Wonder Woman - General Discussion

[QUOTE=Primal Slayer;6224240]He was Bond so has a fan base[/QUOTE]

Okay so who is playing him, Pierce Brosnon, Timothy Dalton, Daniel Craig?

[QUOTE=Primal Slayer;6222451][img]https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ntMtniSd2ns/VngLXMSjT9I/AAAAAAAANrs/McWi4YBjCbA/s1600-Ic42/RCO009.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
Gail Simone mocking the idea of Diana having a father just a few years before DC went and did this exactly this. That's amazing.

[QUOTE=Guy_McNichts;6224406]Gail Simone mocking the idea of Diana having a father just a few years before DC went and did this exactly this. That's amazing.[/QUOTE]

She may have also, ironically, planted the seed in someone's head to do it. Fate usually has a sense of humor that way.

Doesn't make this page any less based.

Simone has said that she faced a lot of pressure to include more men in her WW run and to make men more central to the narrative.

The DCAU also implied that Hades was like a father to Diana. I think Diana would have gotten a father at some point since all the stars were aligning in that direction.

Yeah, I've heard the higher-ups at DC were pushing for a father for years. Azzarello was just the guy who pulled the trigger.

What's funny is how the previous attempts all mocked the idea or treated it as nothing of value. Like even aside from the scene above, Simone wrote a storyline that had Cottus declare he was technically Diana's father because the clay she was made from came from him.
And Diana completely sand-bags it. Says, "That doesn't make you my father." and it never comes up again.

Even the DCAU didn't seem to have much respect for the idea. When Hades brags that he helped Hippolyta mold the clay, she--again--just says, "That doesn't make you my father."
And then at the end of the episode, Hawkgirl asks if she thinks he was telling the truth, and Diana replies, "I really don't care." and it's never brought up again.

It feels like there were one or two guys in charge (DiDio probably one of them) that kept insisting on making this happen, and every creator passive aggressively took the piss out of it until the New 52.

[QUOTE=Koriand'r;6224399]Okay so who is playing him, Pierce Brosnon, Timothy Dalton, Daniel Craig?[/QUOTE]

Pierce Bronson

I just finished reading Rucka's second run again, "The Lies," "The Truth," "Godwatch," and "Year One." Reading this made me miss the seriousness and stakes and weight of Rucka's second run.

While I like Cloonrad's run, I do think there's silliness and lightheartedness to it that never makes anything feel particularly grave. I'm not trying to be critical of the run because we have definitely had worse, but sometimes I think I'm just happy by the amount fan service Cloonrad provides. Villainy Inc. returning, Diana's foes, Holliday Girls, Diana Prince, Nubia, An Amazons event, and probably what I think has been the best part of Cloonrady's run, the introduction of Seigfried. They do a lot well, but ultimately, I don't feel the urge and excitement to read the next issue like I did with Rucka. I think that's awful since Rucka's run was twice a month as opposed to the monthly format of Cloonrad.

Anyway, I hope we are going to get an amazing 800 from them, but I wouldn't be heartbroken if they either changed their tone moving forward or if we tried a new writing team.

[QUOTE=PopQuezy;6231335]I just finished reading Rucka's second run again, "The Lies," "The Truth," "Godwatch," and "Year One." Reading this made me miss the seriousness and stakes and weight of Rucka's second run.

While I like Cloonrad's run, I do think there's silliness and lightheartedness to it that never makes anything feel particularly grave. I'm not trying to be critical of the run because we have definitely had worse, but sometimes I think I'm just happy by the amount fan service Cloonrad provides. Villainy Inc. returning, Diana's foes, Holliday Girls, Diana Prince, Nubia, An Amazons event, and probably what I think has been the best part of Cloonrady's run, the introduction of Seigfried. They do a lot well, but ultimately, I don't feel the urge and excitement to read the next issue like I did with Rucka. I think that's awful since Rucka's run was twice a month as opposed to the monthly format of Cloonrad.

Anyway, I hope we are going to get an amazing 800 from them, but I wouldn't be heartbroken if they either changed their tone moving forward or if we tried a new writing team.[/QUOTE]

This is exactly how I felt after re-reading the Perez, Jimenez, and Rucka Post-Crisis runs. It doesn't have to be 100% serious all the time - for example, Jimenez's run had some lighthearted bits and Gail Simone's run was often super silly - but Cloonrad's run just never ups the ante, and the fact that Diana's characterization is so inconsistent makes it even harder to care.

