[QUOTE=Veni;6149264]Well Discovery considers Wonder Woman to be one of their most important franchises
[ATTACH=CONFIG]123611[/ATTACH][/QUOTE]
Love to see that!
Printable View
[QUOTE=Veni;6149264]Well Discovery considers Wonder Woman to be one of their most important franchises
[ATTACH=CONFIG]123611[/ATTACH][/QUOTE]
Love to see that!
[QUOTE=Veni;6149264]Well Discovery considers Wonder Woman to be one of their most important franchises
[ATTACH=CONFIG]123611[/ATTACH][/QUOTE]
Could anyone have imagined a decade ago that eventually WW would be listed along with the likes of Batman and Harry Potter as one of WB's top priorities? That first movie really did something.
I saw a tweet about how they're doing a "reset" so unsure if that means they're planning on rebooting but hopefully it means we get more Wonder-content on other platforms. And it puts the video game in a much comfier place as well.
[QUOTE=Veni;6149264]Well Discovery considers Wonder Woman to be one of their most important franchises
[ATTACH=CONFIG]123611[/ATTACH][/QUOTE]
And to add to this, his [URL="https://www.indiewire.com/2022/08/batgirl-canceled-david-zaslav-explains-warner-bros-discovery-ceo-1234747818/"]exact quote's[/URL] are:
“The Warner Bros. Motion Picture Group has fantastic IP and a great history,” Zaslav said. “Between DC and the animation group, together with the entire Warner library, our ambition is to bring Warner back and produce great high-quality films. As we look at the opportunities that we have, broadly, DC is one of the top of the list for us. Look at Batman, Superman, Wonder-Woman, Aquaman, these are brands known everywhere in the world. The ability to drive those all over the world is a big opportunity for us.”
Zaslav said that the DC organization moving forward will resemble the strategy that drives Disney’s Marvel Cinematic Universe.
“We have done a reset. We’ve structured the business,” Zaslav said. “There will be a team with a 10-year plan focusing just on DC. It’s very similar to the structure that Alan Horn and Bob Iger put together very effectively with Kevin Feige at Disney. We think we could build a long-term, much more sustainable growth business out of DC, and as part of that, we’re going to focus on quality. We’re not going to release any film before it’s ready… The focus is going to be, how do we make each of these films, in general, as good as possible? DC is something we can make better, and we’re focused on it now. We have some great DC films coming up. ‘Black Adam,’ ‘Shazam!,’ and ‘Flash.’ We’re working on all of those. We’ve seen them, and we think they’re terrific, and that we can make them even better. That’s what Mike [De Luca] and Pam [Abdy, Warner Bros.’ new motion picture heads] are doing.”
Zaslav added, “We’ve looked hard at the direct-to-streaming business. We’ve seen, luckily, by having access to all the data how these movies perform. Our conclusion is expensive direct-to-streaming movies, in terms of how people are consuming them on the platform, how often people buy a service for them, how they get nourished over time, is no comparison to what happens when you launch a film in the theaters. This idea of expensive films going direct to streaming. We cannot find an economic case for it. We can’t find an economic value for it, and so we’re making a strategic shift.”
Ultimately, Zaslav said, the objective is to “grow the DC brand, to grow the DC characters. But also our job is to protect the DC brand, and that’s what we’re going to do.”
I want results. Not empty platitudes and I'm not going to read too much into a logo placement on a chart. It's a shallow sign, imo.
[QUOTE=Aegis;6149357]That makes no sense. Bringing him back didn't change his character. He was the same person.[/QUOTE]
Trevor was fine. So is Chris Pine. Diana moping about him for a quarter of a century, having sex with him after he possessed another man's body and needing to be convinced to be a hero by him and renounce her wish was terrible. Are we to assume that Diana was okay with the world burning down as long she had her Stevie?
No wonder they are okay with Patty's 'vision' for Diana. So long as it doesn't challenge them and keeps them comfortable.
[QUOTE=Veni;6149264]Well Discovery considers Wonder Woman to be one of their most important franchises
[ATTACH=CONFIG]123611[/ATTACH][/QUOTE]
I will believe it when i see it. Lipservice is all they know to do with WW.
[QUOTE=Guy_McNichts;6149249]With Zaslav gutting Warner and slashing things left and right, some have speculated/feared the actual DC comics might be on the chopping block.
