IMAGE PULL DIVIDED STATES OF HYSTERIA #4 COVER

>>93580031
>Image bending over and spreading their ass cheeks for the SJWs
Fucking pussies.

File: Untitled.png (47KB, 901x355px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 901x355px

>>93580031
Oh, bullshit. The consumers never got to decide. A few people who were not even going to buy the comic got the cover pulled because they did not want consumers to have the option.

The idea that only government can censor shows how the left is basically just the libertarian right nowadays. In many ways, censorship for fear of a few powerful watchdogs is worse than government censorship, which has always existed.

Bunch of dickless faggots but I guess that's to be expected with today's industry.

Post the cover

>>93580031
What's the old cover?

If I even gave a damn about the series I would have boycotted it for censoring the cover.

File: DividedStatesofHysteria-04_cvr.jpg (958KB, 790x1200px) Image search: [Google]

958KB, 790x1200px

>>93580137
>>93580140

>>93580168
i can see England having a problem with it

>People defending a Crossed-level edgy book because of "the left are censoring our comics"
I mean , I can understand with Marvel (because their characters deserve than what they have right now) but with this it's fucking pitiful.

There's nothing of value in this book, it feels like an Avatar book in every way mixed with 2017 politics.

>>93580213
Nobody cares about this book (that I can tell). But Image caving so quickly suggests to any young creator that they must not take any risks because companies will never stand behind them if there is an arbitrary online freakout.

I guess I just feel tired of clickbait outlets pretending that like 20 people on Twitter are representative of all minorities everywhere and letting them decide what we can buy.

>people who don't read the comic boycott it before release because a cover offends them
>other people who don't read the comic boycott it because the cover was changed to not offend other people who don't read comic
>meanwhile, all the people who don't read the comic continue to not read the comic
It sounds like a non-issue to me.

>>93580213
First of all, you're comparing apples and oranges with the Syaf controversy. He put that shit in a work-for-hire book featuring characters and ideas he did not own. Of course they'd censor it.

Doing it to a creator-owned book where you go to tell a story free of these shackles is another thing altogether.

Secondly, I don't think anyone is defending the book itself, more Chaykin's entitlement to tell the story the way he wants.

>>93580300
I wasn't thinking of the Syaf controversy when I wrote that , but yeah there's a point to be made about that.I was thinking on the "SJW Marvel" meme that gets thrown every two threads about the company.

>>93580213
It's a pile of shit and a "holy shit I'm so smart" ego stroking project but it's really disturbing how people somehow can't just choose to not pay attention to it.

>>93580168
Oof

>>93580519
It's funny, the cover was solicited over a week ago and nobody noticed/cared until it was highlighted specifically on social media yesterday

I saw it in the Image solicits on Bleeding Cunt the day it came out and didn't even remember it until everyone was suddenly squawking over it

File: bravo.webm (85KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 250x250px

>>93580168
jeez, even a mature audiences publisher like Avatar press has the common sense not to go THAT graphic on their covers.

File: zmEC8.jpg (31KB, 429x397px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 429x397px

I'm more offended that Howard Chaykin still gets work, dude can't draw for shit

>>93581208

"Cripes, Wolverine have been getting into the T-Rex DNA again!"

>>93581208
He recently did Satellite Sam, right? Did that look as awful as that Wolverine or his current book?

>>93580168
lol

File: chaykinblackhawkd.jpg (210KB, 529x800px) Image search: [Google]

210KB, 529x800px

>>93581208
He can draw, just nowhere near as good as he used to. He abuses the fuck out of gaudy digital textures and filters

Pic related, from his Blackhawk miniseries before he went to shit

The same person who spearheaded This removal was the same who removed some indie guys book from a publisher because he had made fun of trannys before, these people are waking up and starting to realize publishers can keel over to them if enough people get together

>>93580168
There is literally nothing wrong with that

>>93580113
>Consumers
Are you a consumer if you don't buy it?

>>93580168
I'd have an easier time defending it if it wasn't so poorly drawn, clashing with the totally-not-a-traced-photo city street and...whatever the fuck is going on with the background. Like a lazy fucking noise gradient? Like I honestly hope it was just years behind the curve outrage cover on purpose so he didn't bother putting in any effort. Because if he thought that was legitimately worth publishing...

The outrage-chasing anti-SJWs on /co/ hated this book when it was first announced, because of the solicit, and adopted it as soon as they realised it was pissing SJWs off. Now the cover has created controversy (exactly as intended) they've decided it is their beloved child.

Image has no real editing, it's a pay-and-print service. That's the sole reason this cover came into play, and I suspect the reason they've even pulled it is because a lot of the flak they are taking is from their own creators (and people who they would like to be their creators). Chaykin has always been a guy who chases and sells on controversy.

>>93581306
Are you talking about Sarah Horrocks and Berliac? D&Q pulled Berliac's book due to wanting good press, I believe - I don't think they would have pulled a book they expected to really sell - but the only involvement Sarah Horrocks had in that was pointing out what he had said previously.

