-
[QUOTE=Agent Z;6456439]If anything, Synder's idea is more an indictment of a shared universe than anything else because this is the kind of thing to be expected when you take a bunch of characters and stories that were created to exist independent of each other and try to force them into the same setting. [B]It wouldn't surprise me if someone else has at least considered using a concept like this[/B] and I know at least one person on this site who argued for this kind of weaving connections between DC's separate corners and that person still hated Snyder's work.[/QUOTE]
Max Landis with that "Kryptonian Epic" he keeps threatening to make...where pretty much every character in the DC universe is connected to Krypton, works for LexCorp, or is friends with Bruce Wayne.
And even he's not the first/only person to take this approach.
It's a bad instinct among some writers to make everything in their story connected. Where everything's related, everything ties together, there's a single source for everything, and/or it's all the orchestration of one thing or person.
They think it's compelling world-building and handy way of explaining things (most of which don't need explanation), but it just makes the universe feel smaller and more mundane.
It can happen even in contained universes. Like [I]Star Wars[/I] is supposed to be the sprawling galaxy of worlds and alien races...yet everything always comes back to this small handful of people who are all related. Or the [I]Amazing Spider-Man[/I] movies having all of his villains coming from OsCorp's basement.
I can think of plenty of other examples.
It's especially egregious in a shared universe because it not only makes everything smaller, it reduces all these independent protagonists into supporting cast for one character. It takes what should be an ensemble and turns it into one hero with everyone else existing in relation to them.
-
[QUOTE=SiegePerilous02;6456513]The opposite extremes of online discourse is one thing. The steep box office drop during BvS's second weekend tells us another (though that's not limited to just Superman). [/QUOTE]
It is also not a flop by any objective standard. I know people insist it should have made more but that seems more like Avengers envy talking than anything else.
[QUOTE]As is the studio moving on from Cavill despite him wanting to come back. They don't see any profit in keeping him around, so that tells us the studio is not seeing that the wider general audience is overly attached to this version. [/QUOTE]
This is the same studio that also put out WW 1984, Black Adam, the first Suicide Squad movie and Whedon's Justice League. Funny how so many DC movies made less money than Snyder's, got worse reviews or both.
[QUOTE]Just because we have fans who think it should revolve around Superman to this extreme doesn't make it any better of an idea, and I doubt Snyders justifications would be any more convincing than theirs.[B] Bad ideas being floated around[/B] by some other people is flimsy justification for doing it yourself. Especially as we know Snyder having it revolve around Clark just equals out to him being a plot device rather than a fleshed out character. [/QUOTE]
"Floated around" being the key phrase here. Thinking about doing something and actually doing it are not the same thing.
[QUOTE]Fun is subjective, but that's why the shared universe being so big allows for people to focus on different parts of it to cater to their interests. Are you defending Snyder's decisions of a shared universe, or indicting the whole concept? [/QUOTE]
I'm doing neither. I'm simply pointing out that:
* This was an idea that was suggested but never came to fruition and even Snyder seems to have not taken all that seriously.
* This is to be expected when characters and concepts created to be independent get forced into one continuity.
I don't like this idea but I'm just grateful it didn't see the light of day rather than angry it was suggested at all. I'd rather get upset at an actual realized bad idea than one that [I]might[/I] have happened.
-
[QUOTE=Guy_McNichts;6456528]Max Landis with that "Kryptonian Epic" he keeps threatening to make...where pretty much every character in the DC universe is connected to Krypton, works for LexCorp, or is friends with Bruce Wayne.
And even he's not the first/only person to take this approach.
It's a bad instinct among some writers to make everything in their story connected. Where everything's related, everything ties together, there's a single source for everything, and/or it's all the orchestration of one thing or person.
They think it's compelling world-building and handy way of explaining things (most of which don't need explanation), but it just makes the universe feel smaller and more mundane.
It can happen even in contained universes. Like [I]Star Wars[/I] is supposed to be the sprawling galaxy of worlds and alien races...yet everything always comes back to this small handful of people who are all related. Or the [I]Amazing Spider-Man[/I] movies having all of his villains coming from OsCorp's basement.
I can think of plenty of other examples.
It's especially egregious in a shared universe because it not only makes everything smaller, it reduces all these independent protagonists into supporting cast for one character. It takes what should be an ensemble and turns it into one hero with everyone else existing in relation to them.[/QUOTE]
And Landis's pitch had a far greater chance of seeing the light of day once upon a time before he revealed his true colors with his idiotic take on the Star Wars sequels and the allegations made against him pretty torpedoed his career. Just look how many people liked that dumb video he made about the Death and Return of Superman.
-
That being said, I have been growing less enamored of shared universes recently. So if this discourages it and possibly leads to DC deemphasizing, if not removing it entirely, well, I wouldn't see it as a big loss.
