Printable View
[QUOTE=Agent Z;6339136]Sorry if this sounds weird, but I recall a time when Diana had the ability to store the lasso in a pocket dimension. Did that ever happen or am I mistaken?[/QUOTE]
It did and I believe she vibrated her hand at super speed to access it.
[QUOTE=Sebastianne;6324940][img]https://i.imgur.com/FaFwwD7.jpg[/img]
what is Mrs. Simone cooking?[/QUOTE]
Please be an animated and a live-action series. Please be an animated and a live-action series. Please be an animated and a live-action series. Please be an animated and a live-action series. Please be an animated and a live-action series. Please be an animated and a live-action series. Please be an animated and a live-action series. Please be an animated and a live-action series. Please be an animated and a live-action series. Please be an animated and a live-action series. Please be an animated and a live-action series.Please be an animated and a live-action series. Please be an animated and a live-action series. Please be an animated and a live-action series. Please be an animated and a live-action series. Please be an animated and a live-action series. Please be an animated and a live-action series. Please be an animated and a live-action series. Please be an animated and a live-action series.
Gail is great, but she already worked on the Wonder Woman animated movie and that had some weird stuff in it.
..does anyone else find it rather sad that Gail is pretty much the only female writer famously associated with Wonder Woman? I mean, no disrespect intended, but her biggest success was with Birds of Prey, not Diana. But it's as if she's treated as *THE* woman who can write Diana, and yet...her run didn't exactly get raves.
I'd still be interested to see what else she'd like to do with the character, mind you...it's just strange how she's linked to Diana as if there's no other writers who could be as connected to her. At least that's how it's framed.
[QUOTE=DisneyBoy;6348948]
..does anyone else find it rather sad that Gail is pretty much the only female writer famously associated with Wonder Woman? [/QUOTE]
I don't. Then again, I feel Kelly Sue DeConnick is about to take that title thanks to Historia.
[QUOTE=Primal Slayer;6325437]Physical sales are still decent so I assume online sales pretty much get them to break even and maybe gain a little $$. Surprised they havent made a deal with netflix to host them over HBO Max.[/QUOTE]
Given how little they cost to produce those animated movies make a lot of profit. Even the lower selling ones still ended up with great returns.
[QUOTE=WonderScott;6343338]It did and I believe she vibrated her hand at super speed to access it.[/QUOTE]
What era or run was this?
[QUOTE=DisneyBoy;6348948]Gail is great, but she already worked on the Wonder Woman animated movie and that had some weird stuff in it.
..does anyone else find it rather sad that Gail is pretty much the only female writer famously associated with Wonder Woman? I mean, no disrespect intended, but her biggest success was with Birds of Prey, not Diana. But it's as if she's treated as *THE* woman who can write Diana, and yet...her run didn't exactly get raves.
I'd still be interested to see what else she'd like to do with the character, mind you...it's just strange how she's linked to Diana as if there's no other writers who could be as connected to her. At least that's how it's framed.[/QUOTE]
It's not particularly surprising given before Simone's run there weren't many woman in general who worked as writers on Wonder Woman and I think she still has the record for longest running female writer on the character. Joye Hummel's contributions have only become more known in the past decade, Mindy Newell co-wrote with Perez for about 10 issues, and Trina Robbin's work with Busiek on LoWW mini, and then a smattering of others for some single issues and short stories.
I think we've had more women work on WW after Simone and in the past decade then pretty much WW's entire publication output in the 20th century.
[QUOTE=DisneyBoy;6348948]Gail is great, but she already worked on the Wonder Woman animated movie and that had some weird stuff in it.
..does anyone else find it rather sad that Gail is pretty much the only female writer famously associated with Wonder Woman? I mean, no disrespect intended, but her biggest success was with Birds of Prey, not Diana. But it's as if she's treated as *THE* woman who can write Diana, and yet...her run didn't exactly get raves.
