Was that now notorious DeMarco Meg cover really so bad?
Hi there revamp. Welcome to the board.
I thought it was foul, so the answr to your qustion is 'yes' in my case.
yours from a swimming pool foyer in Melbourne,
Floyd
welcome to the board
no it was not. made me smile at the time. and several since. art can be wonderful. it is after all art.
That DeMarco/Inaba cover wasn't nice.
I might suggest that in future DeMarco tries wearing more practical shoes and standing up straight. No slouching!
'Posture', as Julian Clary used to be fond of saying.
And what was with the caption?!
"Chicks with sticks"
Oh, I see, it's a clever pun on Chicks with dicks. Coupled with the "sexy" image I can only imagine the hundreds of new readers that one drew in.
Jesus H Prude: don't stick your nose up (at least not up in the air).
Wasn't it "Ladies Who Punch"...?
Thanks for the welcome Floyd! Myself I did not find it offensive (me being pretty hard to offend) and I thought it did not look to bad. I have little doubt it boosted the sales quite a bit but might have lowered it as result of people like me who:
a)Felt embarrassed to take it to the till.
and
b)Had to hide it from parents.
See, I wasn't offended by it, it just looked sort of wrong (best description of this wrongness was when Floyd described Demarco as having the legs of Nemesis the Warlock).
Anyway, I think my parents were convinced 2000AD is a perverts publication ever since I got a copy in Smiths some years ago with a Simon Davis Sinister/Dexter cover...
(looks at cover)
Ouch!
Looks good, but only from the waist up.
/says the person who can't draw a straight line
Not offended. Just thought that here legs looked Ugly...
Dan
Not offended, just bad art.
I thoguht it was not that bad. Not really sexy and certanily not as attractive and eye pleasing as the DeMarco pics inside but alright.