-
[QUOTE=Agent Z;6456572]That being said, I have been growing less enamored of shared universes recently. So if this discourages it and possibly leads to DC deemphasizing, if not removing it entirely, well, I wouldn't see it as a big loss.[/QUOTE]
I particularly feel this way as a Wonder Woman reader. Because when compromises have to be made in order to create a shared universe, it's usually Wonder Woman and her universe that gets the raw end of the deal.
-
I am just glad that Snyder's talent-free behind has finally been banned from ever doing films based on DC superheroes. As long as he is never again involved in telling Wonder Woman's stories, I am good. :cool:
-
[QUOTE]The Amazon demigoddess has arrived at Iron Studios as they debut their latest set of DC Comics statues. Wonder Woman has been unleashed with a brand new 11/6" tall statue, capturing her beauty and skill. Visiting a fall Greek Temple, Princess Diana is placed on a nicely detail base showing off a fallen statue of Hermes. Wonder Woman is loaded hand-painted detail on her armor as well as signature weapons with her cape, shield, sword, spear, and even the Lasso of Truth at her side. Tons of detail was poured into this statue, and DC Comics fans will not want to miss out on owning this beauty for their Wonder Woman collection. Iron Studio has her priced at $210, set for a June 2024 release, and fans can find them right here.[/QUOTE]
[url]https://bleedingcool.com/collectibles/wonder-woman-has-been-unleashed-for-iron-studios-dc-comics-statue/[/url]
[IMG]https://mlpnk72yciwc.i.optimole.com/cqhiHLc.IIZS~2ef73/w:auto/h:auto/q:75/https://bleedingcool.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/wonder-woman-unleashed_dc-comics_gallery_644c0a89c09f9.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]https://mlpnk72yciwc.i.optimole.com/cqhiHLc.IIZS~2ef73/w:auto/h:auto/q:75/https://bleedingcool.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/wonder-woman-unleashed_dc-comics_gallery_644c0a8839fbb.jpg[/IMG]
-
[QUOTE=HotBoy;6456638]I particularly feel this way as a Wonder Woman reader. Because when compromises have to be made in order to create a shared universe, it's usually Wonder Woman and her universe that gets the raw end of the deal.[/QUOTE]
Like the ingenious development of shoving WW back on to the JSA so she can be the "first hero" but for some reason quits like a coward so the world doesn't meaningfully change so Supes can still be #1 in modern times (aka the time period readers a give a shit about).
-
I like Hippolyta being with the JSA even if they didn't do much with it.
-
[QUOTE=HestiasHearth;6456667]I am just glad that Snyder's talent-free behind has finally been banned from ever doing films based on DC superheroes. As long as he is never again involved in telling Wonder Woman's stories, I am good. :cool:[/QUOTE]
God bless man.
Hopefully Gunn has some decent ideas for the characters. At least Gunn has actually made some decent movies, which more than you can say for Snyder. :p
[QUOTE=Agent Z;6456572]That being said, I have been growing less enamored of shared universes recently. So if this discourages it and possibly leads to DC deemphasizing, if not removing it entirely, well, I wouldn't see it as a big loss.[/QUOTE]
Thats not the problem, the problem is when you have terrible creatives involved in the shared universe pot trying to shrink the setting.
Like I am a huge Superman fan and even I think the whole "Olympian Gods are actually Kryptonians" is stupid, uncreative, and most importantly insulting to Wonder Woman.
Its just really not a good idea. Hell it makes the Olympian boring cause it turns them from Gods into just aliens posing as Gods.
-
[QUOTE=Agent Z;6456539]It is also not a flop by any objective standard. I know people insist it should have made more but that seems more like Avengers envy talking than anything else.[/QUOTE]
Nobody said it's a flop. Just that it had terrible legs and word of mouth.
And it's not really Avengers envy. We just see how it made the biggest bulk of its money opening weekend, which tells us there was a great deal of interest in the characters. Make no mistake, people showed up for Batman and Superman (as well as the hype for Wonder Woman's debut), [I]not[/I] Snyder as the director. Had the movie just been an average summer blockbuster about as crowd pleasing as the first Iron Man or Avengers, it probably would have made that money. It was the easiest soft ball in the world for WB to make even more money than they did, and they whiffed it by putting Snyder in charge.
[QUOTE=Agent Z;6456539]This is the same studio that also put out WW 1984, Black Adam, the first Suicide Squad movie and Whedon's Justice League. Funny how so many DC movies made less money than Snyder's, got worse reviews or both.[/QUOTE]
The studio doing all those other screw ups doesn't preclude them also reading the room and being able to see that the wider audience isn't overly in love with Snyder's Superman, or his vision as a whole.
[QUOTE=Agent Z;6456539]"Floated around" being the key phrase here. Thinking about doing something and actually doing it are not the same thing.[/QUOTE]
It's not, but it also doesn't pair well with the ideas that actually ended up on screen that were (charitably) divisive.
