Your DC-Only controversial opinions (part II)...

[CosmiComic]

My controversial opinion, Superman should be the diplomat working with Government institutions, not Wonder Woman. I think the main universe Superman being elected for public office like Calvin Ellis would be a great status quo that highlights the qualities of Clark Kent.

The reason why Wonder Woman shouldn't be a diplomat is that she was never made to work within the system. Marston's Wonder Woman was a radical that was much more likely to create a political movement. Today Diana should be building communes for alternative lifestyles and to shelter victims of violence, both domestic and institutional, not attending U.N. meetings and fancy events.

Superman in office and WW in Habitats for Humanity? Sounds like it has potential. I definitely think she'd be all about social progress, although so would he

[Vordan]

My controversial opinion, Superman should be the diplomat working with Government institutions, not Wonder Woman. I think the main universe Superman being elected for public office like Calvin Ellis would be a great status quo that highlights the qualities of Clark Kent.

The reason why Wonder Woman shouldn't be a diplomat is that she was never made to work within the system. Marston's Wonder Woman was a radical that was much more likely to create a political movement. Today Diana should be building communes for alternative lifestyles and to shelter victims of violence, both domestic and institutional, not attending U.N. meetings and fancy events.

Disagree with regards to Supes but agree with regards to Wondy. Odd that no one has copied what Busiek did with his WW expy in Astro City, she’s literally done what you’re proposing for Diana.

[Aahz]

Isn't it also the problem that editors don't invest into those characters in the first place because they care more about the popular ones?

Not really, I mean often these lesser popular characters get books, they are just usually cancelled after 1-2 years because of low sales.
So there is initially some investment but you probably would have to commit on the long run.

But Question is of course for which characters such a long-term commitment despite low sales would pay-off eventually, and for which it wouldn't.

[Stanlos]

Disagree with regards to Supes but agree with regards to Wondy. Odd that no one has copied what Busiek did with his WW expy in Astro City, she’s literally done what you’re proposing for Diana.

I feel to this day that one of the greatest tragedies of the behind the scenes maneuvering that resulted in the exodus of the mega talents from DC is that we never got a Busiek/star artist run on WW. I do would love to see what Busiek would do and what a Warren Ellis follow up would be like.

[Alpha]

Busiek is gonna write a story for the 80th Anniversary WW special. What was Diana like in his Trinity story?

[Agent Z]

The different parts of BvS can be good but the general combination isn't

I wouldn't mind evil Superman as much if he was actually the regular good Superman for most of the DCEU up until then. But we spent more time with him being on opposite sides of the other heroes, and fighting against them, so we don't really feel rhe imapct of him being evil

In BvS, Clark is on the opposite side of Bruce because Bruce is the one acting evil not Clark. That leaves only the JL movie where he is briefly brainwashed. For most of the DCEU, Clark is unambiguously a good if flawed character.

[Agent Z]

Also, a lot of people are far too uncritical of Marston to the point they think anything done with Wonder Woman that wasn't originated by him should be tossed out. Marston might have been progressive by the standards of the 40s but his writing still contains elements that do not work for today or at least aren't inherently better.

[Alpha]

Also, a lot of people are far too uncritical of Marston to the point they think anything done with Wonder Woman that wasn't originated by him should be tossed out. Marston might have been progressive by the standards of the 40s but his writing still contains elements that do not work for today or at least aren't inherently better.

Sure. I don't disagree with that. But I don't think there has been a Wonder Woman run as fascinating as his.

[SiegePerilous02]

Also, a lot of people are far too uncritical of Marston to the point they think anything done with Wonder Woman that wasn't originated by him should be tossed out. Marston might have been progressive by the standards of the 40s but his writing still contains elements that do not work for today or at least aren't inherently better.

Sure. I don't disagree with that. But I don't think there has been a Wonder Woman run as fascinating as his.

I think it's more that most stuff after Marston aside from a handful of runs like Perez and Rucka didn't really add anything of value to the character or mythos. Its all either solid standard fare but not really remarkable or incredibly bad. So as incredibly dated as Marston is, it's why some WW fans still regard his as the true vision, warts and all in ways that say Batman fans don't do with early Finger and Kane.

[John Venus]

My controversial opinion, Superman should be the diplomat working with Government institutions, not Wonder Woman. I think the main universe Superman being elected for public office like Calvin Ellis would be a great status quo that highlights the qualities of Clark Kent.

The reason why Wonder Woman shouldn't be a diplomat is that she was never made to work within the system. Marston's Wonder Woman was a radical that was much more likely to create a political movement. Today Diana should be building communes for alternative lifestyles and to shelter victims of violence, both domestic and institutional, not attending U.N. meetings and fancy events.

Being a diplomat doesn't stop her from building a movement or communes though.

