Since larger, older threads contributed to the forum issues of the past few weeks, I'm rebooting this one, so please start anew!! :)
Printable View
Since larger, older threads contributed to the forum issues of the past few weeks, I'm rebooting this one, so please start anew!! :)
The vilification Diana got for killing Max Lord was DC trying to have their cake and eat it too. They knew turning a fan favorite into a villain would be controversial so they decided to make the audience hate Diana for killing Max rather than them for making him a villain and thus necessitating Diana killing Max in the first place.
Diana was almost a home wrecker in post-crisis with how much she flirted with Superman when he was involved with Lois, and she rarely ever got called out for it, where as Clark once took Lana to task for the same thing (although that was much worse at the time), if the post-crisis canon had stayed past Convergence, I like to think Diana finally apologised to both Lois and Clark for that behaviour once Jon was born.
Obviously, it's kind of impossible to want that now since in this timeline there were no romantic feelings, but it just sticks in my craw Diana got away with that for years and never received a comeuppance that could benefit her as a character.
I thought Brian Azzarello's run was better Greg Rucka's rebirth run.
[QUOTE=Miles To Go;3845843]Diana was almost a home wrecker in post-crisis with how much she flirted with Superman when he was involved with Lois...[/QUOTE]
a) Was she aware Superman is Clark Kent at the time?
b) Was this when they were marooned on Asgard for 3000-ish years?
[QUOTE=jump;3845895]I thought Brian Azzarello's run was better Greg Rucka's rebirth run.[/QUOTE]
Stands to reason.
They're writers of comparable talent, and Azz wasn't handicapped by having his story be required to be about how the last couple of years didn't happen.
[QUOTE=Miles To Go;3845843]Diana was almost a home wrecker in post-crisis with how much she flirted with Superman when he was involved with Lois, and she rarely ever got called out for it, where as Clark once took Lana to task for the same thing (although that was much worse at the time), if the post-crisis canon had stayed past Convergence, I like to think Diana finally apologised to both Lois and Clark for that behaviour once Jon was born.
Obviously, it's kind of impossible to want that now since in this timeline there were no romantic feelings, but it just sticks in my craw Diana got away with that for years and never received a comeuppance that could benefit her as a character.[/QUOTE]
The feelings were mutual. Both unresolved, complicated and didn’t just go away easily. Numerous times Clark thought about what could’ve been with her. Clark was the one that pursued her [B]first[/B] from the start. No one should apologize for how they feel especially when they had an attraction and developing a relationship (whatever it led to) before being involved with anyone else. Will Clark apologize for being jealous (18th letter)?
Diana being the Goddess of War could’ve been an interesting concept as well as the “God Mode” power.
I liked the new52 Gods, especially Strife.
[QUOTE=Carabas;3845958]a) Was she aware Superman is Clark Kent at the time?
b) Was this when they were marooned on Asgard for 3000-ish years?[/QUOTE]
Yes, she was aware of who he was, she knew he was involved with Lois, and even had the gall to tell Lois SHE was Clark's best friend when we all know that's the wife's job.
And yeah, that time they were stuck on Asguard where Clark rejected her on the last night...but that sadly did'nt stop her from continuing to push herself on him and not know her boundaries.
[QUOTE=LoveStar;3846145]The feelings were mutual. Both unresolved, complicated and didn’t just go away easily. Numerous times Clark thought about what could’ve been with her. Clark was the one that pursued her [B]first[/B] from the start. No one should apologize for how they feel especially when they had an attraction and developing a relationship (whatever it led to) before being involved with anyone else. Will Clark apologize for being jealous (18th letter)?[/QUOTE]
Miles was talking about Diana pursuing Clark when he was married to Lois not before. That's a crappy thing to do no matter your feelings.
And yeah, Clark was being an ass in the 18th Letter.
[QUOTE=Miles To Go;3846174]Yes, she was aware of who he was, she knew he was involved with Lois, and even had the gall to tell Lois SHE was Clark's best friend when we all know that's the wife's job.
And yeah, that time they were stuck on Asguard where Clark rejected her on the last night...but that sadly did'nt stop her from continuing to push herself on him and not know her boundaries.[/QUOTE]
When you haven't seen your human partner with the 100 years top lifespan for 3000 years, you're no longer involved.