[QUOTE=Mantis-Ray;6456831]God bless man.
Hopefully Gunn has some decent ideas for the characters. At least Gunn has actually made some decent movies, which more than you can say for Snyder. :p[/QUOTE]
Snyder's best movie was that Dawn of the Dead remake he did, and the script was written by Gunn lol.
[QUOTE=Mantis-Ray;6456831]Like I am a huge Superman fan and even I think the whole "Olympian Gods are actually Kryptonians" is stupid, uncreative, and most importantly insulting to Wonder Woman.
Its just really not a good idea. Hell it makes the Olympian boring cause it turns them from Gods into just aliens posing as Gods.[/QUOTE]
I don't think there are many diehard Superman fans who were clamoring for such a thing either. They'd either be neutral or think it's incredibly stupid.
The shared universe can lead to bad writing, but there really isn't an inherent aspect of it that inevitably leads to things like this. This is entirely down to creators seeing this concept and wanting to shrink it down, nobody is forcing them.
-
[QUOTE=Agent Z;6456539]
This is the same studio that also put out WW 1984, Black Adam, the first Suicide Squad movie and Whedon's Justice League. Funny how so many DC movies made less money than Snyder's, got worse reviews or both.
[/QUOTE]
Are you seriously trying to put some of these in the same league? 1984 that came out at the HEIGHT of a pandemic.
The first Suicide Squad made $747 million at the box office. Not your best one to use as an example. Along with a 3% difference in RT score.
This isnt Whedons JL because...its not fully his movie. It's frankenstein that we know 100% was rushed just to get execs their bonus.
BvS made majority of their money up front and dropped quickly. It should've been way more massive than it was when you have the worlds 2 BIGGEST superheroes in it.
-
On a funnier note, I'm now thinking of a crossover with Saint Seiya cause of the shared Greek Mythology settings
If your wondering the appeal, Saint Seiya is based on characters having these kickass armors themed after various constellations all in the service to protecting their leader Athena and her reincarnations
Like the Bronze Saints in their God Cloths (suped up versions of their normal cloth armors)
From left to right, Phoenix Ikki, Andromeda Shun, Pegasus Seiya, Cygnus Hyoga, and Dragon Shiryu
[img]https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/737641424366862396/1102750125698330705/1000.png[/img]
And of course the most popular characters the Gold Saints with their golden armor based off the 12 Western Zodiacs
[img]https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/737641424366862396/1102846772251983882/latest.png[/img]
Does Diana have a constellation sign? Be fun thinking of how she would look in a Saint cloth. :p
-
If you actually believe that starsigns reflect your personality (which I don't) she would be a Sagittarius
-
[QUOTE=Alpha;6457108]If you actually believe that starsigns reflect your personality (which I don't) she would be a Sagittarius[/QUOTE]
To be clear the constellations is strictly a power thing, I don't think it indicates personality. Unless you think having the cygnus sign means you'll be a cold distant stoic guy which is Hyoga's personality. Which now that I think about it, whatever cloth you get is prolly not dependent on what star you were born under, Seiya got his by proven himself in a martial contest and several of the Bronze Saints make the switch from Bronze to Gold in some cases.
And the powers are pretty out there like Cancer Deathmask steals souls while Pisces Aphrodite (a man btw, he is the world's most beautiful Saint) fights with poison roses. And this is apparently reoccurring techniques per generation as in The Lost Canvas prequel Pisces Albafica is a poisonous person who attacks with roses. Also all the Virgo Saints do meditation poses and fight with enlightened Buddha powers.
Oh she's Sagittarius, then that would be the Gold Saint on the middle bottom with the bow. Thats also the Gold cloth for the main character too, Seiya during the pivotal moments is able to use the Sagittarius cloth's powers to save the day and in some continuities like the Omega sequel he full on becomes the Sagittarius Saint.
So she would get the bow and arrow that can shoot faster than light beams of golden energy and light, the specific attack name being Atomic Thunderbolt. Plus it can also give you a centaur mode.
-
[QUOTE=Mantis-Ray;6457154]To be clear the constellations is strictly a power thing, I don't think it indicates personality. Unless you think having the cygnus sign means you'll be a cold distant stoic guy which is Hyoga's personality. Which now that I think about it, whatever cloth you get is prolly not dependent on what star you were born under, Seiya got his by proven himself in a martial contest and several of the Bronze Saints make the switch from Bronze to Gold in some cases.
And the powers are pretty out there like Cancer Deathmask steals souls while Pisces Aphrodite (a man btw, he is the world's most beautiful Saint) fights with poison roses. And this is apparently reoccurring techniques per generation as in The Lost Canvas prequel Pisces Albafica is a poisonous person who attacks with roses. Also all the Virgo Saints do meditation poses and fight with enlightened Buddha powers.