It's also weird because they've taken a few big swings and done almost nothing with them - in fact, I'm pretty sure Steve Orlando broke more new ground in his fill-in arc than Cloonrad have in their entire run. We saw some HUGE, exciting changes with Trial of the Amazons and Nubia's series (especially the newly-united Amazons re-entering Man's World as a political force) and there's so much to explore there, but the subsequent stories haven't even touched that and instead we've followed Diana...*checks notes*...stopping an Info Wars-ified Dr. Psycho from selling evil milk and doing a very by-the-numbers secret lab break-in.

Maybe things will amp up a little bit with the upcoming arc with the gods, but yeah...I'm finding it tiresome at this point.

Perez run was very serious and grim, that's one of the

[QUOTE=Thor2014;6231745]Perez run was very serious and grim, that's one of the[/QUOTE]

The origin of the amazons... sure. It needs to be, you can't turn what happened to them into a joke, this isn't Thor: Love and Thunder. And you can't pussy foot around it like the films and Johns, state what happened, take it with some seriousness, and be clear about it. If it's all whimsical and silly, why should I care about any of these characters?

I just watched Thor4, and not gonna lie: the whole notion that a film with whimsy and jokes somehow negates the stakes and the seriousness of the film's central plot is absolutely bonkers to me. Love and Thunder had a lot of funny moments and great sight gags, and yet at no point did I feel that the serious parts of the film were invalidated, or made less important. In fact, Love and Thunder proves once again that comic book fandom tends to look at everything through a very simplistic, rigidly black OR white lens. Goddess, I wish Wonder Woman 1984 had been 1/8 as strong as Love and Thunder (especially the fight choreography and special effects). And I will say it once again, Waititi would probably be a solid director to bring a Golden Age aesthetic to Themyscira in a film, instead of the usual one-note sword-and-sandals visuals we get. A film could have whimsy and silliness and still make audiences care about the characters (the MCU has made a hugely successful, critically acclaimed billion-dollar empire out of precisely that; when did the fandom start thinking that these two things are mutually exclusive?

After watching THOR4 I realized that all the online hatred the film got was because of how female-centric and gay positive it was (which is how a Wonder Woman film should be when you think about it).

There are numerous ways to make a superhero film that doesn't follow the MCU style (or Waititi's style to be specific). I don't know why people are acting like this is a binary choice between stuff like Love & Thunder and "grimdark". Then again, people treat anything slightly more serious than a Saturday morning cartoon as grimdark, so I guess I can chalk it up to nuance being practically non-existent on the Internet.

[QUOTE=HestiasHearth;6231940]

After watching THOR4 I realized that all the online hatred the film got was because of how female-centric and gay positive it was (which is how a Wonder Woman film should be when you think about it).[/QUOTE]

All? I hate it and see 84 as better..but it definitely aint for the reasons you listed

[QUOTE=masterwitcher88;6231859]The origin of the amazons... sure. It needs to be, you can't turn what happened to them into a joke, this isn't Thor: Love and Thunder. And you can't pussy foot around it like the films and Johns, state what happened, take it with some seriousness, and be clear about it. If it's all whimsical and silly, why should I care about any of these characters?[/QUOTE]

While I agree with your sentiment, Perez's voice for Diana...is not my favorite. Too virginal, too chaste, not fun enough, too much bloviating. There's a reason one of the criticisms of the WW book is that it's "too preachy" and I truly feel that came from Perez's depiction of Diana. He did phenomenal stuff in reestablishing her and her mythos, but his Diana was often pretty milquetoast.

Please don't murder me, CBR Wonderfandom!

Young Diana stories:

[img]https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51666yV4-fL.jpg[/img]
[img]http://prodimage.images-bn.com/pimages/9780399549762_p0_v1_s1200x630.jpg[/img]
[img]https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51FpS9Q4yUL._AC_SY780_.jpg[/img]

[img]https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-FRypsmSAETk/YiLPEI4L5yI/AAAAAAACzQc/dBY-bRTq29omkLUfqs_AqMS0FYSYD9YaACNcBGAsYHQ/h16000/Wonder%2BWoman%2B-%2BThe%2BAdventures%2Bof%2BYoung%2BDiana%2BSpecial%2B001%2B%25282021%2529%2B%2528digital%2529%2B%2528Son%2Bof%2BUltron-Empire%2529-083.jpg[/img]

[QUOTE=Shimbo;6232169]While I agree with your sentiment, Perez's voice for Diana...is not my favorite. Too virginal, too chaste, not fun enough, too much bloviating. There's a reason one of the criticisms of the WW book is that it's "too preachy" and I truly feel that came from Perez's depiction of Diana. He did phenomenal stuff in reestablishing her and her mythos, but his Diana was often pretty milquetoast.