[QUOTE=Carabas;3846474]When you haven't seen your human partner with the 100 years top lifespan for 3000 years, you're no longer involved.[/QUOTE]
That doesn't mean you're obligated to hook up with someone else.
[QUOTE=Miles To Go;3845843]Diana was almost a home wrecker in post-crisis with how much she flirted with Superman when he was involved with Lois, and she rarely ever got called out for it, where as Clark once took Lana to task for the same thing (although that was much worse at the time), if the post-crisis canon had stayed past Convergence, I like to think Diana finally apologised to both Lois and Clark for that behaviour once Jon was born.
Obviously, it's kind of impossible to want that now since in this timeline there were no romantic feelings, but it just sticks in my craw Diana got away with that for years and never received a comeuppance that could benefit her as a character.[/QUOTE]
Like when Jeb Friedman got called out as well? Oh wait...
[QUOTE=Agent Z;3846502]That doesn't mean you're obligated to hook up with someone else.[/QUOTE]
Doesn't mean they are obligated to never date again when their partner dies either, plenty of people marry again after their spouse dies.
[QUOTE=Agent Z;3846415]Miles was talking about Diana pursuing Clark when he was married to Lois not before. That's a crappy thing to do no matter your feelings.
And yeah, Clark was being an ass in the 18th Letter.[/QUOTE]
She still never did. Clark called her his best friend just as much as she called him hers. Clark showed his feelings just as much too. So to only target Diana is unfair.
[QUOTE=ssupes;3846555]Like when Jeb Friedman got called out as well? Oh wait...
Doesn't mean they are obligated to never date again when their partner dies either, plenty of people marry again after their spouse dies.[/QUOTE]
Which is their choice. If Clark doesn't want to date after Lois' death he has a right to. Yet often I see people put him on blast for the crime of not sleeping with Diana because apparently it's his duty to lay with any woman that shows interest.
[QUOTE=LoveStar;3846580]She still never did. Clark called her his best friend just as much as she called him hers. Clark showed his feelings just as much too. So to only target Diana is unfair.[/QUOTE]
Which one was it? Either she never pursued Clark or both expressed interest even when he was married.
[QUOTE=Agent Z;3846654]Which is their choice. If Clark doesn't want to date after Lois' death he has a right to. Yet often I see people put him on blast for the crime of not sleeping with Diana because apparently it's his duty to lay with any woman that shows interest.[/QUOTE]
The crime was more the bait and switch at the end where they teased their relationship over the issue where he accepts that lois is gone and when it comes to the payoff after he admits it might be their last night together he turns here down. That's what people criticize about the issue.
[QUOTE=ssupes;3846686]The crime was more the bait and switch at the end where they teased their relationship over the issue where he accepts that lois is gone and when it comes to the payoff after he admits it might be their last night together he turns here down. That's what people criticize about the issue.[/QUOTE]
Why does accepting Lois is gone suddenly mean jumping into bed with Diana? Those are two different things.
[QUOTE=Agent Z;3846659]Which one was it? Either she never pursued Clark or both expressed interest even when he was married.[/QUOTE]
[B]Both[/B] expressed interest and let their feelings be known but didn’t act upon them and [B]both[/B] expressed regret for not taking a chance. It was mutually complicated.
[QUOTE=Agent Z;3846701]Why does accepting Lois is gone suddenly mean jumping into bed with Diana? Those are two different things.[/QUOTE]
He didn't realize it suddenly and then decide that he should sleep with wonder woman, I imagine he accepted it after the first hundred years when humans tend to die and after nine hundreds of accepting that and being close with a women that he previously had feelings and got close to again which lead to the final night where they might not survive the battle that he should finally act on those feelings but yet it was denied after all of what they had shown in the issue just so they could finish with the status quo back to normal.
Since we're restarting,
Diana having any daddy is a bad idea, and having one whose mythology is dripping in rape is a horrible idea.
Making the Amazons pawns of the gods cuts the knees out from under what Wonder Woman is all about.
Diana is not only pansexual: for her free and enthusiastic love is the default. (She realises frankness in sexual matters makes people conditioned by Man's World uneasy, so usually holds back on her views and experiences. Her empathy is also an excellent help in finding good and safe partners.)