Oh she's Sagittarius, then that would be the Gold Saint on the middle bottom with the bow. Thats also the Gold cloth for the main character too, Seiya during the pivotal moments is able to use the Sagittarius cloth's powers to save the day and in some continuities like the Omega sequel he full on becomes the Sagittarius Saint.
So she would get the bow and arrow that can shoot faster than light beams of golden energy and light, the specific attack name being Atomic Thunderbolt. Plus it can also give you a centaur mode.[/QUOTE]
WOOOOO! Golden winged armor with red highlights! perfect fit. :D
-
[QUOTE=Mantis-Ray;6457097]On a funnier note, I'm now thinking of a crossover with Saint Seiya cause of the shared Greek Mythology settings
If your wondering the appeal, Saint Seiya is based on characters having these kickass armors themed after various constellations all in the service to protecting their leader Athena and her reincarnations
Like the Bronze Saints in their God Cloths (suped up versions of their normal cloth armors)
From left to right, Phoenix Ikki, Andromeda Shun, Pegasus Seiya, Cygnus Hyoga, and Dragon Shiryu
[img]https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/737641424366862396/1102750125698330705/1000.png[/img]
[/QUOTE]
Whoa, these are all so cool looking!
But I guess I would have to go with the left Gold one, PHOENIX, lol! ;)
-
[QUOTE=Mantis-Ray;6457097]On a funnier note, I'm now thinking of a crossover with Saint Seiya cause of the shared Greek Mythology settings
If your wondering the appeal, Saint Seiya is based on characters having these kickass armors themed after various constellations all in the service to protecting their leader Athena and her reincarnations
Like the Bronze Saints in their God Cloths (suped up versions of their normal cloth armors)
From left to right, Phoenix Ikki, Andromeda Shun, Pegasus Seiya, Cygnus Hyoga, and Dragon Shiryu
[img]https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/737641424366862396/1102750125698330705/1000.png[/img]
And of course the most popular characters the Gold Saints with their golden armor based off the 12 Western Zodiacs
[img]https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/737641424366862396/1102846772251983882/latest.png[/img]
Does Diana have a constellation sign? Be fun thinking of how she would look in a Saint cloth. :p[/QUOTE]
I love Divine Cloth Seiya.
-
[QUOTE=marhawkman;6457349]WOOOOO! Golden winged armor with red highlights! perfect fit. :D[/QUOTE]
Oh yeah, once again Diana gets the armor with great big wings, nice
Here's a better look at at the Sagittarius armor
Sagittarius Aiolos the great long dead hero who gave his life defending a baby Athena
[img]https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/1066847369775288400/1103155677142188122/latest.png[/img]
And Sagittarius Seiya in Saint Seiya Omega, a sequel to the original series
[img]https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/1066847369775288400/1103155677486141521/latest.png[/img]
-
[QUOTE=Mantis-Ray;6456831]God bless man.
Hopefully Gunn has some decent ideas for the characters. At least Gunn has actually made some decent movies, which more than you can say for Snyder. :p
Thats not the problem, the problem is when you have terrible creatives involved in the shared universe pot trying to shrink the setting.
Like I am a huge Superman fan and even I think the whole "Olympian Gods are actually Kryptonians" is stupid, uncreative, and most importantly insulting to Wonder Woman.
Its just really not a good idea. Hell it makes the Olympian boring cause it turns them from Gods into just aliens posing as Gods.[/QUOTE]
Exactly.
That is the main problem with Snyder's DCEU (and the main reason it was never a hit with general audiences or critics): it was full of terribly tone-deaf ideas executed terribly. The dude is not a good storyteller, and even his technical stuff, which many claim is his only real skill as a filmmaker, are cliched, tired tricks (lots of slow motion, portentous music, desaturated colors) that could be more effective at the service of better written movies. Making Diana a literal copy of Superman, by turning her into a descendant of Kryptonians, is, like you said, an insult to Wonder Woman and her fans, and the mere fact that Snyder actually considered it proves once again that he needs to stay away from Wonder Woman (and from mainstream superheroes). WBD made the right call when they got rid of him and killed his 'Verse.
-
What are the great character arcs Diana could be going through?
Obviously most Comic Book writers (men, women and non binary) don't know how to write Diana.
A good number of them MIGHT understand her power and her values, but very few of them understand her personality beyond vague good strong leader.
We all know what Bruce Banner and Hulk sound and what their character arcs could be. But the same isn't true of Diana.
And when a new writer picks up the character and they need to do character work apart from plot, it always seems to be about making her more insecure about something. Which to me always seem like the opposite of where to take her.
But could there be a giant saga about her like Al Ewing's Immortal Hulk that takes her on an emotional journey?
(Of course there is, but what do you think it would be about?)
-
[QUOTE=Alpha;6458769]What are the great character arcs Diana could be going through?
Obviously most Comic Book writers (men, women and non binary) don't know how to write Diana.
A good number of them MIGHT understand her power and her values, but very few of them understand her personality beyond vague good strong leader.