Personally, I don't see it going that far, but suppose he did torpedo the comics division. As far as I know, the "Wonder Woman comics must be published or the rights go back to the Marston family" clause is still in effect. So, if DC folds and unless there's a re-negotiation, what happens to Diana?
For a start, when they say the rights go back, to what extent? I guess it's a similar situation as when the IPs become public domain, but what exactly goes back to the Marstons? What elements of her lore would still be regarded as DC creations and stick with Warner?
But the other question is what the Marstons could or would do with it? The obvious suggestion would be sell to Disney/Marvel, but who knows? Wonder Woman, one way or another, is a valuable IP. I don't know how ambitious or business savvy the surviving Marstons are, but there are other avenues they could pursue.
Again, I doubt this will happen, and I'm not sure it would necessarily be a good thing if it did, but one wonders.
And imagine if Diana were to actually thrive afterward? How sad would that be...that all this time, it was just Warner/DC that held her back?[/QUOTE]
WB /DC have always held her back. It would be interesting to see her shine without them. It would be great.
[QUOTE=Gaius;6149266]This is something I've wondered as a thought experiment, independent of the current Zaslav stuff, if DC ever failed to uphold the agreement.
I assume it'd probably be all the stuff Marston can be specifically credited with (Wonder Woman, the Diana Prince identity, Steve, Etta, Priscilla Rich, Giganta, etc). Of course Hippolyta, the Amazons, Themyscira, Circe, and the Gods are all public domain so they'd be fair use either way.[/QUOTE]
They wouldn't be able to use any of the post-Marston designs or stories though.
Not to be the depressing one here, but a directive like Zaslav's, that has shown to appraoch TV with 50s era mysoginy, doesn't inspire me much confidence when it comes to Wonder Woman.
[QUOTE=Zagre;6150191]They wouldn't be able to use any of the post-Marston designs or stories though.
[B]Not to be the depressing one here, but a directive like Zaslav's, that has shown to appraoch TV with 50s era mysoginy, doesn't inspire me much confidence when it comes to Wonder Woman[/B].[/QUOTE]
This. I think we are about to witness a new era of WW being treated like trash. She will probably be portrayed as an angry warrior. Nerfed and will be Superman's punching bag as usual. And the punching bag for others too. This could be the start of one of WW's worst eras.
[QUOTE=Zagre;6150191]They wouldn't be able to use any of the post-Marston designs or stories though.
Not to be the depressing one here, but a directive like Zaslav's, that has shown to appraoch TV with 50s era mysoginy, doesn't inspire me much confidence when it comes to Wonder Woman.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, later post-Marston stuff like Barbara Minerva, Nubia, Artemis, the Wonder Girls (or even that concept), the Rebirth costume, would still be DC
Another interesting thing is it'd probably be a huge mess for every book where WW guest starred or was a on team book if DC ever wanted to release new trades or reprints.
Rawr
[IMG]https://s3.amazonaws.com/comicgeeks/comics/covers/large-9919722.jpg?1657839575[/IMG]
[QUOTE=Zagre;6150191]They wouldn't be able to use any of the post-Marston designs or stories though.
Not to be the depressing one here, but a directive like Zaslav's, that has shown to appraoch [B]TV with 50s era mysoginy[/B], doesn't inspire me much confidence when it comes to Wonder Woman.[/QUOTE]
So your saying this is what Zaslav represents? What proof do you have of this since I would think in this day and age he wouldn't have come to the position he has with this approach, as you say it.
[QUOTE=John Venus;6150149]
Diana moping about him for a quarter of a century
[/QUOTE]
That's totally fine as well. Like Superman spent 1000 years being faithful to Lois after getting lost in some parallel dimension. Why is it an issue with WW who is hundreds of years old?
[QUOTE=Aegis;6151060]That's totally fine as well. Like Superman spent 1000 years being faithful to Lois after getting lost in some parallel dimension. Why is it an issue with WW who is hundreds of years old?[/QUOTE]
This would be a valid response if the extent of it had been someone asking her out and her saying she'd never date again out of respect for Steve. But in WW84:
(a) Diana's plight is that she's lonely because she's immortal, outlived all of her loved ones, and can't go back to the one place where she wouldn't be alone. You'd think she'd wish to be able to go back to her immortal homeland, where she lived for hundreds of years and had countless loved ones who grieved for her when she left (in fact, the first scene of the movie shows her feeling homesick), but nope, she wishes for the guy she dated for what couldn't have been more than a matter of months. Never mind the fact that she'd inevitably outlive him anyway.