Neither Steve nor Etta should be in the military, or any para-military organisation. (Steve being an ex-Air Force pilot is fine, but if so he asked to be discharged soon after meeting Diana, if not earlier.)
Having Steve be gay would add a lot to the story.
Athena the goddess is over-valued by the Wonder Woman writers. (But then, she is generally over-valued by most people today.)
Despite being vehemently opposed to racism, sexism, misogyny, homophobia, transphobia, ableism, and similar patterns of thoughts, Diana has great trouble grasping the theories explaining or studying them, because she never experienced or internalised these things growing up.
DC's handling of the Bana has been awful and racist with the exclusion of Perez and Jimenez (and even they have their issues).
Cheetah should be cured of her condition and move on. If DC wants a major Diana villain, they can use either Circe, Heracles or Zeus.
Wonder Woman, like all Amazons, doesn't shave and, also like all Anazons, she's not naturally hairless from the neck down. Talking about eyebrows, armpits, legs, and (not that we'd ever be shown it on-panel) crotch. Diana would care as much about her body hair as most guys do theirs (i.e. barely at all). I'd be really curious if any artist could make this unconventional beauty concept sell, tho.
Steve Trevor's appeal should likewise be more unconventional. I'd make him shorter, like 5'8" (the actual average American height for men), leaner, like 140 lbs (but cut like Bruce Lee), and younger, like early 20s (old enough to drink but can't run for public office yet). And I'd keep the Air Force origin, but make him a military doctor who could also fly a plane. And Steve is a much bigger pacifist than Diana (same as Lois is a much better journalist than Clark).
Cheetah needs to be the polar opposite of everything Wonder Woman is. Cheetah is actually cursed only if Diana is actually blessed. If Diana was born lucky, then Cheetah was born unlucky. If Diana's physicality is her most obvious trait, then it can't be Cheetah's.
I'd also prefer if Cheetah ditched the bestial motif almost altogether. Maybe keep her hair blonde with dark spots, magical claws and teeth that can be concealed, otherwise human looking. Focus more on her being the mental opposite of Diana and succeeding there. If Diana wants to redeem the world, Cheetah wants to corrupt it.
Oh, and Cheetah alone can break the lasso.
That's for starters.
I don't think the contest is necessary. It doesn't explain why Diana is heroic.
Artemis should not have been named after a Greek goddess since the Bana turned their back on the Greek goddess.
Artemis was better in Red Hood and the Outlaws than in Wonder Woman right now.
*Hippolyta and Phillipus should be married. Nubia should be Phillipus' daughter and Diana's step sister. Donna should also be part of the family as an adopted sibling.
*I would have no problem with Diana taken off the Justice League. It's rarely done her any good.
*I would have no issue if Cassie wasn't the daughter of Zeus either. There's no reason why a child of Zeus has to be a hero in WW.
*While I liked how the movie handled Diana and Steve, Diana and Artemis would make for a far better couple.
*There is nothing wrong with stories about the gods but the types of stories being done about them need more variety.
*The Amazons don't necessarily need advanced technology but should approach magic as a science.
*Amazons should unlock superpowers via training not birth or divine empowerment.
*Zeus, Poseidon, Apollo and almost any "hero" from Greek myth would make for a better villain than Ares.
*Circe should be Diana's main big enemy over Cheetah. Barbara should be cured of her condition and move on.
*[B]Diana:[/B] "We have a saying, my people. Don’t kill if you can wound, don’t wound if you can subdue, don’t subdue if you can pacify, and don’t raise your hand at all until you’ve first extended it."
All superheroes should approach lethal force in this manner and the fact that so few of them do is one of many reasons why the genre is seen as so childish and stagnant.
*The Kapatelis, the Sandsmarks and Trevor Barnes make for better supporting characters than Steve and Etta.
Both of Rucka's runs are overrated. The first was good, but not great. And it would have went from good to awful had Infinite Crisis not mercifully in this instance intervened and prevented him from hooking up Diana with Bruce like he had planned. The second was just bad. Coming in during a confusing and transitioning continuity period made the job harder and wasn't his fault, but all the same some of the attempts at clarification were poor, and while the origin portion was fine, The Lies was just boring.