We all know what Bruce Banner and Hulk sound and what their character arcs could be. But the same isn't true of Diana.
And when a new writer picks up the character and they need to do character work apart from plot, it always seems to be about making her more insecure about something. Which to me always seem like the opposite of where to take her.
But could there be a giant saga about her like Al Ewing's Immortal Hulk that takes her on an emotional journey?
(Of course there is, but what do you think it would be about?)[/QUOTE]this is part of why I liked the Lyta Milton story. It has spectacular fights between WW and Circe, but WW isn't acting bloodthirsty.
-
[QUOTE=Alpha;6458769]What are the great character arcs Diana could be going through?
Obviously most Comic Book writers (men, women and non binary) don't know how to write Diana.
A good number of them MIGHT understand her power and her values, but very few of them understand her personality beyond vague good strong leader.
We all know what Bruce Banner and Hulk sound and what their character arcs could be. But the same isn't true of Diana.
And when a new writer picks up the character and they need to do character work apart from plot, it always seems to be about making her more insecure about something. Which to me always seem like the opposite of where to take her.
But could there be a giant saga about her like Al Ewing's Immortal Hulk that takes her on an emotional journey?
(Of course there is, but what do you think it would be about?)[/QUOTE]
It’s an interesting question and depends on what you want out of Diana. Out of moral ascending, moral descending, transformational and flat styles of character arcs, I can see possibilities for Diana in all of them. Moral descending might be a harder one, given what she stands for and having to accept that Diana has flaws, but there are also a lot superhero conceits and concepts that can be used to play around with that.
To me, Diana has a strong, classic and exciting Bildungsroman with multiple layers to it.
She’s a great character to use in a flat arc with other characters’ arcs, because of her nature, personality and moral compass.
When I think about moral ascending and descending arcs, I always think about what Diana wants personally out of life and the choices she makes to achieve them and how it affects the characters around her - or how the characters react.
Perez got a fair amount of distance out of naïveté and “stranger in a strange land.” Azz gave her a lot of “othering,” whether by the Amazons or Olympians and in a foil with the First Born character. Jimenez shared with us a lot of the consummate friend, sister, daughter and superhero. Rucka’s Hiketeia gave us a great right versus wrong and moral ascending and descending arc. Simone had a romance with Tom Tressor and a homecoming that played with personal power versus societal power.
You’re right in that it all depends on how you define “your” Diana and communicate that and have audiences accept it. Diana hasn’t fared as well as Clark or Bruce in terms of this as consistently as they have to certain degrees. Or isn’t allowed the same amount of range or reference as they are (why hello there sexism.)
Diana is complex and that’s a challenge for a lot of people creating her stories - especially for those of us who have strong sense of who we think she should be. Sometimes that doesn’t let us step into another person’s definition of who she is.
So, to me, you have to strongly tell me who your version is, so I can step into your fantasy.
In general some themes I’d like to see propel Diana through some arcs are:
Romance and love
Betrayal
Secrets and lies
Sexism in the superhero and supervillain world
Systemic discrimination
Power and authority
Inclusion versus exclusion/isolation
LGBTQIA+ identities
Biological and chosen families
Democracy, autocracy, monarchy, etc.
Many classic themes, but ones I think can be interesting using the Wonder world of characters.
-
[QUOTE=marhawkman;6458870]this is part of why I liked the Lyta Milton story. It has spectacular fights between WW and Circe, but WW isn't acting bloodthirsty.[/QUOTE]
I agree. My Diana would have to be pushed and influenced very strongly out of her control to become bloodthirsty.
-
One thing I would play with is Diana proposing a political marriage between her and an important otherwordly figure to end a potential conflict and create a potential long term alliance. Marriage as a business deal is a curious challenge for an emotionally instinctive character like her that challenges institutions.
Of course I don't mean her marrying a villain, or a jerk. Simply a stranger she doesn't love or understand, and that doesn't agree with her philosophy eithout being her enemy. Someone much less emotive but hopefully complex.
-
[IMG] https://www.toyark.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/15776_07_Logos.jpg[/IMG]
-
McFarlane design a decent WW toy challenge - Fail (Impossible).
Was set on easy mode.
-
[QUOTE=Gaius;6461084]McFarlane design a decent WW toy challenge - Fail (Impossible).
Was set on easy mode.[/QUOTE]
And then they put that picture next to it as if the toy actually looks like [I]that[/I], and that the toy doesn't serve as a "before" to the drawing's "after." LOL!
-
I know this is kind of douchey, but haven't people spent multiple pages talking about Diana's boots and her face in the past, yet when asked here what Character Arcs they would like to see her go through, they don't have any interest in the topic?
I suppose that's fine, and we aren't professional comic book writers, but I'm just surprised sometimes at the topics that take off in this forum
-
[QUOTE=Alpha;6461175]I know this is kind of douchey, but haven't people spent multiple pages talking about Diana's boots and her face in the past, yet when asked here what Character Arcs they would like to see her go through, they don't have any interest in the topic?