(c) Steve was only able to return by taking over a random dude's body, which she proceeded to violate even knowing the situation. And she didn't even consider that there was anything wrong with it.
(d) She was desperate to give up her powers for him and let him permanently inhabit this poor man's body, in spite of the fact that the world was collapsing around them and she was the only one who could stop it. And worse yet, she only did the right thing after Steve convinced her to do it.
None of that would ever happen in a Superman story because it's honestly pathetic and makes her look like a terrible person. I know Patty was trying to do the throwback '80s thing but it came with a whole bunch of problematic tropes that she somehow didn't consider.
[QUOTE=Aegis;6151060]That's totally fine as well. Like Superman spent 1000 years being faithful to Lois after getting lost in some parallel dimension. Why is it an issue with WW who is hundreds of years old?[/QUOTE]
In addition to what [B]bardkeep[/B] said, the different is that:
-Lois is still alive on earth and Superman knows that he can reunite with her again at some point. Steve in WW84 was dead and the only thing on Diana's mind was how much she missed him and wanted to be with him at the expense of literally everything else.
-The Superman story you mentioned is still problematic for other reasons since it treated Diana as 'temptation' to show how loyal Superman was to Lois and also had Lois being jealous of Diana's appearance. There was also a Batman story in Tom King's run that did the same thing.
[QUOTE=John Venus;6151462]In addition to what [B]bardkeep[/B] said, the different is that:
-Lois is still alive on earth and Superman knows that he can reunite with her again at some point. Steve in WW84 was dead and the only thing on Diana's mind was how much she missed him and wanted to be with him at the expense of literally everything else.
-The Superman story you mentioned is still problematic for other reasons since it treated Diana as 'temptation' to show how loyal Superman was to Lois and also had Lois being jealous of Diana's appearance. There was also a Batman story in Tom King's run that did the same thing.[/QUOTE]
Actually, Superman never knew that he would be able to go back in time to where they were before going to Asgard.
Right. But there was still the possibility of him reuniting with Lois. That's different from Diana who knew that Steve was dead for real.
[QUOTE=John Venus;6151494]Right. But there was still the possibility of him reuniting with Lois. That's different from Diana who knew that Steve was dead for real.[/QUOTE]
If they were really trapped for 1000 years, earth time (in case they say time moves differently in Asgard), in what sense does Superman think there is still a possibility of him reuniting with Lois? The story made no sense that Supes couldn't move on from Lois even after 1000 years, that is what I ultimately took from this.
I have read fanfiction on this that does the story more justice than what the original writer did (Joe Kelly?).
[QUOTE=BiteTheBullet;6150756]So your saying this is what Zaslav represents? What proof do you have of this since I would think in this day and age he wouldn't have come to the position he has with this approach, as you say it.[/QUOTE]
Considering they believe that females (their words) don't really care for scripted content and prefer "comfort viewing" (whatever that means), and believe so strongly enough to even make it part of their business plans, yes, this is what I'm saying Zaslav represents. Can he hire somebody that doesn't embody stuff like that and actually cares about the character? Sure, anything is possible, but excuse me if I think he may find similarly minded people mroe approachable.
About the WW84, while the film has problems let's remember that when Diana asked for "a wish" she didn't know the Dream Stone worked, It wa more of a playful thing. The body swap thing was bad though, and completely unnecessary (I really don't get why they didn't just make him a body out of thin air, the "I'm losing my pwoers" was enough of a price).
[QUOTE=Zagre;6151572]Considering they believe that females (their words) don't really care for scripted content and prefer "comfort viewing" (whatever that means), and believe so strongly enough to even make it part of their business plans, yes, this is what I'm saying Zaslav represents. Can he hire somebody that doesn't embody stuff like that and actually cares about the character? Sure, anything is possible, but excuse me if I think he may find similarly minded people mroe approachable.
About the WW84, while the film has problems let's remember that when Diana asked for "a wish" she didn't know the Dream Stone worked, It wa more of a playful thing. The body swap thing was bad though, and completely unnecessary (I really don't get why they didn't just make him a body out of thin air, the "I'm losing my pwoers" was enough of a price).[/QUOTE]
Maybe if Zaslav was there, WW84 may have never gotten greenlit as scripted. He says it is all about quality, not how quickly they can churn them. If that would have been the case, I'm all for Zaslav since WW84 is one of the worst superhero movies I have seen, and I want Wonder Woman films to do well.