Also I disagree that Wonder Woman is ever out of line calling Clark her best friend. "Best friend" is really a relative term when you get right down to it. The dynamics of "best friends" are not all the same. And there can be intelligently unspoken qualifications. There is such a thing as "this is my best friend second to his/her spouse" without having to qualify it every single time. Its not an automatic slight against one's spouse if one indeed has a spouse. You have to use it with the intent to incite jealousy or anger, to have it be offensive. Rationally offensive, at least. And Diana's never used it with that intent toward Lois.
As inevitably dated as they are on certain subjects, the original Golden Age WW comics are still the best run she's ever had
The vast majority of Wonder Woman comics are not very good. She is a great character and icon, but her comics don't do her justice
I think both the clay birth and demigod origin both have their strengths and drawbacks. I've settled into not caring that much either way as long as DC would just stop talking about her conception either way. That said, the demigod origin coming with potential heavy use of Zeus makes it slightly more unfavorable.
The only versions of Etta Candy worth the time of day are the ones closest to the original.
Amazons should have technological advancements.
The post-Crisis Lasso of Truth is lame, and the pre-Crisis Magic Lasso is a million times better.
DC in general should never have rebooted in the 80s. Wonder Woman's reboot in particular had many trends and problems that have persisted to this day.
The Perez run is overrated and the early parts are a slog to get through. It picks up writing wise as soon as the art takes a down turn when he stops doing the art.
The Azzarello run is more style over substance. it's style and stronger points still make it a top 5 or so run in lieu of the lack of much competition, despite the major problems it has.
The characterization of Earth One Hippolyta is not as against the grain as people make it seem considering some of the really shady stuff she's gotten up to in the main canons. Being insanely over protective and even resorting to lying and manipulations to keep Diana safe is practically second nature to her.
Ares was only a good antagonist in Rucka's first run, which hopefully Wilson will take some cues from. Otherwise, his set ups in Rebirth and the New 52 are more interesting and we don't miss anything by not having Diana fight him. Deimos, Phobos, Eris, Deception, etc. all fill his role better.
I can take or leave Diana Prince. I don't think it goes against what the character stands for, because her being the embodiment of truth is not something she's always been.
[QUOTE=Agent Z;3845708]The vilification Diana got for killing Max Lord was DC trying to have their calf and eat it too. They knew turning a fan favorite into a villain would be controversial so they decided to make the audience hate Diana for killing Max rather than them for making him a villain and thus necessitating Diana killing Max in the first place.[/QUOTE]For me? Villifying her for killing Max Lord. Not the fact she killed him, but how they tried to act like it was the wrong thing for her to do.
[QUOTE=marhawkman;3927090]For me? Villifying her for killing Max Lord. Not the fact she killed him, but how they tried to act like it was the wrong thing for her to do.[/QUOTE]
Meanwhile, Bruce's venture into mass surveillance and Clark's covering up a rape and the League's human rights abuses were forgotten about almost immediately after they were revealed. The latter didn't even get brought in Infinite Crisis which was supposed to be about the Trinity being taken to task for their mistakes.
[QUOTE=Carabas;3845975]Stands to reason.
They're writers of comparable talent, and Azz wasn't handicapped by having his story be required to be about how the last couple of years didn't happen.[/QUOTE]
Was it specifically mandated by DC that Ruka's run be about upending the Azz run, or was it his own personal mission to do so simply because it didn't suit his tastes and his interpretation of the character? They can claim the former, but his storytelling choices and not so subtle in-story swipes show it was the latter.
[QUOTE=Natamaxxx;3928120]Was it specifically mandated by DC that Ruka's run be about upending the Azz run, or was it his own personal mission to do so simply because it didn't suit his tastes and his interpretation of the character?[/QUOTE]
Knowing Rucka, he must have loved 90% of Azzarello's run. He writes similar stuff all the time.
[QUOTE=Carabas;3928222]Knowing Rucka, he must have loved 90% of Azzarello's run. He writes similar stuff all the time.[/QUOTE]
I think the Amazons are the only things he must have really disliked. He didn't attack the demigod origin nearly as much. Probably because he wasn't allowed to, but I always took Hippolyta's comment about the eagle in Year One part 2 and putting her trust in it as a sign as a nod to her affair with Zeus, and it wasn't painted as negative. She was clearly with Philippus now anyway.
I honestly don't think he'd have a problem using characters like Zola or the revamped Gods, but Finch ruined that stuff already anyway.