I'd still be interested to see what else she'd like to do with the character, mind you...it's just strange how she's linked to Diana as if there's no other writers who could be as connected to her. At least that's how it's framed.[/QUOTE]
Tbf to Simone, a lot of the weird stuff in the 2009 DTV might not have come from her. I think she did a first draft and it was heavily altered. Her Amazon character Persephone might be the only holdover.
For female writers with an impact on WW, I think Joye Hummel gets the #1 spot, abd DeConnick now grabbed the second place with Simone as third.
[QUOTE=SiegePerilous02;6349323]Tbf to Simone, a lot of the weird stuff in the 2009 DTV might not have come from her. I think she did a first draft and it was heavily altered. Her Amazon character Persephone might be the only holdover.
For female writers with an impact on WW, I think Joye Hummel gets the #1 spot, abd DeConnick now grabbed the second place with Simone as third.[/QUOTE]
In fact, all of the weird, anti-woman stuff in the first animated movie didn't come from Gail.
I remember reading stories at the time that Gail's script was heavily rewritten by Michael Jelenic--including putting in that bit about Hippolyta having a child with Ares, as well as the bit about Steve Trevor trying to get Diana drunk so he could take advantage of her.
I'm still in awe about how that last bit actually made it into the film and not one person objected enough to get it removed.
The archetype they went with Steve in the movie was kind of in vogue at the time, that's only rather recently fallen out of favor, so it's not too surprisingly honestly.
And yeah, that a big part of the movies message is a "both sides are wrong" where Diana has to learn a lesson in "equality" from that version of Steve is what sinks the film for me.
Kelly Sue has contributed a lot to the amazins from the DC universe and to Hippolyta.
But she's not the torchbearer for Wonder Woman. Don't be mistaken
[QUOTE=Alpha;6349487]Kelly Sue has contributed a lot to the amazins from the DC universe and to Hippolyta.
But she's not the torchbearer for Wonder Woman. Don't be mistaken[/QUOTE]
No one's saying she is.
[QUOTE=HotBoy;6349397]In fact, all of the weird, anti-woman stuff in the first animated movie didn't come from Gail.
I remember reading stories at the time that Gail's script was heavily rewritten by Michael Jelenic--including putting in that bit about Hippolyta having a child with Ares, as well as the bit about Steve Trevor trying to get Diana drunk so he could take advantage of her.
I'm still in awe about how that last bit actually made it into the film and not one person objected enough to get it removed.[/QUOTE]
The Polly/Ares son bit was so ugly and off-putting, I couldn't figure out why Gail would have ever written it in. Guess she didn't!
...I'm not saying it's definitely A-Okay that that version of Steve takes Diana out to get her smashed, but at the same time, I'm not sure it's fair to say he was going to force her into anything once she was trashed either. The impression I got was that Steve is bad at dating and just likes to go out for drinks as a default. If he could make out with Diana or more afterwards, it wouldn't have been him forcing himself on her. By that point, he'd already blurted out thathe liked her "rack" and had been threatened with castration by the Amazons...so his cards were pretty much on the table. Diana knew he was interested and he knew there'd be consequences if stepped across the line.
It's still not a great look, but I don't think Steve was plotting some assault based on how he was portrayed.
The scene seemed to be more about showing how "mama said!" men are gross and manipulative. Maybe because we knew Diana was in no danger and Steve was already embarrassing himself in the film, it didn't land as predatory.
[QUOTE=DisneyBoy;6349524]The Polly/Ares son bit was so ugly and off-putting, I couldn't figure out why Gail would have ever written it in. Guess she didn't!
...I'm not saying it's definitely A-Okay that that version of Steve takes Diana out to get her smashed, but at the same time, I'm not sure it's fair to say he was going to force her into anything once she was trashed either. The impression I got was that Steve is bad at dating and just likes to go out for drinks as a default. If he could make out with Diana or more afterwards, it wouldn't have been him forcing himself on her. By that point, he'd already blurted out thathe liked her "rack" and had been threatened with castration by the Amazons...so his cards were pretty much on the table. Diana knew he was interested, he knew there'd be consequences if stepped across the line.