I suppose that's fine, and we aren't professional comic book writers, but I'm just surprised sometimes at the topics that take off in this forum[/QUOTE]
"Character arc" is kind of amorphous, maybe that's why. And there's been lots of chatter related to that question - for example, I've seen several conversations around here about whether or not Diana should have a kid in continuity, who her love interest should be, whether or not she should have a central trauma that drives her, etc.
So because it's been discussed plenty, I'll skip right past "please give Diana a girlfriend..."
I'd like to see a bigger, braver story that pits her against the criminal justice system. Hiketeia got partially there, but I'd take out the elements with the sacred vow and the Erinyes and go full-on "Diana protects a guilty criminal because she sees that they truly repent and knows how messed up the prison system is." I've always thought there'd be a lot to explore with her take on the carceral system, since in the eyes of an immortal it'd probably seem heinous to take someone with such a short life and force them to spend years in prison. I doubt that story would ever happen because DC's not that brave, but I'd love to see it.
I'd also really like to see a story about her losing faith in the ability to change things within the system and struggling to figure out how change can happen without violence. IMO the central contradiction to her isn't "warrior for peace," it's "pacifist (or even diplomat) for revolution," and there are lots of interesting stories there that would be challenging to tell but very rewarding in the right hands. Tom King talking about how he's emphasizing her rebel side definitely gets me excited to see his direction.
And it'd be cool to see a story that really explores Hippolyta's internal life during Diana's upbringing and how that builds into their relationship. You've got the built-in concept of "the Amazons suffered so Diana wouldn't have to," but how does that impact how Hippolyta raises her? Hoping we get more Historia volumes because I'm sure it'll explore that a lot.
...did I mention Diana getting a girlfriend?
-
[QUOTE=WonderScott;6459852]Perez got a fair amount of distance out of naïveté and “stranger in a strange land.” Azz gave her a lot of “othering,” whether by the Amazons or Olympians and in a foil with the First Born character.[/QUOTE]when done right that is amazing though. EVERYONE is an outsider. NO ONE is universally liked and accepted. The question is where and why.
-
[QUOTE=Alpha;6461175]I know this is kind of douchey, but haven't people spent multiple pages talking about Diana's boots and her face in the past, yet when asked here what Character Arcs they would like to see her go through, they don't have any interest in the topic?
I suppose that's fine, and we aren't professional comic book writers, but I'm just surprised sometimes at the topics that take off in this forum[/QUOTE]
Personally I just find the question kinda vague. like this isn't a question about story arcs one would love to see, but rather 'how would you like to see Wonder Woman develop and change as a person over the course of a story arc' Im just not sure how id even answer something like that
-
One arc I'd like to see...and I'll admit this is influenced by recent trends with writers...is an arc that explores Diana's humanity and concludes with the assertion that, despite her fantastical birth and upbringing, she is undoubtedly human and always was.
A way to do this is to contrast her with various rogues who reject their humanity in some capacity. Cheetah became a monster. Clea sees herself as above ordinary people and would jump at the chance to be a goddess. Osira fashions herself as a goddess that presumes to know how humanity should be ruled. Devastation gleefully revels in how monstrous she is. And so on...all in comparison to the empathetic and selfless Diana who loves humanity.
Unlike a lot of modern writers who seem to agree she's not human and have her just meekly accept it as fact.
I'd also like to see an arc that properly explores the extent of Diana's goals and their limits. Specifically, just how long she plans to be Wonder Woman and does she really have an end-goal in mind?
I've addressed this in other threads, but this is a big reason why I'm so resistant to Diana being hundreds of years old and/or operating since World War II (or before). I would rather see Diana deal with the gravity of her immortality and the possibility her mission is truly an impossible one as it happens. I'd like to see her confront the possibility she can never do enough, and the fear nothing she does will make any real difference.
Again, that one of the reasons why I think it's stupid when they make WWII a part of her story because it just hand-waves those questions in the dumbest way. "Eh, she just went home for a while" or "Yeah, she'll just be Wonder Woman forever with no change or effect." If something made Diana just go home...that should be a huge deal and not just the half-assed answer of where she's been since 1945 until today.
There's a story in Diana's existential dread.
On a related subject, I'd like to see a story where Diana's truly confronted with her fears. What exactly those fears are is arguably a topic in itself, but I think the thing that really keeps Diana up at night is the possibility she isn't all she believes she should be. She does have that competitive/over-achieving side to her, and she did choose to put the weight of the world on her shoulders. What happens when she's confronted with the possibility she's just not good enough?
Tying back to the notion her dream is an impossible one she will never achieve, I'd like to see Diana truly tested with the chance (or reality) that she just might be Sisyphus...eternally pushing that rock up a hill only for it to roll back down.