If I had to guess Rucka disliked the Amazons raping sailors to reproduce and the WW/Superman relationship. He probably would’ve made her clay if he could have, but I don’t think being the daughter of Zeus is a dealbreaker. He said at the start of Rebirth there was one thing he couldn’t change and I’m betting that was the Papa Zeus origin.
As for a controversial opinion: Azz’s use of the Gods was the most interesting they’ve ever been to me. I like burned out Ares, the failed mentor more than cackling Ares the villain. The designs were LEAGUES cooler than the Greek toga look they usually sport.
Killing sailors. They weren't raped. The fornication before the murders was never portrayed as anything but consensual. Its semantics in the sense that the Amazons still did something very out-of-character to past incarnations and something we all agree is downright terrible, but all the same just because they committed one horrendous crime doesn't mean its applicable to tag them with another that the writing does not support.
That whole thing would have worked so much better if the Amazons just seduced the men then let them go on their merry way.
[QUOTE=Sacred Knight;3930924]Killing sailors. They weren't raped. The fornication before the murders was never portrayed as anything but consensual. Its semantics in the sense that the Amazons still did something very out-of-character to past incarnations and something we all agree is downright terrible, but all the same just because they committed one horrendous crime doesn't mean its applicable to tag them with another that the writing does not support.
That whole thing would have worked so much better if the Amazons just seduced the men then let them go on their merry way.[/QUOTE]
I still don't understand why they didn't just go ashore, hit the local bars, pick up some guys for a one night stand then leave before the sun comes up.
Much more subtle and less likely to raise suspicions ;)
[QUOTE=Gaelforce;3931029]I still don't understand why they didn't just go ashore, hit the local bars, pick up some guys for a one night stand then leave before the sun comes up.
Much more subtle and less likely to raise suspicions ;)[/QUOTE]
"(ll. 54-59) `Son of Iapetus [Prometheus], surpassing all in cunning, you are glad that you have outwitted me [Zeus] and stolen fire -- a great plague to you yourself and to men that shall be. But I will give men as the price for fire an evil thing in which they may all be glad of heart while they embrace their own destruction.'
(ll. 60-68) So said the father of men and gods, and laughed aloud. And he bade famous Hephaestus make haste and mix earth with water and to put in it the voice and strength of human kind, and fashion a sweet, lovely maiden-shape, like to the immortal goddesses in face; and Athene to teach her needlework and the weaving of the varied web; and golden Aphrodite to shed grace upon her head and cruel longing and cares that weary the limbs. And he charged Hermes the guide, the Slayer of Argus, to put in her a shameless mind and a deceitful nature.
(ll. 69-82) So he ordered. And they obeyed the lord Zeus the son of Cronos. Forthwith the famous Lame God moulded clay in the likeness of a modest maid, as the son of Cronos purposed. And the goddess bright-eyed Athene girded and clothed her, and the divine Graces and queenly Persuasion put necklaces of gold upon her, and the rich-haired Hours crowned her head with spring flowers. And Pallas Athene bedecked her form with all manners of finery. Also the Guide, the Slayer of Argus, contrived within her lies and crafty words and a deceitful nature at the will of loud thundering Zeus, and the Herald of the gods put speech in her. And he called this woman Pandora (2), because all they who dwelt on Olympus gave each a gift, a plague to men who eat bread."
[QUOTE=Sacred Knight;3930924]Killing sailors. They weren't raped. The fornication before the murders was never portrayed as anything but consensual. Its semantics in the sense that the Amazons still did something very out-of-character to past incarnations and something we all agree is downright terrible, but all the same just because they committed one horrendous crime doesn't mean its applicable to tag them with another that the writing does not support.
That whole thing would have worked so much better if the Amazons just seduced the men then let them go on their merry way.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Gaelforce;3931029]I still don't understand why they didn't just go ashore, hit the local bars, pick up some guys for a one night stand then leave before the sun comes up.
Much more subtle and less likely to raise suspicions ;)[/QUOTE]
I agree that calling the Amazons rapists is getting old. What they did is already bad enough, but nothing shown supports that they raped the men.
There really is no valid in-story reason for them to kill the men aside from shock value. We never see anyone reach the island without divine assistance in this run, so Paradise Island much like all versions cannot be reached by mortal means. If people suspected their true existence, who would be able to find them?