It's still not a great look, but I don't think Steve was plotting some assault based on how he was portrayed.
The scene seemed to be more about showing how "mama said!" men are gross and manipulative. Maybe because we knew Diana was in no danger and Steve was already embarrassing himself in the film, it didn't land as predatory.[/QUOTE]
I would agree with you if Diana's reaction and his silence didn't all but indicate his intention.
My new theory is that a WW animated series is going to be announced to air within the next couple years, with a new live action film coming later. James Gunn confirmed that she'll have a project in the first 3 years of the new DCU, but Gal Gadot is set to appear in both Shazam 2 and Flash so I wouldn't be surprised if they waited until after her final appearance to announce a live action reboot. Plus WBD [I]did[/I] just make a big deal with Amazon to put DC animated content on Prime Video.
And if my theory is true, I'd bet Gail is the head writer.
[QUOTE=Gaius;6349463]The archetype they went with Steve in the movie was kind of in vogue at the time, that's only rather recently fallen out of favor, so it's not too surprisingly honestly.
And yeah, that a big part of the movies message is a "both sides are wrong" where Diana has to learn a lesson in "equality" from that version of Steve is what sinks the film for me.[/QUOTE]
Steve in the 2009 movie felt like a Joss Whedon character in the worst way possible. A "nice guy" whose gross sexual entitlement you're supposed to give a pass because he's snarky and self-deprecating.
Maybe a separate thought, but if the icky stuff about Whedon hadn't become public knowledge, would his characters still be regarded in the same way today?
I think you're right about Gunn keeping things under wraps, Bardkeep, but at the same time, the public's opinions on the new direction for DC have to land. Just because they're rebooting things doesn't mean it'll go any better than it did with Synder.
[QUOTE=DisneyBoy;6350197]Maybe a separate thought, but if the icky stuff about Whedon hadn't become public knowledge, would his characters still be regarded in the same way today?
I think you're right about Gunn keeping things under wraps, Bardkeep, but at the same time, the public's opinions on the new direction for DC have to land. Just because they're rebooting things doesn't mean it'll go any better than it did with Synder.[/QUOTE]
His characters are still regarded the same as they were before his drama came to light?
[QUOTE=DisneyBoy;6350197]Maybe a separate thought, but if the icky stuff about Whedon hadn't become public knowledge, would his characters still be regarded in the same way today?[/QUOTE]
The "nice guy" trope was getting push-back even without that stuff. I suppose it's anecdotal, but I definitely saw more "Xander was always a dick" and "Mal was abusive" takes as time went on. The truth about him coming out just shed new light on those characters and the thinking behind their writing.
Speaking of which...we the animated movie's Steve was bad, the one in Whedon's [I]Wonder Woman[/I] script was on a whole other level. The crap he had Steve doing and saying makes '09 Steve getting Diana drunk seem like a harmless faux pas.
What were the highlights of that script? Never read it.
[QUOTE=DisneyBoy;6350236]What were the highlights of that script? Never read it.[/QUOTE]
The whole script is basically Steve berating Diana and treating her like a child. Literally the first thing he says to her, after she saves him from the crash, is a snarky comment about how she doesn't understand what a man is.
Compare to 2017 Steve's befuddled, "Don't I look like one?" Whedon has him just insult her.
He does nothing but antagonize Hippolyta and shows neither her, nor the other Amazons any respect.
You know how 2017's No Man's Land sequence starts with Diana insisting they needed to stop and help the innocent people, Steve says they can't, but she goes anyway, saves the village, and it's a big triumphant moment?