None of these companies truly give a damn about the social issues they pretend to be highlighting and/or stirring up and/or protecting, they just care about what sells. Right now, it looks like this cover will be more harmful to Image's brand than it will be helpful. Same deal with Berliac and D&Q.

>>93581321

It's lazy enough that I'm apathetic. A more creative angle would be to show just the feet dangling in a manner that suggests hanging above a large pool of blood reflecting the body in it with just enough detail to draw interest.

>>93580031
twitter bullies did it again!

>>93580031
>when you can't even address the ugly reality of things
You don't need Howard Chaykin to address the ugly reality of things.

>>93581621
I bought this book the day after it released. Had been excited for it, but totally missed it on previews. Got to my shop, and they had a few copies. Got home, read it and really enjoyed it. I was here during a story time, but didn't stick around for the full thread, I am surprised image caved, more surprised co didn't like it to begin with.

I'm really pissed about the whole situation in general, the Twitter beast claims another victory. And before someone jumps down my throat, I'm what you would consider one of those sissy SJWs. I just believe it's wrong to censor. If people want to buy it and read it, they have that right. If my 12 year old brought home a copy of Naked Lunch then he's gonna read it.

I really don't care what a private company does with their product I wasn't going to buy or consume

>>93581981
In principle I'm with you on the second paragraph, but a company is a company. It's Image's decision to drop this and it's not IMO a moral decision, it's a business one. Chaykin is not exactly the guy you point to for considered, classy depictions of social issues and supreme artistic integrity either.

>>93582071
I agree, but I read comics to escape from the pressures of my real life. When a social media app can dictate how my hobby is managed beyond my control I have to get off the ride. Think I'm gonna just end my pull.

>>93581425
>>93581632
Have you refined and cultured gentlemen stopped to consider that the ridiculously outrageous and blatant nature of the artwork is the entire purpose?

>>93582162

Yes. Which is why I was suggesting to subtly pull the reader in with my suggestion, make them interested in what the hell they're looking at. Then open the comic and see the image that was the original cover on the first page.

When you want to shock the audience, a one two punch like this has a greater effect than just a lazy reveal. You're often limited by what you can display on the cover, but can be even more graphic on the first page.

File: starbuck chaykin.jpg (323KB, 1200x818px) Image search: [Google]

323KB, 1200x818px

>>93581302
Chaykin used to be damn good

Also that's clearly Nick Fury not Blackhawks

This whole circlejerk is from people who either don't read this comic, or they read no comics at all. The fact that they reacted as if this is Chaykin's first rodeo suggests it's the latter.

>>93583201
I've definitely seen comments from people who are well familiar with Chaykin, on both sides of the argument.

>>93583201
Also, people who don't fucking understand how Image works in the first place. I've seen some next-level ignorance and assumptions about them the last two days

>>93583290
Most of the Image creators were coaxed out because crybaby cunts demanded to know where 'Image partners' stood on the matter (not that they were entitled to know in the first place).

You have people in three camps as a result (e.g. Cameron Stewart in support of the removal, Jason Aaron on neither side and being more objective about it, and guys like Kaare Andrews who are completely against the censorship), it's interesting to see where people lie.

Almost everyone in comics journalism is vehemently in support of action against Chaykin/Image, which is stupefying to see

>>93583486

On the other hand, this is getting the comic more attention than it normally gets. Wouldn't be surprised if it was intentional like most controversies are lately.

>>93583608
Due to the controversy the first issue is getting a second printing.

Alex De Campi, Gail Simone, Joe Glass, etc: i hope there's a place in hell for you.

>>93584538
Fuck off, spic trash.

>>93584819
Go to tumblr, faggot.

File: 913950.jpg?5391835202737684611.jpg (233KB, 800x618px) Image search: [Google]

233KB, 800x618px

>>93581124
Yeah...oh wait.

>>93583630
Can someone post the first issue controversial scenes? Cant find them.

>>93584951

That ain't even the worst one.

My favorite is the one of the kids sliding into a woodchipper.

>>93584920
You first, wetback.

>>93584985

>>93564984

>>93582162
Learn to read dumbfuck

>>93585067
Then go jerking to TheMarySue motherfucking piece of greasy shit.

Frustrated. Unlike Marvel and DC I think Image actually has an ounce of integrity.

>>93581621
>and I suspect the reason they've even pulled it is because a lot of the flak they are taking is from their own creators (and people who they would like to be their creators). Chaykin has always been a guy who chases and sells on controversy.

mr. insider here speaks the truth, Chances are someone at Image itself got upset.

>>93585229
>being this fanny flustered this soon
kek, way too easy

>>93585415
>I think Image actually has an ounce of integrity.
Image is literally Fanta minus integrity.

>>93580031
They thought they can get away with it if Avatar can publish a 100 rape-torture-murder variants/issue on Crossed. They were wrong.

>>93580168
Who in their right minds would even want to own a book with a cover like that?

He should drop Image and go to Avatar Press. Those fuckers aren't pussy's and will publish anything