Frank Cho Walks off Wonder Woman - Claims Censorship

[SirSullymore]

http://www.bleedingcool.com/2016/07/14/frank-cho-walks-off-wonder-woman-after-sixth-cover/

What do you guys think? I'm on Frank's side, taking into account we're only hearing his side of course. Say what you want about him (I personally like him) but you can't deny the dude can draw. His covers are no more vulgar than any other Wonder Woman cover and they look great to boot!

UPDATE: Cho elaborates - http://www.themarysue.com/frank-cho-wonder-woman/

 

[BloatedGuppy]

I don't read comics. I don't follow Wonder Woman. I don't know who Frank Cho is. I don't know who Greg Rucka is. I'm generally anti-censorship (while thinking it gets invoked far, far too often in circumstances where the word doesn't or shouldn't apply). I have no personal objection to any of the shown covers. Keep all that in mind when I say the following.

Reading this...

EVERYONE loves my Wonder Woman covers and wants me to stay. Greg Rucka is the ONLY one who has any problem with covers. Greg Rucka has been trying to alter and censor my artwork since day one.

And this...

I tried to play nice, not rock the boat and do my best on the covers, but Greg?s weird political agenda against me and my art has made that job impossible.

And this...

But Greg Rucka is in a hostile power trip and causing unnecessary friction over variant covers.

...Cho sounds like a paranoid, self-aggrandizing jackass. He might be right...Rucka might be doing all the things he's being accused of here. But when I hear someone expressing themselves like Cho is expressing himself, it leaves me to believe that there's more than one side to the story, that Cho is a drama queen, and that his version of events should probably be viewed with extreme skepticism until inviolate evidence is supplied. I might be wrong, but...y'know. I'm probably not.

 

[SirSullymore]

Whelp, to give you some context, Rucka (whom I also really like) has made a name for himself for his positive portrayal of female characters in comics. Cho is has bit of a reputation due to his fondness for drawing sexy pin-up style ladies and taking the piss out of outrage culture (neither of which I have a problem with). Make of that what you will.

 

[Zhukov]

Ohhkay then.

I'm not seeing the... anything here. What's being censored exactly? (Well, y'know, "censored", this being the internet and all.)

Those covers look alright to me. I mean, by the standards of comic book covers. Very well illustrated. I'm not seeing anything remarkable that would trigger a censorship debate. (And judging entirely by the fact that we're talking about a female comic book character I'm guess this is the cartoon skin/panty variety of censorship debate.)

No idea exactly who Rucka and Cho are, but this Cho fellow is not exactly painting himself in a great light with that rant. Sounds like the kind of paranoid conspiracy rants you'd hear on an internet forum.

 

[SirSullymore]

Well, the only demonstrable censorship (if you can call it that) is that the third cover cropped off her butt. Again, believe half of what you see and non of what you read, but I could see Rucka fighting Cho throughout the creative process, but this may just be a kneejerk, defensive reaction on my part due to the hostility the fanbase gave Cho when he got the job in the first place.

 

[Bobular]

Can someone point out where the censorship is supposed to be?

The only difference I can tell is the last one was cropped slightly and that removed a part of her arse and knees, I can't see anything really changed on the first two.

 

[SirSullymore]

Can someone point out where the censorship is supposed to be?

The only difference I can tell is the last one was cropped slightly and that removed a part of her arse and knees, I can't see anything really changed on the first two.

That's the only demonstrable censorship, though Cho claims that Rucka was being disruptive throughout the process, presumably requesting (or demanding) Cho alter his work in the early stages. Again, Cho's word is all we have.

 

[NPC009]

What surprises me most is this:

"it?s a VARIANT COVER and he should have no editorial control over it. (But he does. WTF?!!!)"

Yeah, the writer shouldn't have the final say, maybe, but the editor is free to take his opinion into account.

Can someone point out where the censorship is supposed to be?

The only difference I can tell is the last one was cropped slightly and that removed a part of her arse and knees, I can't see anything really changed on the first two.

From what I gather, that's all this is about.

I dunno, the way I look at it the final image puts Wonder Woman's face a little more at the centre of the image, which is not a bad place for the face to be.

 

[Lacedaemonius]

Never judge something from only one side of a story, it's just a shortcut to a bad decision.

 

[Godzillarich(aka tf2godz)]

Whelp, to give you some context, Rucka (whom I also really like) has made a name for himself for his positive portrayal of female characters in comics. Cho is has bit of a reputation due to his fondness for drawing sexy pin-up style ladies and taking the piss out of outrage culture (neither of which I have a problem with). Make of that what you will.

Why would DC think it was a good idea to pair these two up on a wonder woman book? What did they think was going to happen?

OT: creative differences strikes again in comics. This is nothing new in this industry but now we got hot-topic politics into it.

 

[DudeistBelieve]

From what I read, homeboy took the job just so he could draw his Wonder Woman art and get paid for it, only for his artwork to be underminded by the writer.

So it looks like a clear case of the guy being like, well fuck this then, cause it's not what I signed up for. so it's two artistic visions clashing with each other.

And thats what it is.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

Cho is has bit of a reputation due to his fondness for drawing sexy pin-up style ladies and taking the piss out of outrage culture...

Ah. Cho should perhaps begin by taking the piss out of himself, because his diatribe posted above is classic "outrage culture". I've often found those most obsessed with outrage online tend to be those who both perpetuate it and can't get enough of it.

 

[SirSullymore]

Why would DC think it was a good idea to pair these two up on a wonder woman book? What did they think was going to happen?

Well he was only doing variant covers. They're both really talented, imo, it's a shame it didn't work out. Rucka is really good at writing women and Cho is really good at drawing them.

 

[SirSullymore]

Cho is has bit of a reputation due to his fondness for drawing sexy pin-up style ladies and taking the piss out of outrage culture...

Ah. Cho should perhaps begin by taking the piss out of himself, because his diatribe posted above is classic "outrage culture". I've often found those most obsessed with outrage online tend to be those who both perpetuate it and can't get enough of it.

He first he made fun the outrage at that Spider-Woman cover that a group of people objected to, then the person who created Spider-Gwen gave him shit for it and it snowballed from there. At first I was behind his Spider-Gwen OUTRAGE pics, but by the end I admit it had gotten a bit stale.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

He first he made fun the outrage at that Spider-Woman cover that a group of people objected to, then the person who created Spider-Gwen gave him shit for it and it snowballed from there. At first I was behind his Spider-Gwen OUTRAGE pics, but by the end I admit it had gotten a bit stale.

Sounds about typical.

"Ha ha! Look at these losers. Upset about nonsense! Fucking outrage culture. Let us mock them."
"Guyz. Guyz. I am UPSET. Something has HAPPENED. People with WEIRD POLITICS are OUT TO GET ME. This is an OUTRAGE."

 

[SirSullymore]

Hey, nerds are passionate fans! haha

Yeah, everyone is OUTRAGING at somebody, "Bring back male Thor!" "Women can only be depicted in positions of power!" "Making Cap a Hydra agent is anti-Semitic!" "SJW's are ruining comics!"

Gotta love it.

 

[Erttheking]

From my experience, when one person gives a detailed account of how he's been wronged without going much into detail on a vague situation, I'm skeptical. This sounds a little too "Woe is me."

Even if the other side is a "dirty feminist"