Thursday, July 19, 2007

Is This Gratuitous? Battlestar Galactica #10 Raynor Cover

My first reaction to a brief glance at this cover was that it must be Witchblade. Then I looked agan.

Wow. It's not Sara Pezzini or the new bearer Dani, so it must be a different book, right? Yep.

It is Battlestar Galactica #10 with cover art by Nigel Raynor. It sure fooled me! What was confusing was that I first mistook her hair past her shoulders for the Witchblade outfit. Then I noticed all the wires coming out of her and knew something was different. Now I realize that she is naked other then the hair and shadows.

I must confess up front that I haven't watched the new Battlestar Galactica. The hubby prefers the classic Battlestar, and since he lets me watch a lot of reality television, something has to give. That being said, I have no idea who this person is on the cover or what the circumstances are, so it is hard for me to truly judge how gratuitous the cover is in relation to the story and in general.

Here is the solicitation for issue #10:

"Each and every month, DYNAMITE ENTERTAINMENT is your only source for the all-new adventures of the crew of the Battlestar Galactica! Read the stories that compliment the Peabody Award Winning TV Show! Have you come onboard yet?

As our first "season" of New Battlestar Galactica comics races towards its conclusion, Sharon delves deep into her human memories while back aboard the Galactica, the dedicated leader of the subversives is revealed to be not quite as he appears...

Featuring covers from Nigel Raynor, Joe Prado, Stephen Segovia and a New Battlestar Photo Cover!"

Here I sit, not sure what direction to go on this. Please help me with your comments! Tell me what I am seeing and if it is relevant to the back story or just plain eye candy.

Question of the day: Is this gratuitous?


Gordon D said...

I've just finished watching the first two seasons of BG on DVD (haven't read the comics) - part of the story involves the fact that, when Cylons die, they "reincarnate" into new bodies. Part of this involves the new body soaking in a big tub of goo.

However, the way the TV show handled it was subtle - you saw a head, arms, and legs sticking out of the goo. No full-on nudity, or even, say, unsubtle hints.

So my vote - this is gratuitous. But what do I know? :)

Nick said...

If the cover is suppose to be of Sharon from the new series, um...yeah, no., lol. It's pretty gratuitous.

BSG the new series thats out now has had it's ups and downs, honestly I suggest checking it out on DVD. A lot of people have problems with some of the traditional roles being played by women but, come on, Katee Sackhoff as Starbuck=SMOKIN!! As I have been told there is also only one more season left for the show, I am guessing cause David Eick is starting up a new Bionic Woman tv series (

On a totally random note, have you checked out that new Vertigo series called Faker? I just read the first issue it's not half bad.

Carl said...

Welp, may The Lords of Kobol bless your hubby! The new show is a hideous blasphemy against the one and only Battlestar Galactica and is a soap opera pretending to be SF using only the names, the props and nothing else. And before any GINOBSG zombie jumps on my back, I watched the damned mini-series and the first 2 seasons since all my hypnotized friends insisted I wasn't giving it a break! One of my other friends they got to watch the show finally asked the main guy pushing it (after he had watched up to half the first season) the funniest damned thing:

"So, when I am supposed to like and care about the characters?"

And the best was the reply:

"Oh, by the middle of the 2nd season..."

Ssssssssssoooo, basically you have to watch like 27 episodes and before that, a 6 hour mini-series before the love kicks in folks.

I gave The New Avengers 3 books before I quit that mess.

Anyway, way off the subject, back to it. That's supposed to be Sharon? Sharon aka "Boomer" (*snort!*) is an Asian-looking gal and I too thought Sara from Witchblade was on the wrong cover.
Yeah, I'd say it was gratuitous, but not the first GINOBSG cover to do so...

Unknown said...


As for the show, I tried watching an episode a year or so back, and found it a pretty dull experience.

The handheld, shakey-camera technique drove me crazy, and actor Edward James Olmos drains the energy out of every scene he that combination alone was enough to chase me away. I question why they even needed the "Battlestar Galactica" title, since it bears such a vague resemblance to the original show. I suspect it was simply to "fill the seats" when they were looking for an initial fan base.

I loved the original BG, though I suspect it may not hold up as well if I watched the episodes again. They were perfect for a teenage boy in the late 1970's, though.

Lisa said...

I LOVE the show. The old one is too dorky for me -- I'll watch an ep once in a while when it's on, just for laughs, but I could never commit to it. The current show is great, in my opinion, although the middle of this last season got a little bit off track.

Anyway, I believe that's Sharon on the cover, who is a Cylon in the show. I thought this cover was pretty gratuitous when the comic showed up in my store. But, they do have several covers, so I always make sure that this cover is not the one in the front.

Unknown said...

I confess that I do not know the story (and this cover completely fails to make me want to know the story), but I would say that this is gratuitous. The cover makes me think "surly naked babe with strings poking at her" more than it makes me think of a generated body.

Swinebread said...

The new show has the cylons and humans humping all the time, so I'm gonna say it's not in context of the BSG show

Heidi Meeley said...

I really appreciate all your feedback on this- let's call it most definitely gratuitous, shall we?

Yikes, I still think it is Witchblade every time I glance at it.