Wonder Woman Controversial Opinions Part 2

[Gaius]

Reading the recent comments reminded me just how badly Rucka’s status quo was screwed up after he left. Amazons Attack...wow, so bad. I kinda wish he wrote a limited series with a true ending to his run, along with his own version of Amazons Attack. Call it Wonder Woman: Unfinished Tales or something.

Yep. Derailed her book for years all so Superman and Batman could get play moral high ground and left us stuck with pretending Max Lord is a worthwhile character

[I'm a Fish]

I'm curious do you guys ever feel Diana's movie ever helped her be taken more seriously or just no one at Dc comics cared ? I feel like it depends because her whole support cast still isn't in the movie

I think they helped her be taken more seriously as a money-making franchise.

[John Venus]

The prevailing argument before the movie came out was that WW was too complicated, unworkable for a movie and that it wouldn't succeed. The movie at least disproved that. How much DC has capitalized on that success is another matter though.

You also have to thank the success of the first Thor movie. It may look like it was all meant to be in hindsight but that movie's success was pivotal in proving that a mythology based superhero with fabulous hair can succeed on screen and co-exist with the then more grounded superheroes like Iron Man. It helped knee cap another argument against a WW movie.

[SiegePerilous02]

Yep. Derailed her book for years all so Superman and Batman could get play moral high ground and left us stuck with pretending Max Lord is a worthwhile character

Wasn't Rucka going to bring in Superman and Batman and contrast their reactions to Diana's methods anyway, and it was editorial interference that changed it to Max and painted her as in the wrong?

As a fan of all three characters, the idea always had the potential to make one of the parties look bad. Rucka may have been able to handle it well if left to his own devices, but I think Superman is OOC if his immediate reaction is to judge Diana after he nearly killed her no matter what. Bringing them into her book to paint them as hypocrites isn't necessarily much better than her being thrown under the bus the DC event at large (and it's not like they escaped unscathed either, all three took a hit for IC's stupid plots to work)

[I'm a Fish]

Wasn't Rucka going to bring in Superman and Batman and contrast their reactions to Diana's methods anyway, and it was editorial interference that changed it to Max and painted her as in the wrong?

As a fan of all three characters, the idea always had the potential to make one of the parties look bad. Rucka may have been able to handle it well if left to his own devices, but I think Superman is OOC if his immediate reaction is to judge Diana after he nearly killed her no matter what. Bringing them into her book to paint them as hypocrites isn't necessarily much better than her being thrown under the bus the DC event at large (and it's not like they escaped unscathed either, all three took a hit for IC's stupid plots to work)

Yeah, originally Superman and Batman weren’t going to judge her for her actions at all and in fact would try to break her out of prison to which she declined.

I don’t think he was going to paint them as hypocrites though.

And the “Amazon’s Attack” was going to last one page and be the shortest war in history because the Amazon’s made the president surrender 5 minutes after the war started.

[John Venus]

Rucka had more nuanced ideas. Editorial had much more plain and simple ideas. We ended up getting a little bit of both.

[I'm a Fish]

The full story (to my knowledge) was:

-After Diana killed Max (or whoever Rucka wanted to use before editorial made him use Max, because originally he wanted to use an OC) a detective from Washington was going to look into the case and he finds Diana guilty of killing the man (no surprise since she already admitted to it).

-The detective asks Superman to be there for Diana's arrest incase she resisted (I don't think Superman was going to be mind controlled, and would have no part in the story before the detective asked for his assistance).

-Superman would decline at first, because Diana is his friend and he didn't want to play a hand in her arrest and doubted he would be needed anyway, but the detective talked him into it.

-Superman and the detective knock on Diana's front door, too which she exclaims "I'm surprised it took you so long, I'm ready to go with you detective." and is taken to a super-human prison.

-(If memory serves) Superman would then go to Batman because he didn't like the idea of Diana being kept in a prison and would try to talk Batman into helping despite her having killed someone. Batman would reply with that he was already coming up with a plan to free Diana and wants Superman's help.

-The two would successfully break into the prison unaware and try to free Diana, but she would refuse to leave her cell because she has to face whatever consequence the American justice system would charge her with. Superman and Batman reluctantly leave.

-Meanwhile the Amazon's aren't very happy with their ambassador being held poisoner and demand America release her. America refuses and declares war on the Amazons. As they helicopter the President away in Marine One an Amazon suddenly steps onboard (while the helicopter is in the air ) and tells the president, "we have hundreds of invisible planes ready to attack the Whitehouse, the Pentagon and every major military institution in your country if you don't surrender immediately."

-The president surrenders immediately. Making the moment the war started to the moment the president surrendered 5 minutes long.

Things get a little choppy in details after that since Rucka never got that far, but ultimately he said Diana would be found innocent and released.

Edit: Basically what happened after was that Editorial really liked the idea and wanted to expand upon that. They asked Rucka if he would write the story if they switched out his OC with Max and made a larger event out of it, which he agreed to if the concussion was the same, (with Diana being found innocent). They told him "yes" (which they would later backtrack on) and instead made Diana the odd-man out, which Rucka wasn't happy about, and then they blindsided him by telling him his run was going to end soon so he never had time to write a proper concussion to the neck-snap fallout.

[Agent Z]

The prevailing argument before the movie came out was that WW was too complicated, unworkable for a movie and that it wouldn't succeed. The movie at least disproved that. How much DC has capitalized on that success is another matter though.

You also have to thank the success of the first Thor movie. It may look like it was all meant to be in hindsight but that movie's success was pivotal in proving that a mythology based superhero with fabulous hair can succeed on screen and co-exist with the then more grounded superheroes like Iron Man. It helped knee cap another argument against a WW movie.