And hey, that can tie back around to the first arc I mentioned: that no matter how powerful she is, for all the things she can do, she is still only human.
Finally...I don't know it this would qualify as a character arc...but I think there is a story to be explored in Diana confronting the puritanical side of the patriarchy. Given she's a woman, who comes from pagan beliefs, Wonder Woman would be thoroughly hated by the kind of people that burned witches back in the day. And she has other enemies who would exploit that to discredit and alienate her.
Might be something there.
-
[QUOTE=Fuzzy Mittens;6461277]Personally I just find the question kinda vague. like this isn't a question about story arcs one would love to see, but rather 'how would you like to see Wonder Woman develop and change as a person over the course of a story arc' Im just not sure how id even answer something like that[/QUOTE]
Well she has been written many ways, so you would pick whatever version you prefer and ask what you think are the aspects of her that could be further explored.
Like in Hiketeia, Greg Rucka looked at Diana and saw her as a Stoic advocate for marginalization embedded in a careful culture. And he thought " what if Diana chose to advocate for someone, without knowing the full picture, and was compelled by her allies to leave this situation as the conflict became more complicated and her position less clear.(actually I might have fumbled this description if Hiketeia)
Bur that's maybe what I'm suggesting, what are the interesting ways, for you, through which a story could, in the future, intensely challenge her beliefs or unite her contradictions.
-
[QUOTE=bardkeep;6461244]
I've always thought there'd be a lot to explore with her take on the carceral system, since in the eyes of an immortal it'd probably seem heinous to take someone with such a short life and force them to spend years in prison.[/quote]
Yup, and just in general a future story about how she deals with longterm goals vs short term needs
[Quote]
I'd also really like to see a story about her losing faith in the ability to change things within the system and struggling to figure out how change can happen without violence. IMO the central contradiction to her isn't "warrior for peace," it's "pacifist (or even diplomat) for revolution," and there are lots of interesting stories there that would be challenging to tell but very rewarding in the right hands.[/quote] Oh, even though I dislike her as a diplomat I do really like the way you described it, and it's definitely a good way forward. I think Eric Luke tried to do something similar in his first story, but I'm sure it could be done more profoundly and with more nuance.
[Quote]
And it'd be cool to see a story that really explores Hippolyta's internal life during Diana's upbringing and how that builds into their relationship. You've got the built-in concept of "the Amazons suffered so Diana wouldn't have to," but how does that impact how Hippolyta raises her? Hoping we get more Historia volumes because I'm sure it'll explore that a lot.[/QUOTE] True, that could even be counterposed in the present as Diana tries to adjust to being a teacher to someone whose modern needs she might not understand (Diana vs Generation Z or Generation Alpha)
[QUOTE=Guy_McNichts;6461319] an arc that explores Diana's humanity and concludes with the assertion that, despite her fantastical birth and upbringing, she is undoubtedly human and always was. [/quote]
Ok yeah, I can see it. You had lots of ideas, and they were good ones!
[Quote]
I'd also like to see an arc that properly explores the extent of Diana's goals and their limits. Specifically, just how long she plans to be Wonder Woman and does she really have an end-goal in mind?
...
I'd like to see her confront the possibility she can never do enough, and the fear nothing she does will make any real difference.
...
There's a story in Diana's existential dread. [/quote]
That's just a really solid direction in which to take a whole run, very good question to which the answer seems obvious, but can so easily be debated.
[Quote]
She does have that competitive/over-achieving side to her, and she did choose to put the weight of the world on her shoulders. What happens when she's confronted with the possibility she's just not good enough?[/quote] and her archenemy should really be someone that can make the argument that maybe others aren't good enough for her. I do like the idea that her retort would be, I will make them good enough. Diana is never that pompous, but maybe she should be SOME times.
[Quote]
Finally...I don't know it this would qualify as a character arc...but I think there is a story to be explored in Diana confronting the puritanical side of the patriarchy. Given she's a woman, who comes from pagan beliefs, Wonder Woman would be thoroughly hated by the kind of people that burned witches back in the day. And she has other enemies who would exploit that to discredit and alienate her.
Might be something there.[/QUOTE]
Maybe in her struggles to understand something entirely different from her, like an otherworldly culture she even transforms somehow, and when she comes back to us she is unrecognizable in her behaviour and others have to take on the challenge of understanding her. Like, Diana is ultimately such an attractive voice for the downtrodden, that it does highlight the nastu fact that we might ignore the words of an ugly face but listen to them if they are pretty, and does Diana really wanna indulge that dynamic of herself as the pretty face for another's voice?
(Sorry I went in another direction but you just inspired me. I do think puritanical vs pagan has plenty of potential)
-
[QUOTE=Alpha;6461175]I know this is kind of douchey, but haven't people spent multiple pages talking about Diana's boots and her face in the past, yet when asked here what Character Arcs they would like to see her go through, they don't have any interest in the topic?
