Interview + Preview: [url]https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/wonder-woman-goes-post-apocalyptic-dead-earth-preview-1253440[/url]
Printable View
Interview + Preview: [url]https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/wonder-woman-goes-post-apocalyptic-dead-earth-preview-1253440[/url]
[URL="https://community.cbr.com/showthread.php?129074-Wonder-Woman-Dead-Earth-Announced"]Prior thread after announcement[/URL]
Not much new in this interview and preview compared to the earlier one. Some lines that twigged to me in various ways:
[QUOTE]doing my best to make Diana as approachable and relatable as possible[/QUOTE]
Doing Diana [I]approachable[/I] is great. I'm less sure about [I]relatable[/I], especially if it's supposed to be an intrinsic part of her character. To me, the best way to work on relatability with regard to Wonder Woman (and many other DC heroes) is to focus on her relations with other characters. The movie did that to extraordinary effect.
[QUOTE]To me, her peacemaking is more important than her warrior abilities. She desires justice for every being, and she has the power to enforce it, or at least she used to. Something that interests me about today’s world is a lot of our morality is based on the kind of environment we live in: Would we be as ready to help someone if it truly comes at an expense of our own? I feel that it’s easy to say yes, but in action we as humans have failed in this time and time again — I know I have — and that is on full display in the humans that we meet in this story.
What I love about Diana is she is a god and she doesn’t have to worry about being hurt by a violent human, and because of that, she has more agency to safely make peace on behalf of humanity. But what happens when Diana’s powers are lowered significantly? When she is more vulnerable physically, it affects her spiritual way of thinking as well. Both will be tested in Dead Earth.[/QUOTE]
This goes deep into philosophical territory, but I have some deep concerns about the presuppositions that Johnson seems to use here. First is the idea of humanity as being fundamentally egotistical. To me, that's an idea that I reject. While you certainly can find support for such a viewpoint in history, you can just as easily find instances of humans coming together in times of crisis. Our entire evolutionary advantage has been our ability to organise, work together, and—indeed—help each other.
Also, the question if Diana's desire for peace and justice will be affected (lowered) by her being of less physical power just feels horrendous. To me, that's a more fundamental aspect of her character than nearly everything else, and totally independent of her physical powers.
[quote]This goes deep into philosophical territory, but I have some deep concerns about the presuppositions that Johnson seems to use here. First is the idea of humanity as being fundamentally egotistical. To me, that's an idea that I reject. While you certainly can find support for such a viewpoint in history, you can just as easily find instances of humans coming together in times of crisis. Our entire evolutionary advantage has been our ability to organise, work together, and—indeed—help each other.[/qUOTE]True. Not all people will held at expense to themselves, but many will. Mister Rogers and his "look for the helpers" (full disclosure; never watched, only read about this) comes to mind. Or people after the bombings at the Boston Marathon who ran in to held even before the smoke cleared (again, something read about rather than watched). People can be bad, but also very good. I hope that won't be ignored.
[quote]Also, the question if Diana's desire for peace and justice will be affected (lowered) by her being of less physical power just feels horrendous. To me, that's a more fundamental aspect of her character than nearly everything else, and totally independent of her physical powers. [/QUOTE]I'd go so far as to say it's a fundamental aspect of [i]many[/i] comic book heroes. Not all, but many. I loved in Convergence when Billy Batson and Mary Bromfield and Freddy Freeman didn't let not having powers stop them. It changed their methods, not their nature. And that's true for Diana, too. And then there's dealing with the comparison of all the non-powered heroes who fight for those causes. Ultimately, I expected the answer to the question will be that those desires are intrinsic to her and not derived from her powers. But I'd have preferred it if that was something she [i]didn't[/i] have to struggle with. I know that's not as relatable to a lot of people and some wouldn't find it as compelling, but it would work for me. Because there really are people who don't struggle with those choices. To me, Diana should be one of those (as should be Clark, and a number of older heroes not motivated by tragedy, but altruism). Not to say they are perfect and never act selfishly or make mistakes. But that they see the world and want to make it better or see a person in trouble and want to help (big picture v. individual-focused).
That art is phenomenal. A little nervous about the writer but his heart seems to be in the right place and at least Diana will hopefully not have to share the story with other heroes (fingers crossed Bats and Supes don’t show up). Honestly I’ll take an ambitious failure over a mediocre success at this point. Give me something that tries to go all out with Diana.
[QUOTE=kjn;4676274][URL="https://community.cbr.com/showthread.php?129074-Wonder-Woman-Dead-Earth-Announced"]Prior thread after announcement[/URL]
Not much new in this interview and preview compared to the earlier one. Some lines that twigged to me in various ways:
Doing Diana [I]approachable[/I] is great. I'm less sure about [I]relatable[/I], especially if it's supposed to be an intrinsic part of her character. To me, the best way to work on relatability with regard to Wonder Woman (and many other DC heroes) is to focus on her relations with other characters. The movie did that to extraordinary effect.[/QUOTE]
My question is always: "Relatable and approachable to [I]whom[/I] exactly?" Because the answer to that question tells me a great deal about what we're about to receive artistically.
Why do writers feel the only way they can write a good Wonder Woman is by knocking her power level down?
How about a good Wonder Woman at the height of her power?
[QUOTE=Gaelforce;4676775]Why do writers feel the only way they can write a good Wonder Woman is by knocking her power level down?