Please don't murder me, CBR Wonderfandom![/QUOTE]

I agree with this. In fact, I didn't love how Diana was written in either of my 2 favorite runs (Perez, Rucka's Post-Crisis). Had the same issues as you do with Perez and Rucka made her way too grave/serious (he definitely got a better handle on her in his Rebirth run). They just had such brilliant storytelling, lore, and thematic depth and interesting enough supporting casts that they more than made up for it. Felt the same way about Legend of WW, which I also loved overall.

Phil Jimenez and Gail Simone probably wrote my favorite Dianas in the main book. And I thought WML did a fantastic job with her voice when he was at his best, but when he was off, he was REALLY off.

[QUOTE=Shimbo;6232169]While I agree with your sentiment, Perez's voice for Diana...is not my favorite. Too virginal, too chaste, not fun enough, too much bloviating. There's a reason one of the criticisms of the WW book is that it's "too preachy" and I truly feel that came from Perez's depiction of Diana. He did phenomenal stuff in reestablishing her and her mythos, but his Diana was often pretty milquetoast.

Please don't murder me, CBR Wonderfandom![/QUOTE]

I mean no one likes to be preached at in general. I don't blame you for not liking it, and I actually agree with your sentiment on it being too virginal and chaste. I actually liked Rucka's voice for her though post-crisis. I don't believe the stories he wrote called for fun and adventure in Diana's voice. She was serious and formal because she needed to be at that time. Its when other writers take that as her defacto tone and put it in their own stories which weren't as deep as Rucka's.

[QUOTE=HestiasHearth;6231940]I just watched Thor4, and not gonna lie: the whole notion that a film with whimsy and jokes somehow negates the stakes and the seriousness of the film's central plot is absolutely bonkers to me. Love and Thunder had a lot of funny moments and great sight gags, and yet at no point did I feel that the serious parts of the film were invalidated, or made less important. In fact, Love and Thunder proves once again that comic book fandom tends to look at everything through a very simplistic, rigidly black OR white lens. Goddess, I wish Wonder Woman 1984 had been 1/8 as strong as Love and Thunder (especially the fight choreography and special effects). And I will say it once again, Waititi would probably be a solid director to bring a Golden Age aesthetic to Themyscira in a film, instead of the usual one-note sword-and-sandals visuals we get. A film could have whimsy and silliness and still make audiences care about the characters (the MCU has made a hugely successful, critically acclaimed billion-dollar empire out of precisely that; when did the fandom start thinking that these two things are mutually exclusive?

After watching THOR4 I realized that all the online hatred the film got was because of how female-centric and gay positive it was (which is how a Wonder Woman film should be when you think about it).[/QUOTE]

I disagree with all of this, sorry, I hated Love and Thunder, and they did virtually laugh at every moment. The film was a joke to me, I didn't care for any character, and it was solely working off of good will from the previous film and the MARVEL machine itself. It wasn't even that funny either. The MCU is a success because it's essentially cornered the superhero market with no real competition from DC, it has its corporate made formula and sometimes people make a good film with it, not L&T. I didn't even finish the film it was that bad for me.

[QUOTE=Primal Slayer;6232152]All? I hate it and see 84 as better..but it definitely aint for the reasons you listed[/QUOTE]

Its saying something when people prefer 84 over that garbage.

[QUOTE=Agent Z;6231960]There are numerous ways to make a superhero film that doesn't follow the MCU style (or Waititi's style to be specific). I don't know why people are acting like this is a binary choice between stuff like Love & Thunder and "grimdark". Then again, people treat anything slightly more serious than a Saturday morning cartoon as grimdark, so I guess I can chalk it up to nuance being practically non-existent on the Internet.[/QUOTE]

100 to all of this.

[QUOTE=Agent Z;6231960]There are numerous ways to make a superhero film that doesn't follow the MCU style (or Waititi's style to be specific). I don't know why people are acting like this is a binary choice between stuff like Love & Thunder and "grimdark". Then again, people treat anything slightly more serious than a Saturday morning cartoon as grimdark, so I guess I can chalk it up to nuance being practically non-existent on the Internet.[/QUOTE]

I thought the first Wonder Woman film nailed this. It was serious when it needed to be, but it was really earnest and had lots of humor and light character moments that felt totally natural (vs. the MCU films, which shoehorn in quips to keep anything from feeling too serious). It always baffles me when people compare its tone to the Snyderverse.