I suppose that's fine, and we aren't professional comic book writers, but I'm just surprised sometimes at the topics that take off in this forum[/QUOTE]
There has been tons of chatter and discussion about character arcs for WW here. The reality is that every discussion, no matter what topic, eventually reaches a point of talking in circles. Nothing wrong with that. I just ignore the topics that don't interest me.
-
[QUOTE=Alpha;6461519]Well she has been written many ways, so you would pick whatever version you prefer and ask what you think are the aspects of her that could be further explored.
Like in Hiketeia, Greg Rucka looked at Diana and saw her as a Stoic advocate for marginalization embedded in a careful culture. And he thought " what if Diana chose to advocate for someone, without knowing the full picture, and was compelled by her allies to leave this situation as the conflict became more complicated and her position less clear.(actually I might have fumbled this description if Hiketeia)
Bur that's maybe what I'm suggesting, what are the interesting ways, for you, through which a story could, in the future, intensely challenge her beliefs or unite her contradictions.[/QUOTE]
Ah, I think I see.
Well im not sure if its quite what you mean, but id like to see explored just what IS the paradise of the island like? What is it culturally that Diana is using as a reference point that shes aspiring towards in an effort to better the rest of the world. We have had several points where someone hand waves that it IS a paradise and it was the original point of Dianas mission that she was to make the rest of the world a paradise just like where she grew up. So id like to see this explored and examined, to see what Paradise Island is, what impact it had on Diana, and what the paradise of the island means to her.
Aside from that...I mean gosh, theres alot of good takes out there already.
Marstons heavily competitive paragon who enjoyed life and had fun helping people.
Messner-Loebs take that felt really down to Earth and human and relatable with an uncanny ability to just talk to people.
Ross and Dini's incredible and inspirational figure who did what she could to help those in need.
and thats just a few that I was particularly fond of.
-
[QUOTE=Fuzzy Mittens;6461569]
Aside from that...I mean gosh, theres alot of good takes out there already.
Marstons heavily competitive paragon who enjoyed life and had fun helping people.
Messner-Loebs take that felt really down to Earth and human and relatable with an uncanny ability to just talk to people.
Ross and Dini's incredible and inspirational figure who did what she could to help those in need.
and thats just a few that I was particularly fond of.[/QUOTE]
Yes, those are personalities she's had over the decades (and every writer chooses one regardless of what came before).
And as you know, stories are plots but they are also character development. There are many stories where a character changes in large, or small ways. And Diana is the type of character that probably won't change dramatically within a story (she will change dramatically when a writer takes ovef and ignores who she was before).
But the most memorable stories of a character are usually about them changing in some way.
Think of it this way too, we know how different she is when she arrives in Man's World, vs 5 years later. But how different is she 5 years in, versus 15 years in? Her circumnstances will change, but will she herself change too somehow?
-
[QUOTE=Alpha;6461519]Well she has been written many ways, so you would pick whatever version you prefer and ask what you think are the aspects of her that could be further explored.
Like in Hiketeia, Greg Rucka looked at Diana and saw her as a Stoic advocate for marginalization embedded in a careful culture. And he thought " what if Diana chose to advocate for someone, without knowing the full picture, and was compelled by her allies to leave this situation as the conflict became more complicated and her position less clear.(actually I might have fumbled this description if Hiketeia)
Bur that's maybe what I'm suggesting, what are the interesting ways, for you, through which a story could, in the future, intensely challenge her beliefs or unite her contradictions.[/QUOTE]
I know you're not a fan of Hiketeia, but your description is definitely a fumble and basically the least generous possible read on it.
- Diana is serious in it, but she definitely isn't stoic. She's gentle and compassionate with Dani, empathetic, and VERY emotional.
- I know you hate the boot on Batman's head, but I wouldn't call her humbling him when he's being a complete asshole "advocating for marginalization." He was attacking her for the second time and refusing listening to reason. Obviously there's a massive power imbalance (which the text acknowledges) but I don't think she had any obligation to take the high ground and it was arguably kinder than actually hurting him.
- Diana doesn't agree to help Dani because she doesn't know the full picture, she agrees to help because it doesn't matter what she did. Dani made a vow of service and submission. If she'd tried to hurt anyone else, she would've violated her terms of the agreement and ended Diana's obligation to protect her.
- The central conflict is her being stuck between the laws of 2 worlds. She never doubts her position.
-
I wasn't crapping all over Hiketeia, in fact, I don't dislike the story at all, just the way the boot on the head is used in fandom. But I haven't read in a long time so I can't really describe the specifics. Nothing I said was meant as a critique, even if it was inaccurate. The part about her being stoic wasn't about her being heartless, just meant fool headed and imposing. Couldn't find the best words to quickly summarize what Greg recognized in the character.
What I was saying is that the story engaged with Diana in a potentially transformative manner, as the most powerful stories usually do