Whedon's script had a similar sequence. Except his...as I recall it...involved terrorists holding people hostage. Diana insists they should help, but Steve tells her they can't, but she goes anyway. This results in the terrorists panicking, killing the civilians, and escaping.
Steve then yells at Diana how she should've listened, she doesn't know what she's doing, and he ends his tirade with (actual line): "You're not a hero, Diana. You're a f***ing tourist."
It's a very ugly take on the character. We definitely dodged a bullet.
Ugh. That sounds very unpleasant. And Steve's a hard enough character to get right anyway.
[QUOTE=bardkeep;6349829]
Steve in the 2009 movie felt like a Joss Whedon character in the worst way possible. A "nice guy" whose gross sexual entitlement you're supposed to give a pass because he's snarky and self-deprecating.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=DisneyBoy;6350197]Maybe a separate thought, but if the icky stuff about Whedon hadn't become public knowledge, would his characters still be regarded in the same way today?
I think you're right about Gunn keeping things under wraps, Bardkeep, but at the same time, the public's opinions on the new direction for DC have to land. Just because they're rebooting things doesn't mean it'll go any better than it did with Synder.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, never watched Buffy/Angel but didn't care from what I saw of Firefly (which has also aged pretty badly with news developments in the past few years)
[QUOTE=bardkeep;6349829]My new theory is that a WW animated series is going to be announced to air within the next couple years, with a new live action film coming later. James Gunn confirmed that she'll have a project in the first 3 years of the new DCU, but Gal Gadot is set to appear in both Shazam 2 and Flash so I wouldn't be surprised if they waited until after her final appearance to announce a live action reboot. Plus WBD [I]did[/I] just make a big deal with Amazon to put DC animated content on Prime Video.
And if my theory is true, I'd bet Gail is the head writer.[/QUOTE]
I want this with every fiber of my being.
[QUOTE=bardkeep;6349829]Steve in the 2009 movie felt like a Joss Whedon character in the worst way possible. A "nice guy" whose gross sexual entitlement you're supposed to give a pass because he's snarky and self-deprecating.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Primal Slayer;6350209]His characters are still regarded the same as they were before his drama came to light?[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Guy_McNichts;6350231]The "nice guy" trope was getting push-back even without that stuff. I suppose it's anecdotal, but I definitely saw more "Xander was always a dick" and "Mal was abusive" takes as time went on. The truth about him coming out just shed new light on those characters and the thinking behind their writing[/QUOTE]
Xander at least got bashed when the show was airing for being a dick, but mostly from the fans of Buffy's vampire BFs who he was in opposition to.
I keep hoping the re-assessment of Whedon's work will finally get us to acknowledge the toxicity of Spike and how catering to him undermined the feminist themes of the show more than anything else.
Angel at least was designed to be a morally gray character struggling with his shadier impulses and appropriately punished when he relapses. Somehow the dude who dates a high school girl is way less of a creep than the males Whedon typically writes and prefers.
Giles is still king though.
[QUOTE=SiegePerilous02;6350296]I want this with every fiber of my being.
Xander at least got bashed when the show was airing for being a dick, but mostly from the fans of Buffy's vampire BFs who he was in opposition to.
I keep hoping the re-assessment of Whedon's work will finally get us to acknowledge the toxicity of Spike and how catering to him undermined the feminist themes of the show more than anything else.
Angel at least was designed to be a morally gray character struggling with his shadier impulses and appropriately punished when he relapses. Somehow the dude who dates a high school girl is way less of a creep than the males Whedon typically writes and prefers.
Giles is still king though.[/QUOTE]
From what I've seen, Spike has been a very contentious character since season 5 and his relationship with Buffy was one of many story arcs criticized during the show's original run, or at least a short time after it ended. Although the knowledge that Whedon really hated that he couldn't kill him off arguably seems more like Whedon trying to punish James Marsden rather than cater to Spike.
[QUOTE=Gaius;6349463]The archetype they went with Steve in the movie was kind of in vogue at the time, that's only rather recently fallen out of favor, so it's not too surprisingly honestly.