I don't know if the Thor movie had that much of an influence in it. It was viewed as average at best compared to other MCU movies at the time and has been accused (rightly or wrongly depending on how you feel) about downplaying the more fantastical elements of the comics.

[Gaius]

Wasn't Rucka going to bring in Superman and Batman and contrast their reactions to Diana's methods anyway, and it was editorial interference that changed it to Max and painted her as in the wrong?

As a fan of all three characters, the idea always had the potential to make one of the parties look bad. Rucka may have been able to handle it well if left to his own devices, but I think Superman is OOC if his immediate reaction is to judge Diana after he nearly killed her no matter what. Bringing them into her book to paint them as hypocrites isn't necessarily much better than her being thrown under the bus the DC event at large (and it's not like they escaped unscathed either, all three took a hit for IC's stupid plots to work)

Yeah, I think so since he already kind of explored the idea of contrasting the Batman and Wonder Woman in Hiketeia. From what I recall in an interview he did plan having a neck snap-like moment in his run but Didio, Johns, and editorial in general liked the idea and this is how it evolved into Max Lord and the buildup to IC.

Rucka seems like he was on board with all the stuff leading up to Max Lord, his main problem was that they then kicked him off the book for the relaunch and he wasn't allowed to resolve it.

That leads into him being initially promised the WW: Earth One as a consolation books but that's a different story obviously.

[John Venus]

I don't know if the Thor movie had that much of an influence in it. It was viewed as average at best compared to other MCU movies at the time and has been accused (rightly or wrongly depending on how you feel) about downplaying the more fantastical elements of the comics.

Well, you're right about the fact that you don't know. I was active online on a lot of a comic book sites including here and in several other places, Thor was absolutely crucial step in the MCU since it was the first peek at the Marvel Cosmic before Guardians blew the door wide open and if Thor had bombed like say, Iron Fist did, then it would have put the whole Avengers experiment in jeopardy.. All the hype would have been deflated.

Also, this is what the fans were saying before the WW movie was confirmed:

[HestiasHearth]

The prevailing argument before the movie came out was that WW was too complicated, unworkable for a movie and that it wouldn't succeed. The movie at least disproved that. How much DC has capitalized on that success is another matter though.

You also have to thank the success of the first Thor movie. It may look like it was all meant to be in hindsight but that movie's success was pivotal in proving that a mythology based superhero with fabulous hair can succeed on screen and co-exist with the then more grounded superheroes like Iron Man. It helped knee cap another argument against a WW movie.

I don't think even Marvel itself was confident about a superhero based on magical myths and ancient deities could "live" comfortably alongside its science-and-tech-based superheroes. Didn't the first Thor film explain magic as some sort of uber-advanced technology and gods as highly evolved aliens or something? I still prefer Wonder Woman, where gods were gods and magic is magic. Audiences have consumed fantasy books, TV, films, and yes, comics sufficiently for them NOT to need magic and gods explained in a quasi-"realistic" way.

[I'm a Fish]

Well, you're right about the fact that you don't know. I was active online on a lot of a comic book sites including here and in several other places, Thor was absolutely crucial step in the MCU since it was the first peek at the Marvel Cosmic before Guardians blew the door wide open and if Thor had bombed like say, Iron Fist did, then it would have put the whole Avengers experiment in jeopardy.. All the hype would have been deflated.

Also, this is what the fans were saying before the WW movie was confirmed:

Her movie wasn’t confirmed by the time her cameo in BvS was announced?

[Perseus]

I still don't think they take Diana very seriously, with respect to the movies.

Where were the people in the first movie with respect to her powerset. Why couldn't she fly, for instance? Where did her bulls**t powers pop up in the end act against Ares, never to be used again?

She gets disrespected by saying she stayed away from humanity for 100 years only to have that retconned later because it makes her look bad.

She gets curbstomped by Superman, thus letting all of us know that a woman can't be an equal to the all-mighty Superman!

Why would they kill all the gods, save one, Ares, in the first movie? All that potential for storylines involving the gods gone, unless they do something about it in the third movie.

And, WW84. What the hell were they thinking? You have possibly her most iconic villain in Cheetah, and we get the 'cats' version of her at the end and a very poorly lit and badly acted out fight.

I don't know if they take her more seriously, but the end result is that she is a prescence in the DCEU, although just a sidekick when Superman is involved.

Pretty much sums up my feelings for DCEU Diana, just now we wait for the reboot.

[Perseus]

My personal head canon is that Diana is a child of prophesy i.e. Athena and Aphrodite created her not just out of love for Hippolyta but because they knew Ares's chains would never last forever. And that this was something the amazons knew about since before they moved to the island, that Hippolyta would form a child to battle evil and become the bridge between the amazons and the outside world or something like that. Really play that up more in her origins.

[WonderLight789]

I still don't think they take Diana very seriously, with respect to the movies.

Where were the people in the first movie with respect to her powerset. Why couldn't she fly, for instance? Where did her bulls**t powers pop up in the end act against Ares, never to be used again?

She gets disrespected by saying she stayed away from humanity for 100 years only to have that retconned later because it makes her look bad.

She gets curbstomped by Superman, thus letting all of us know that a woman can't be an equal to the all-mighty Superman!

Why would they kill all the gods, save one, Ares, in the first movie? All that potential for storylines involving the gods gone, unless they do something about it in the third movie.

And, WW84. What the hell were they thinking? You have possibly her most iconic villain in Cheetah, and we get the 'cats' version of her at the end and a very poorly lit and badly acted out fight.

I don't know if they take her more seriously, but the end result is that she is a prescence in the DCEU, although just a sidekick when Superman is involved.

Pretty much. The movie and its success did not help the character and her verse that much. They are still portrayed as weaklinks more often than not. And fodderized by Superman anf other bi alpha male characters.