I will at least give Zaslav the benefit of the doubt and let the next few years play out and see what happens. I know he runs the ship, but he is supposed to get his own 'Kevin Feige' so we have to hope that it will be a good hire.
But what if the resource that he is using to determine Quality is more a Geoff Johns than a Phil Jimenez or a Greg Rucka?
[QUOTE=Stanlos;6151719]But what if the resource that he is using to determine Quality is more a Geoff Johns than a Phil Jimenez or a Greg Rucka?[/QUOTE]
And sadly, it's not just Warner Bros./Discovery moving in a more "conservative" direction. I keep asking myself: "What would I do if the comics I love become propaganda for a retrograde politics and nostalgia for a less equitable time in history?" The answer is that I will stop collecting them and find media that has a more inclusive vision for reality. There's a comic book company that has already reached out to my agent to ask if I'd been interesting in pitching a book for them.
[QUOTE=SonOfBaldwin;6151780]And sadly, it's not just Warner Bros./Discovery moving in a more "conservative" direction. I keep asking myself: "What would I do if the comics I love become propaganda for a retrograde politics and nostalgia for a less equitable time in history?" The answer is that I will stop collecting them and find media that has a more inclusive vision for reality. There's a comic book company that has already reached out to my agent to ask if I'd been interesting in pitching a book for them.[/QUOTE]
Write the Wonder womsn comic for that company, after DC loses the rights. I am confident it will happen eventually.
[QUOTE=BiteTheBullet;6151640]Maybe if Zaslav was there, WW84 may have never gotten greenlit as scripted. He says it is all about quality, not how quickly they can churn them. If that would have been the case, I'm all for Zaslav since WW84 is one of the worst superhero movies I have seen, and I want Wonder Woman films to do well.
I will at least give Zaslav the benefit of the doubt and let the next few years play out and see what happens. I know he runs the ship, but he is supposed to get his own 'Kevin Feige' so we have to hope that it will be a good hire.[/QUOTE]
It depends on what he considers quality. It could be more snyder, geoff johns type of approach for WW. Or even taylor type. And none of that is good. zaslav's trackrecord is not giving me positive vibes.
$58B in debt is no joke. Even if everyone alive on earth right now, including newborns pitched in $1 to WBD it wouldn't erase that debt. It will likely hamstrung any attempts to make more projects.
Most likely, they will sell the various publishing, animation and live action rights to various studios who will make stuff for them. Do you how much Netflix would kill to have something like DC's IP library right now?
[QUOTE=SonOfBaldwin;6151780]And sadly, it's not just Warner Bros./Discovery moving in a more "conservative" direction. I keep asking myself: "What would I do if the comics I love become propaganda for a retrograde politics and nostalgia for a less equitable time in history?" The answer is that I will stop collecting them and find media that has a more inclusive vision for reality. There's a comic book company that has already reached out to my agent to ask if I'd been interesting in pitching a book for them.[/QUOTE]
I engaged in the same thought exercise. I would seek out others as I have done in the past. That or draw or write my own scenarios.
I am soooooooooooo stoked about the prospect of seeing what a run on WW or another comic would look like
With The Sandman finally out on Netflix, I'd love to see a WW series that has the same production as it. Especially with Diana taking on all the various gods/fates.
I'm not certain if anyone cares, but Multiversus had its first tournament yesterday. A Wonder Woman (and Tom and Jerry) won the tournament. I glanced at the tournament a few times and saw some Wonder Woman Multiversus merch, including a holographic Wonder Woman trading card that looked quite beautiful.
[QUOTE=Primal Slayer;6152230]With The Sandman finally out on Netflix, I'd love to see a WW series that has the same production as it. Especially with Diana taking on all the various gods/fates.[/QUOTE]
I’m still halfway through but the Sandman is unfortunately not great, or as great as it deserved to be. It feels a bit cheap even though it cost a pretty penny to make. The production value sure is good though. I think Hollywood is just stretched too thin, they’re churning out too much “content” at the expense of quality, to say nothing of politics. Watching Netflix now just feels like plugging your brain to a brain-scrambling device
“Quality over quantity” is the right strategy as far as I’m concerned, it just remains to be seen what “quality” means to Zaslav&Co. I worry the pendulum could swing from one extreme to the other - from Warrior Woman to Lynda Carter and back to Warrior Woman again. Lets hope it stops somewhere in the middle, like why is that so hard
[QUOTE=VonHammersmark;6152779]I’m still halfway through but the Sandman is unfortunately not great, or as great as it deserved to be. It feels a bit cheap even though it cost a pretty penny to make. The production value sure is good though. I think Hollywood is just stretched too thin, they’re churning out too much “content” at the expense of quality, to say nothing of politics. Watching Netflix now just feels like plugging your brain to a brain-scrambling device
“Quality over quantity” is the right strategy as far as I’m concerned, it just remains to be seen what “quality” means to Zaslav&Co. I worry the pendulum could swing from one extreme to the other - from Warrior Woman to Lynda Carter and back to Warrior Woman again. Lets hope it stops somewhere in the middle, like why is that so hard[/QUOTE]
I really enjoyed it. The battle between Dream and Lucifer is something I could see a smart writer doing for a WW show/movie.