Also, a lot of people are far too uncritical of Marston to the point they think anything done with Wonder Woman that wasn't originated by him should be tossed out. Marston might have been progressive by the standards of the 40s but his writing still contains elements that do not work for today or at least aren't inherently better.

We are aware that Marston is not perfect. In fact, Perez is the perfect modernization of Marston's ideals. We just want to carry forward the parts that work and leave behind the parts that don't. Speaking for myself, I certainly haven't advocated for tossing out everything but Marston's ideas. A lot of posters on here also enjoy a lot of elements that came after Marston like Artemis, Barbara Minerva, Donna Troy, Nubia and Cassie Sandsmark and I don't think any body on here would agree about exorcising those characters from canon.

Also this post is amusing coming from someone who gets reflexively defensive of anything even vaguely critical of Snyder and the Snyder-verse.

[CosmiComic]

Not really, I mean often these lesser popular characters get books, they are just usually cancelled after 1-2 years because of low sales.
So there is initially some investment but you probably would have to commit on the long run.

But Question is of course for which characters such a long-term commitment despite low sales would pay-off eventually, and for which it wouldn't.

Why exactly do those characters get low sales?

In BvS, Clark is on the opposite side of Bruce because Bruce is the one acting evil not Clark. That leaves only the JL movie where he is briefly brainwashed. For most of the DCEU, Clark is unambiguously a good if flawed character.

Bruce is acting like the bad guy, but Clark is still against him for most of the movie. And then he dies, then is brought back and fights the whole League. Yet when they're not fighting, Clark barely talks to any of the other heroes. In Snyder's plan, we'd see even more of that. It doesn't sound enticing to me.

[Alpha]

I think it's more that most stuff after Marston aside from a handful of runs like Perez and Rucka didn't really add anything of value to the character or mythos. Its all either solid standard fare but not really remarkable or incredibly bad. So as incredibly dated as Marston is, it's why some WW fans still regard his as the true vision, warts and all in ways that say Batman fans don't do with early Finger and Kane.

Nah there were lots of great ideas over the decades, but no run was as intelectual and creative and full of worldbuilding and characterization as Marston. Jiminez had beautiful world building as did Orlando. Perez had some poetic storytelling. Rucka and Messner had great characterization. Messner and Luke had a lot of awesome ideas and challenges. Simone had a lot of fun and interesting conflicts. But no writer was able to do all these things in one run like Marston did.

[Alpha]

Being a diplomat doesn't stop her from building a movement or communes though.

The version of Diana I liked would look at the United Nations as a meaningless institution that wouldn't allow her to effect real change. After all, speeches aren't what actually defines policy at the U.N.

In fact, Perez is the perfect modernization of Marston's ideals.

I disagree but of course it's just my opinion. The Perez version of Diana doesn't have a clear vision for the world. She just wants peace and kindness. I mean the amazons created a whole distinct society and yet she has nothing to say about systems of governance?

[Agent Z]

We are aware that Marston is not perfect. In fact, Perez is the perfect modernization of Marston's ideals. We just want to carry forward the parts that work and leave behind the parts that don't. Speaking for myself, I certainly haven't advocated for tossing out everything but Marston's ideas. A lot of posters on here also enjoy a lot of elements that came after Marston like Artemis, Barbara Minerva, Donna Troy, Nubia and Cassie Sandsmark and I don't think any body on here would agree about exorcising those characters from canon.

Also this post is amusing coming from someone who gets reflexively defensive of anything even vaguely critical of Snyder and the Snyder-verse.

I'm also "reflexively defensive" of Perez, Rucka, Jiminez, plenty of stuff from before the New 52, the Bat-Family, most of the DCEU actually, including stuff that isn't directed by Snyder.

[SiegePerilous02]

Nah there were lots of great ideas over the decades, but no run was as intelectual and creative and full of worldbuilding and characterization as Marston. Jiminez had beautiful world building as did Orlando. Perez had some poetic storytelling. Rucka and Messner had great characterization. Messner and Luke had a lot of awesome ideas and challenges. Simone had a lot of fun and interesting conflicts. But no writer was able to do all these things in one run like Marston did.

I think I agree that there is no one run that is purely a creator's vision the way Marston's is, so in that regard it stands alone. All the others, even the best ones, still have to deal with editorial interference. Of the following runs, her Silver and Bronze age periods were pretty bad, and while some good characters showed up in post-Crisis, I think the only ones that really added anything substantial as far as mythos, characters and modernizations go are Perez, Rucka and to a lesser extent Jimenez (who did the best job melding Perez and Marston and I wish his run was longer, as I think fusing those two takes would be the best for the IP as a whole). Of the others, we got Donna in the Silver Age TT (which created issues in relation to the WW book proper), Artemis in Loebs and Cassie in Byrne, but while they are all major character the stories surrounding them aren't as big of a deal for WW herself IMO.