[QUOTE=HestiasHearth;6231940]I just watched Thor4, and not gonna lie: the whole notion that a film with whimsy and jokes somehow negates the stakes and the seriousness of the film's central plot is absolutely bonkers to me. Love and Thunder had a lot of funny moments and great sight gags, and yet at no point did I feel that the serious parts of the film were invalidated, or made less important. In fact, Love and Thunder proves once again that comic book fandom tends to look at everything through a very simplistic, rigidly black OR white lens. Goddess, I wish Wonder Woman 1984 had been 1/8 as strong as Love and Thunder (especially the fight choreography and special effects). And I will say it once again, Waititi would probably be a solid director to bring a Golden Age aesthetic to Themyscira in a film, instead of the usual one-note sword-and-sandals visuals we get. A film could have whimsy and silliness and still make audiences care about the characters (the MCU has made a hugely successful, critically acclaimed billion-dollar empire out of precisely that; when did the fandom start thinking that these two things are mutually exclusive?

After watching THOR4 I realized that all the online hatred the film got was because of how female-centric and gay positive it was (which is how a Wonder Woman film should be when you think about it).[/QUOTE]

I agree with all of this and like Love & Thunder just as much Ragnarak and way more than WW 1984 and with reservations I liked WW 1984.

[QUOTE=HestiasHearth;6231940]I just watched Thor4, and not gonna lie: the whole notion that a film with whimsy and jokes somehow negates the stakes and the seriousness of the film's central plot is absolutely bonkers to me. Love and Thunder had a lot of funny moments and great sight gags, and yet at no point did I feel that the serious parts of the film were invalidated, or made less important. In fact, Love and Thunder proves once again that comic book fandom tends to look at everything through a very simplistic, rigidly black OR white lens. Goddess, I wish Wonder Woman 1984 had been 1/8 as strong as Love and Thunder (especially the fight choreography and special effects). And I will say it once again, Waititi would probably be a solid director to bring a Golden Age aesthetic to Themyscira in a film, instead of the usual one-note sword-and-sandals visuals we get. A film could have whimsy and silliness and still make audiences care about the characters (the MCU has made a hugely successful, critically acclaimed billion-dollar empire out of precisely that; when did the fandom start thinking that these two things are mutually exclusive?

After watching THOR4 I realized that all the online hatred the film got was because of how female-centric and gay positive it was (which is how a Wonder Woman film should be when you think about it).[/QUOTE]

I also recently watched [I]TLT[/I]. I think some of the hate it catches is unwarranted, but I otherwise would agree that it's a largely-forgettable MCU movie and I think it is kind of retrograde take on Thor's character after a lot of the character-building they did in [I]Ragnarok[/I], [I]Infinity War[/I] (in particular), and even [I]Endgame[/I]. There are a lot of unfortunate "Wait, what?" moments in that film that I think kind of lessened the experience. Overall, I recommend it to MCU fans, even though I don't have a lot of great things to say about it. I do, though, think to some degree it's hard to make Thor run the ringer of his three prior appearances and then go whimsy and silly, especially when he seems less sharp.

Diana's funeral happened in this week's DCaesed. It was ok, I mean, I've complained about that comic enough already, people here kind of get that its bad. But I have to admit, Ares's appearance and the subsequent 'big reveal' about who is behind all the bull, its Erebus the primordial embodiment of darkness, husband to Nyx, was pretty interesting. Like yeah, green arrow being annoying and quippy kind of ruined the scene, insert marvel jokes at the worst time rant, but overall was pretty sweet. It has that scale, that stakes, and gravitas that's missing in WW comics these days. I feel like if this was written by anyone better than Tom, not a high bar I know, and actually had a care for Diana this would have been a decent elseworld. Like, I 100% believe Tom is obviously going to drop the ball on this and has some stupid superman/batman god scene to solve something that is clearly designed to be a part of Diana's mythos, yknow, 'subvert expectations' and all that by doing the exact thing that DC comics does all that time. I think with Tom, it's that saying that fast food can taste good every once in a blue moon. Not saying that as a whole it was good, but, that was ok, serviceable to me. This man clearly does not like Diana though. And I do hate this trope of heroes getting the weapons and armor of the gods cause its always used to show how great the heroes are and it often feels so undeserved at the moment.