[QUOTE=Primal Slayer;6153191]I really enjoyed it. The battle between Dream and Lucifer is something I could see a smart writer doing for a WW show/movie.[/QUOTE]
If they’re smart they’ll just adapt Wonder Woman: Guts by everyone’s favourite WW writer Brian Azzarello lol but seriously, say what you will about the new 52, that story’s hard to beat
And I can easily see how they could use it in WW3 in a way that doesn’t involve Steve, if say Diana’s only way back to Paradise Island is through the Underworld
[B][SIZE=4]C2E2 ’22: The legacy and importance of Wonder Woman[/SIZE][/B]
[IMG]https://i1.wp.com/www.comicsbeat.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/WWBlackGold.jpg?w=1200&ssl=1[/IMG]
[IMG]https://i2.wp.com/www.comicsbeat.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/WonderWomanLegacyPanel.jpg?resize=696%2C322&ssl=1[/IMG]
[QUOTE]While DC did not have an official presence at this weekend’s C2E2, one of the publisher’s most iconic characters was still in the spotlight as Saturday saw a panel dedicated to The Legacy and Importance of Wonder Woman. Among the panelists were a number of creators who have worked on the amazing Amazon and her world, including artist Gene Ha (Wonder Woman: Historia – The Amazons, Book Two), writer/artist Sanya Anwar (Sensational Wonder Woman, Wonder Woman: Black & Gold), artist Ashley Woods (Wonder Woman: Black & Gold), and writer/artist Daniel Warren Johnson (Wonder Woman: Dead Earth).[/QUOTE]
[url]https://www.comicsbeat.com/c2e2-22-the-legacy-and-importance-of-wonder-woman/[/url]
[QUOTE=SonOfBaldwin;6153973][B][SIZE=4]C2E2 ’22: The legacy and importance of Wonder Woman[/SIZE][/B]
[IMG]https://i2.wp.com/www.comicsbeat.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/WonderWomanLegacyPanel.jpg?resize=696%2C322&ssl=1[/IMG]
[url]https://www.comicsbeat.com/c2e2-22-the-legacy-and-importance-of-wonder-woman/[/url][/QUOTE]
" The moderator praised characters like Ares and Circe, and Johnson sighed and said that, when he was working on Dead Earth, he was really bored by Diana’s villains, so he changed them for his story."
Maybe it was just the way it was written, but there was something about the entire write-up that irked me. Unlike Cloonrad who seem to legitimately love the Wonder Woman character [I]and[/I] her world, this write-up seemed like people getting paid to be there. In particular, the part about her villains irked me the most. I put a little quote above, but at a a panel about the "legacy" and "importance" or Wonder Woman, why on earth are you calling her villains boring?
Besides that, some of the article just made me wonder how much time they'd truly spend in Diana's world. While one person mentions reading her comics from the 40s, there was just something very shallow and surface level to the interview. While I liked some of it, mostly these felt like the wrong presenters to be discussing the "legacy" and "importance" of Wonder Woman when they were getting some basic story elements incorrect.
[QUOTE=PopQuezy;6154089]" The moderator praised characters like Ares and Circe, and Johnson sighed and said that, when he was working on Dead Earth, he was really bored by Diana’s villains, so he changed them for his story."
Maybe it was just the way it was written, but there was something about the entire write-up that irked me. Unlike Cloonrad who seem to legitimately love the Wonder Woman character [I]and[/I] her world, this write-up seemed like people getting paid to be there. In particular, the part about her villains irked me the most. I put a little quote above, but at a a panel about the "legacy" and "importance" or Wonder Woman, why on earth are you calling her villains boring?
