Over her history, we have had three different Silver Swan. Which one do you like?
Printable View
Over her history, we have had three different Silver Swan. Which one do you like?
Um...you named Helen twice. I think you meant to include Valerie.
Sorry. The second one is Valerie
Helen was interesting.
Valerie was interesting for a story arc or two, but would have eventually become a hero. (Which I think they alluded to or showed her as part of some corporate-type team that didn't go anywhere.)
Vanessa has never appealed to me as Silver Swan. I like Vanessa's original character too much and thought transforming her for an arc or two by Jimenez was good, but I don't see her as the ongoing Silver Swan. Her transformation was a little too Spider-Man-y for me in that I don't need a lot of Diana's friends and acquaintances being transformed into superheroes or supervillains.
So, if I had to choose, I'd revamp and reintroduce Ms. Alexandros as Silver Swan.
Helen. The original is still the best.
Alexandros. Shes the original, and I feel the most sustainable as a long term recurring villain.
Vanessa would be next, but she's limited in how much she can be used. Her original arc by Jimenez and Rucka was well done but depended on certain things being in continuity. As we've seen with Rebirth and to a lesser extent the Bloodlines movie, rushing her into the role without all the history doesn't work as well. Plus she inevitably needs to be reformed.
Valerie's just sort of there for me.
I was going to say Curt Swan. I wonder if the original Silver Swan was meant as a sly homage to Curt, being the Swan of the "Silver Age." She even looks like the kind of character Curt could easily draw, with those beautiful wings.
I often wonder with the Wonder Woman movie. You guys think instead of Vannessa they will being in Helena or Valarie? If it's Helena with Ares gone how could she turn into a swan? I mean a swan is a sysmbol for Hera
[QUOTE]
Vanessa has never appealed to me as Silver Swan. I like Vanessa's original character too much and thought transforming her for an arc or two by Jimenez was good, but I don't see her as the ongoing Silver Swan.[/QUOTE]
Agreed X 1000.
I think it was a really soapy/dramatic way for Phil to reintroduce an otherwise irrelevant character who hadn't been a part of the books in the years but who really should have evolved over time as one of Diana's supporting cast members. I was actually really surprised to discover that Phil didn't redeem her by the end of his run. It seemed like he was headed in that direction anyway, which is why I think Rucka picked up the ball and ran with it and thankfully brought Vanessa back to herself. But the whole thing for me just felt like a splashy way to reintroduce the character and then eventually bring her back into Diana's inner circle. But that may be me projecting a little bit. I actually think Rucka said somewhere that he never intended to do much with Vanessa once that storyline was wrapped up.
I didn't mind Valerie as the initial Silver Swan, but I didn't think Perez had a longer-term plan for the character. She obviously wasn't a villain, and he redeemed her within his original run. I believe she was fighting with the good guys during war of the gods, that big event right before Perez left the book. Valerie was never a bad person anyways, just a woman abusedby a twisted billionaire.
I honestly haven't read any of the Helen stories, but seeing as how she's the best swan, can anyone recommend some issues for me to look at?
I do think it's incredibly unfortunate that as the most recent Silver Swan, Vanessa has been saddled with this sort of half-baked Two-Face villain-dom. I would have much rather she had publicity as Diana's friend. I kind of feel like by putting her in Bloodlines and in the Rebirth era, they were giving away the twist in her story.
The issue I have in rebirth is they just left her. We don't know everything about her whereabouts. Not only that but she never was close to Diana in the same way. I'm curious with Helena how would she be brought back?