[/QUOTE]
Yeah, Tom Tressor in the comics was written the same way.
[QUOTE=Guy_McNichts;6350256]The whole script is basically Steve berating Diana and treating her like a child. Literally the first thing he says to her, after she saves him from the crash, is a snarky comment about how she doesn't understand what a man is.
Compare to 2017 Steve's befuddled, "Don't I look like one?" Whedon has him just insult her.
He does nothing but antagonize Hippolyta and shows neither her, nor the other Amazons any respect.
You know how 2017's No Man's Land sequence starts with Diana insisting they needed to stop and help the innocent people, Steve says they can't, but she goes anyway, saves the village, and it's a big triumphant moment?
Whedon's script had a similar sequence. Except his...as I recall it...involved terrorists holding people hostage. Diana insists they should help, but Steve tells her they can't, but she goes anyway. This results in the terrorists panicking, killing the civilians, and escaping.
Steve then yells at Diana how she should've listened, she doesn't know what she's doing, and he ends his tirade with (actual line): "You're not a hero, Diana. You're a f***ing tourist."
It's a very ugly take on the character. We definitely dodged a bullet.[/QUOTE]
I read the script, and I was appalled that anyone during that time would even consider this crap suitable for a Wonder Woman film. Then again, I was never a fan of Whedon's or his allegedly brilliant Buffy, Angel and Firefly. None of those shows did anything for me, and especially with Buffy, I never understood the hype or the adoration that Whedon generated among fans of superheroines.
[QUOTE=Agent Z;6350690]Yeah, Tom Tressor in the comics was written the same way.[/QUOTE]
Was he though? I remember Tom being the typical pretty but dumb nice guy, not outright frattish in his behaviours. I could be misremembering though.
[QUOTE=DisneyBoy;6350745]Was he though? I remember Tom being the typical pretty but dumb nice guy, not outright frattish in his behaviours. I could be misremembering though.[/QUOTE]
He very much was like that in the comics.
[IMG]https://townsquare.media/site/622/files/2012/08/nemesis-drop.jpg[/IMG]
[QUOTE=DisneyBoy;6348948]Gail is great, but she already worked on the Wonder Woman animated movie and that had some weird stuff in it.
..does anyone else find it rather sad that Gail is pretty much the only female writer famously associated with Wonder Woman? I mean, no disrespect intended, but her biggest success was with Birds of Prey, not Diana. But it's as if she's treated as *THE* woman who can write Diana, and yet...her run didn't exactly get raves.
I'd still be interested to see what else she'd like to do with the character, mind you...it's just strange how she's linked to Diana as if there's no other writers who could be as connected to her. At least that's how it's framed.[/QUOTE]
I didn't like the tweet itself. It's so blatantly self-aggrandizing it immediately reminds me of all her failures and with Wonder Woman there are many. At least for me.
[QUOTE=Agent Z;6350690]Yeah, Tom Tressor in the comics was written the same way.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=DisneyBoy;6350745]Was he though? I remember Tom being the typical pretty but dumb nice guy, not outright frattish in his behaviours. I could be misremembering though.[/QUOTE]
In the Heinberg issues, he was. Simone made him more tolerable.
Which is rather surprising given when I saw Heinberg was doing the first solo film, I was fairly dreading Steve would just be how he wrote Tressor.
Tom Tressor was cool, he was just David to Diana's Maddie (Moonlighting reference) they had fun banter.
What Diana did to him was egregious by comparison.
[url]https://www.reddit.com/r/DCcomics/comments/10m12sy/discussion_michael_conrad_on_the_status_of_dianas/[/url]
"I've really been enjoying your Wonder Woman run, but I just read Lazarus Planet: We Once Were Gods, and Diana's clay origin was referenced by an unread Theseus, and both the clay origin and demigod origin have been referenced in your run. I'm just wondering which origin is canon right now?"