Besides that, some of the article just made me wonder how much time they'd truly spend in Diana's world. While one person mentions reading her comics from the 40s, there was just something very shallow and surface level to the interview. While I liked some of it, mostly these felt like the wrong presenters to be discussing the "legacy" and "importance" of Wonder Woman when they were getting some basic story elements incorrect.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, some off the stuff that panel annoyed me.
Ironically, Johnson did the villain pinup for the 80th special and only featured Ares (who looked like a rorschach test) and Cheetah from Dead Earth.
[QUOTE=PopQuezy;6154089]" The moderator praised characters like Ares and Circe, and Johnson sighed and said that, when he was working on Dead Earth, he was really bored by Diana’s villains, so he changed them for his story."
Maybe it was just the way it was written, but there was something about the entire write-up that irked me. Unlike Cloonrad who seem to legitimately love the Wonder Woman character [I]and[/I] her world, this write-up seemed like people getting paid to be there. In particular, the part about her villains irked me the most. I put a little quote above, but at a a panel about the "legacy" and "importance" or Wonder Woman, why on earth are you calling her villains boring?
Besides that, some of the article just made me wonder how much time they'd truly spend in Diana's world. While one person mentions reading her comics from the 40s, there was just something very shallow and surface level to the interview. While I liked some of it, mostly these felt like the wrong presenters to be discussing the "legacy" and "importance" of Wonder Woman when they were getting some basic story elements incorrect.[/QUOTE]
Another example of lipservice. They just throw empty words. But clearly they have no clue.
Maybe it’s just the way the article is written but it doesn’t sound like half the people there even like Wonder Woman. I don’t want Ashley Woods anywhere near the character (making her more gritty and violent and styling her after God of War? Ick…). I actually liked Dead Earth but it doesn’t sound like DWJ is particularly interested in her or her world either.
And I’m a little tired of the belief that she needs some low point or central trauma to be “relatable” - surely the poor woman has been abused enough in her stories even if her origin isn’t defined by a personal tragedy, plus sacrificing paradise even under the pretense that she can never return is a pretty huge cost. Superman, Wally West Flash, at least half of the Green Lanterns, Thor…there are countless huge superheroes who don’t have one personal trauma in their origin that defines them, idk what’s with the frequent insistence that Diana suffer more.
That said, I need Gene Ha’s League of Extraordinary Gentlewomen and Sanya Anwar’s Amazon A-Team books, like, yesterday.
Honestly, sounds like the moderator was the biggest fan.
[QUOTE=VonHammersmark;6153625]If they’re smart they’ll just adapt Wonder Woman: Guts by everyone’s favourite WW writer Brian Azzarello lol but seriously, say what you will about the new 52, that story’s hard to beat
And I can easily see how they could use it in WW3 in a way that doesn’t involve Steve, if say Diana’s only way back to Paradise Island is through the Underworld[/QUOTE]
Wonder Woman had over a decade of stories where Steve was either absent or had little involvement before the New 52.
[QUOTE=Agent Z;6154760]Wonder Woman had over a decade of stories where Steve was either absent or had little involvement before the New 52.[/QUOTE]
Wonder Woman: Guts is that new 52 story where Diana journeys to the Underworld to bring Zola back. What I’m saying is I’d love to see that story adapted in a way that doesn’t involve her going down there to bring Steve back. Instead, Diana crosses the Underworld in order to go home (through Doom’s Doorway) because, lets say Paradise Island is under assault and they need her help
Sorry. Meant to post a response to a message above but didn't manage to get that to work. Lemme try again.
[QUOTE=Stanlos;6143219]But only for 6 issues. He crammed a lot of ideas celebrating WWs and the Amazons' deal but it was so dense a lot was overlooked. I think the bizarre wedding/compulsory union stuff dominated my attention. I want a full 36 months so he could really dig into the concepts. Whereas Morrison choked and did not deliver excellence Simonson did well overall by the characters' design and trappings[/QUOTE]
I was hired by DC to write only those six issues. Phil was getting off the book and Greg was to take over as the writer, but there was going to be six months between the time Phil left and the time Greg could begin writing it. So I was hired to fill that window. Greg had let DC know that he was not going to be using Trevor so I tried writing a story that would, among other things, cover his absence when Greg's issues began and still do it in a dramatic fashion. Whatever I did with Trevor, he wouldn't have been around after my last issue. I enjoyed writing Wonder Woman. I think it would have been fun to write and draw her at some point.