[QUOTE=masterwitcher88;6233890]Diana's funeral happened in this week's DCaesed. It was ok, I mean, I've complained about that comic enough already, people here kind of get that its bad. But I have to admit, Ares's appearance and the subsequent 'big reveal' about who is behind all the bull, its Erebus the primordial embodiment of darkness, husband to Nyx, was pretty interesting. Like yeah, green arrow being annoying and quippy kind of ruined the scene, insert marvel jokes at the worst time rant, but overall was pretty sweet. It has that scale, that stakes, and gravitas that's missing in WW comics these days. I feel like if this was written by anyone better than Tom, not a high bar I know, and actually had a care for Diana this would have been a decent elseworld. Like, I 100% believe Tom is obviously going to drop the ball on this and has some stupid superman/batman god scene to solve something that is clearly designed to be a part of Diana's mythos, yknow, 'subvert expectations' and all that by doing the exact thing that DC comics does all that time. I think with Tom, it's that saying that fast food can taste good every once in a blue moon. Not saying that as a whole it was good, but, that was ok, serviceable to me. This man clearly does not like Diana though. And I do hate this trope of heroes getting the weapons and armor of the gods cause its always used to show how great the heroes are and it often feels so undeserved at the moment.[/QUOTE]
"Annoying and Quippy" is to GA what "breathing" is to everyone else, he can't really exist without it. Not a fan of him being on Themyscira if I'm honest but guess Taylor couldn't help himself with one of his pet characters.

Can only imagine how much pain it must have caused Taylor to write a WW scene without SuperMessiah and BatGod for her to speak of in reverend terms. :p

I honestly completely forgot about this. I don't even care enough to search for scans. Just the idea of characters standing around and acting like Diana getting murdered with one punch & turned into a bloodthirsty monster was an act of heroic sacrifice...as written by Tom Taylor...makes me cringe.

Don't even pretend you respect Wonder Woman, Tom. That ship sailed a long time ago.


As for the rest...if I'm understanding it correctly...sounds like yet another example of something that is or should be Wonder Woman's domain being left to other heroes to resolve. Kind of like when a story involves mind control or possession and someone OTHER THAN Diana thinks to use the Lasso instead of her.
Ancient Greek gods have screwed the world? Boy, that sounds exactly like a job for Wonder Wo--OH, too late! She's dead. Womp womp.

In fact, didn't it turn out the Lasso is or would've been incredibly useful in combating the zombie plague, but it never once occurred to Diana even though the damn thing was at her side at all times?


Oh, Taylor. Useless man.

Even something somehwat revolving around Diana and Cassie doesnt have much play lol. But it was nice to see Ares and him put down Darkseid. Still think that Diana of all people were killed but it wouldnt be an Elseworlds if she didnt fall while Supes survived.

[QUOTE=Gaius;6233929]"Annoying and Quippy" is to GA what "breathing" is to everyone else, he can't really exist without it. Not a fan of him being on Themyscira if I'm honest but guess Taylor couldn't help himself with one of his pet characters.[/QUOTE]
When written well GA has great quips.

[QUOTE=Frontier;6234047]When written well GA has great quips.[/QUOTE]

[IMG]https://i.imgur.com/HCO4WUB.png[/IMG]

[QUOTE=Gaius;6234062][IMG]https://i.imgur.com/HCO4WUB.png[/IMG][/QUOTE]
Don't underestimate Kin Shriner :p.

[QUOTE=Primal Slayer;6234021]Even something somehwat revolving around Diana and Cassie doesnt have much play lol. But it was nice to see Ares and him put down Darkseid. Still think that Diana of all people were killed but it wouldnt be an Elseworlds if she didnt fall while Supes survived.[/QUOTE]

Whatever do you mean? Cassie's role as Damian's girlfriend is an incredible part to the overall story.:p

What comic issue is this from??

[url]https://comicvine.gamespot.com/images/1300-8294079[/url]

[QUOTE=gwhh;6242398]What comic issue is this from??

[url]https://comicvine.gamespot.com/images/1300-8294079[/url][/QUOTE]

JLA Heaven's Ladder.

WW will be in one of the DC Christmas story specials by Stephanie Williams

Superman's there too unfortunately :p

[IMG]https://i.ibb.co/HzT57QV/Image.png[/IMG]

Wonder Shakira

[img]https://i.imgur.com/wc6imrB.jpg[/img]

[img]https://i.imgur.com/imo1zCW.jpg[/img]

[QUOTE=Sebastianne;6249900]Wonder Shakira

[img]https://i.imgur.com/wc6imrB.jpg[/img]

[img]https://i.imgur.com/imo1zCW.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]

WoW, muy bonita la mujer maravilla!!

[img]https://i.imgur.com/DRxW2wY.jpg[/img]

five minutes later he killed Hippolyta miserably :P

[QUOTE=Phoenixx9;6249981]WoW, muy bonita la mujer maravilla!![/QUOTE]

Mmm I don't know, I think she could have bought a more sophisticated outfit :P

[QUOTE=Sebastianne;6250107]Mmm I don't know, I think she could have bought a more sophisticated outfit :P[/QUOTE]

I know what you mean. She could very well have purchased a professional outfit as easily as a regular person buys that costume she has on :P

But she looked good in it, despite the Tiara being more like a crown, lol! And the Bracers looked like material.