[IMG]https://i.redd.it/d7izd2ua2gea1.png[/IMG]
[QUOTE=LordUltimus;6351731][url]https://www.reddit.com/r/DCcomics/comments/10m12sy/discussion_michael_conrad_on_the_status_of_dianas/[/url]
"I've really been enjoying your Wonder Woman run, but I just read Lazarus Planet: We Once Were Gods, and Diana's clay origin was referenced by an unread Theseus, and both the clay origin and demigod origin have been referenced in your run. I'm just wondering which origin is canon right now?"
[IMG]https://i.redd.it/d7izd2ua2gea1.png[/IMG][/QUOTE]
If DC is allowing writers to use the clay origin if they feel like using it, as it appears, doesn’t that mean there currently [I]is no canon?[/I]
[QUOTE=Largo161;6351800]If DC is allowing writers to use the clay origin if they feel like using it, as it appears, doesn’t that mean there currently [I]is no canon?[/I][/QUOTE]
I think it is more "you can use it but you can't CONFIRM that is the origin" like we wont see any flashbacks to Diana being sculpted from clay.
Why are they so obsessed with keeping it? Azz isn't writing the book anymore or likely to return. The Gadot era is nearly over, aside from (allegedly) some cameos. And - from what I can tell - it didn't really improve anything for Wonder Woman to make her Zeus' kid.
So...why not just go back to the clay origin?
[QUOTE=Agent Z;6350775]He very much was like that in the comics.
[IMG]https://townsquare.media/site/622/files/2012/08/nemesis-drop.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE]
Definitely frattish.
But I won't lie, I laughed. The timing on that last panel was great, and good for Diana for dumping him.
I agree though that Diana saying she was basically interested in him mainly because she was feeling like it was time to make babies? That's...pretty cold. I never understood that development. Did DC tell Gail to break them up, and that's what she came up with?
[QUOTE=DisneyBoy;6351825]Why are they so obsessed with keeping it? Azz isn't writing the book anymore or likely to return. The Gadot era is nearly over, aside from (allegedly) some cameos. And - from what I can tell - it didn't really improve anything for Wonder Woman to make her Zeus' kid.
So...why not just go back to the clay origin?[/QUOTE]
Not wanting to admit they made a mistake. :p
[QUOTE=Largo161;6351800]If DC is allowing writers to use the clay origin if they feel like using it, as it appears, doesn’t that mean there currently [I]is no canon?[/I][/QUOTE]
Absolutely. The everything is canon approach that DC has even stated years ago.
[URL="https://twitter.com/gracecellis/status/1618686499008151552"][SIZE=3][B]Diana and the Hero's Journey written by Grace Ellis and illustrated by Penelope Rivera Gaylord[/B][/SIZE][/URL]
[img]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fna5kMzWQAA_GOs?format=jpg&name=medium[/img]
[Quote][B]It takes a village to raise a warrior…and the Amazons have a lot on their hands with Diana. Can she harness the power of truth and community to become the hero we know as WONDER WOMAN?[/B]
Curious and rambunctious Diana thinks she has the whole warrior thing figured out: punching, archery, sword fighting… But as the village prepares for a festival celebrating the story of Hero—the first hero in Greek mythology—Diana and her goat, Phyllis, cause such chaos that she must embark on a journey to…clean up her mess. With the help of the Amazon’s vivid yet unreliable retellings of Hero’s story, what starts out as a boring chore becomes an epic adventure as Diana learns what it truly means to be a hero.
From [I]The New York Times[/I] bestselling co-creator of [I]Lumberjanes[/I], [B]Grace Ellis[/B], accompanied by the delightful artwork of [B]Penelope Gaylord[/B] comes the story of a young hero who must embrace the support of her community to reach her full potential.[/Quote]
Seem to be getting a lot of Young/Pre-teen Diana stuff.