How about a good Wonder Woman at the height of her power?[/QUOTE]
Beats me. Makes me think of how often they want to write Superman less "good" (and sometimes quite bad) and less proactive. They think what the characters actually [i]are[/i] isn't good enough for a story, even though obviously that what a lot of existing fans of the character want to see. But we have his Klan story right now, and the less powerful there is okay because of Golden Age shoutouts. Not so much luck with WW in that regard. And I, personally, want a good Lois and Steve (or Jimmy or Etta or whatnot) because I don't really care for the hero without a regular supporting cast.
[QUOTE=Gaelforce;4676775]Why do writers feel the only way they can write a good Wonder Woman is by knocking her power level down?
How about a good Wonder Woman at the height of her power?[/QUOTE] I never got that myself!! Why the hero has to be less powerful, a shell of themselves??? I wonder if the writers really like the characters!! Are do they get off on writing stories about the hero getting his or her ass kicked!! They enjoy writing stories about the hero suffering, they like destroying the hero life, killing his or her love ones!! They get joy writing stories about tormenting the good person!!! It's all about darkness now!! It's really about criminals ruling the world, a world of darkness!! Destroying the light!! I'll make it a point not to pick-up this comic!!
To be fair, I could see a writer depowering Superman in this type of setting for similar reasons.
[QUOTE=Tzigone;4676331]I'd go so far as to say it's a fundamental aspect of [i]many[/i] comic book heroes. Not all, but many. I loved in Convergence when Billy Batson and Mary Bromfield and Freddy Freeman didn't let not having powers stop them. It changed their methods, not their nature. And that's true for Diana, too. And then there's dealing with the comparison of all the non-powered heroes who fight for those causes. Ultimately, I expected the answer to the question will be that those desires are intrinsic to her and not derived from her powers. But I'd have preferred it if that was something she [i]didn't[/i] have to struggle with. I know that's not as relatable to a lot of people and some wouldn't find it as compelling, but it would work for me. Because there really are people who don't struggle with those choices. To me, Diana should be one of those (as should be Clark, and a number of older heroes not motivated by tragedy, but altruism). Not to say they are perfect and never act selfishly or make mistakes. But that they see the world and want to make it better or see a person in trouble and want to help (big picture v. individual-focused).[/QUOTE]
Agreed. However, I'd posit that to push Diana into "not helping" would be even harder than to push your average hero into the same stance. Like in the movie, "not helping" would come at a clear personal cost and inner conflict for Wonder Woman.
Now, there are lots of discussion about how and when to help, and that's certainly a worthwhile path to take, because even there Wonder Woman is very much different from the other superheroes. But again, that doesn't come from her powers, but from her upbringing.
[QUOTE=Vordan;4676367]That art is phenomenal. A little nervous about the writer but his heart seems to be in the right place and at least Diana will hopefully not have to share the story with other heroes (fingers crossed Bats and Supes don’t show up). Honestly I’ll take an ambitious failure over a mediocre success at this point. Give me something that tries to go all out with Diana.[/QUOTE]
I'd say that we have seen far too many ambitious failures for Diana lately. Morrison was one. Wilson was also ambitious, but received mixed reactions.
Now, I hope Johnson's run will be good, but there is something off about how DC is handling Wonder Woman: it seems they simple have no concern for the character in the way they manage the assignments of writers, artists, and so on. What I'd really hope is for a story about her out from the no-longer-Ink line.
[QUOTE=SonOfBaldwin;4676434]My question is always: "Relatable and approachable to [I]whom[/I] exactly?" Because the answer to that question tells me a great deal about what we're about to receive artistically.[/QUOTE]
Fully agree.
[QUOTE=Gaelforce;4676775]Why do writers feel the only way they can write a good Wonder Woman is by knocking her power level down?
How about a good Wonder Woman at the height of her power?[/QUOTE]
I think there are two aspects to that question. The first is the aspects of the story. Some stories are served by a certain power level, and I see no reason to nerf those stories just because of a rigid stance to maintain power levels at all costs. The current "Superman Smashes the Klan" is a great recent example of such a story. Right now I don't know where Johnson's story will fall here.
The other aspect is that a lot of creators (and here I include publishers, editors, writers, and artists, and even some fans) are uncomfortable with the various subversive and civilisation-critical aspects of Wonder Woman. Nerfing Wonder Woman's powers is one way to try to bring that discomfort under control. Other ways include Xenafication, making her all about the dudes, or make Diana into a product of dudes instead of the Amazons.
Anyway, I saw a [URL="https://twitter.com/DCWonderWoman/status/1192894561326116865"]couple more pages over on Twitter[/URL]. While well-done, I'm not sure I want a story that's all about Diana tearing monsters apart.
Hello Everyone,
I have not posted in this forum much! However, I am a big fan of the character. I often feel bothered when so many writers admit to not liking the character and want to write her to make her "relatable" or to "fix" her. I believe these negative views often come through in the writing. Writers and artists who seem to genuinely like a character generally write better stories with that character.
Reading on the history of the character, this seems to go back to Pre-Crisis even. I thought after the success of the movie things might change more in the comic world for Wonder Woman.
Maybe making Wonder Woman the first hero is an attempt at re-centering the character?
The concept of this book interests me. However, the creator admitting a previous disinterest in the character leaves a bad taste in my mouth. The art is unique. Open to seeing how it unfolds!