Wonder Woman Controversial Opinions Part 2

[Agent Z]

While I agree Grail would have to be fairly well removed from Darkseid's plots and stories, there is a pretty great parallel with Diana here; both are daughters of rulers, both are largely on their own and have their own goals and motivations (Grail did spent almost all her life away from her father before Darkseid War and whatever happened during Robinson's arc), but both ultimately have to answer the summons when/if their parent calls.

Diana and Grail are both gods (to varying degrees anyway, Diana's status is usually sorta murky), both princesses, both Amazons. Grail could be a fantastic broken mirror villain.

Cheetah.....blah. Great concept, she's been in some great stories but.....the whole is less than the sum of its parts somehow. I've rarely, if ever, really enjoyed the character though I have greatly enjoyed some of the stories she's been used in. Rucka is a great example here; Rebirth gave us one of the best Cheetah stories/arcs I've ever seen and it was greatly enjoyable.....but Cheetah herself still comes of lacking, somehow.

On the other hand, Grail had been in far less good stories than Cheetah.

[Ascended]

Of course, Grail has been around a few years while Cheetah goes back to the Golden Age.

But if you look at the percentages....Grail's been in good stories 50% of the time (she's only been in Darkseid War and that Robinson story right?). We can't say the same for Cheetah.

I think there's plenty of room for both of course. I dont even think you can purposefully build a villain into a meaningful archnemesis like we're discussing. That's largely decided by the fans and history. Writers can, of course, try to make it happen and build a villain into a major part of the hero's narrative but when you've got a character who has an actual rogues gallery and deals with multiple foes over time? You can try to make everyone gravitate and look at a particular villain in a certain way.....but for all you know they'll latch onto someone else completely. Just look at Invincible; supposedly a lot of people consider Angstrom Levy to be Invincible's archnemesis, and his stories were some of the very best.....but from what I hear Kirkman never actually intended that to happen. Levy was just another villain as far as Kirkman was concerned.

[Mel Dyer]

Of course, Grail has been around a few years while Cheetah goes back to the Golden Age.

But if you look at the percentages....Grail's been in good stories 50% of the time (she's only been in Darkseid War and that Robinson story right?). We can't say the same for Cheetah.

I think there's plenty of room for both of course. I dont even think you can purposefully build a villain into a meaningful archnemesis like we're discussing. That's largely decided by the fans and history. Writers can, of course, try to make it happen and build a villain into a major part of the hero's narrative but when you've got a character who has an actual rogues gallery and deals with multiple foes over time? You can try to make everyone gravitate and look at a particular villain in a certain way.....but for all you know they'll latch onto someone else completely. Just look at Invincible; supposedly a lot of people consider Angstrom Levy to be Invincible's archnemesis, and his stories were some of the very best.....but from what I hear Kirkman never actually intended that to happen. Levy was just another villain as far as Kirkman was concerned.

There was a time, when the GREAT editors, Stan Lee and Mort Weisinger, guided how writers used the most promising comic characters. Fans wrote letters, hand-written ones, about who they felt were the most promising characters, and editors responded by making sure these characters, matched with the best writers and the best stories...shined! This is the development process that many of us keep talking about, because we recall that is how the most successful comics became successful.

Wonder Woman hasn't had the benefit of that kind of development, over the decades, following her launch in the 1940s. One can argue that editor Robert Kanigher's development of her, as a comedic adventurer in the 50s, and his failure to establish a classic rogues gallery and supporting cast, like those in Batman, Fantastic Four, Superman and Spider-Man ..greatly hurt the character. It set her back, in the sense that writers attempting to world-build the WW comic, today, are forced to hatch appealing supporting characters and arch-villains, which typically takes decades to grow, ..almost, from thin air.

I don't think developing WW is a hopeless enterprise. She needs supporting characters and archenemies, who feel relevant to the WW comic. But, it's got to start somewhere, ..and with editors and creators - but, especially EDITORS - who care about the leading lady.

[Ascended]

There was a time, when the GREAT editors, Stan Lee and Mort Weisinger, guided how writers used the most promising comic characters. Fans wrote letters, hand-written ones, about who they felt were the most promising characters, and editors responded by making sure these characters, matched with the best writers and the best stories...shined! This is the development process that many of us keep talking about, because we recall that is how the most successful comics became successful.

Wonder Woman hasn't had the benefit of that kind of development, over the decades, following her launch in the 1940s. One can argue that editor Robert Kanigher's development of her, as a comedic adventurer in the 50s, and his failure to establish a classic rogues gallery and supporting cast, like those in Batman, Fantastic Four, Superman and Spider-Man ..greatly hurt the character. It set her back, in the sense that writers attempting to world-build the WW comic, today, are forced to hatch appealing supporting characters and arch-villains, which typically takes decades to grow, ..almost, from thin air.

I don't think developing WW is a hopeless enterprise. She needs supporting characters and archenemies, who feel relevant to the WW comic. But, it's got to start somewhere, ..and with editors and creators - but, especially EDITORS - who care about the leading lady.

I remember the days of hand written letters too. Good times.

And I agree that the entire editorial structure is buggered and Kanigher was the absolute worst (read a history book about the character.....dark days). And no, Diana isn't hopeless at all. I'm not saying anything of the sort? Just that writers can try to introduce big villains, but it ends up being the fans and time that actually decide who and what sticks. Diana's definitely got a handicap because of her past poor treatment but she's far from broken or anything.

[Mel Dyer]

I remember the days of hand written letters too. Good times.

And I agree that the entire editorial structure is buggered and Kanigher was the absolute worst (read a history book about the character.....dark days). And no, Diana isn't hopeless at all. I'm not saying anything of the sort? Just that writers can try to introduce big villains, but it ends up being the fans and time that actually decide who and what sticks. Diana's definitely got a handicap because of her past poor treatment but she's far from broken or anything.

I wasn't gunning for you, with that post, Ascended. Sorry, if it sounded that way. Just recalling for those, who don't know or remember, the days, when great editors shaped the destiny of great comic books.

Wonder Woman needs that, and she doesn't have it.

[Agent Z]

The Wonder Woman comics and adjacent stories need to do better when it comes to women of color.

[Mel Dyer]

The Wonder Woman comics and adjacent stories need to do better when it comes to women of color.

Nubia, while heroic, was otherwise unrecognizable in #75.

[king81992]

The Wonder Woman comics and adjacent stories need to do better when it comes to women of color.

I'd argue that DC as a whole needs to do better when it comes to women of color.

[Agent Z]

I'd argue that DC as a whole needs to do better when it comes to women of color.

Very much agreed.

[Ascended]

I wasn't gunning for you, with that post, Ascended. Sorry, if it sounded that way. Just recalling for those, who don't know or remember, the days, when great editors shaped the destiny of great comic books.

Wonder Woman needs that, and she doesn't have it.

I didn't think you were gunning for me man, it's all good. I just wasn't sure what you were getting at. I thought you were commenting directly on my post, not adding to it (if that makes any sense?). And since we seemed to be in agreement I was confused.

But that might be on me too. Work is pretty wild this time of year and I'm not always paying total attention when I post here, or I might just be too damn tired to process them.

[SiegePerilous02]

Cheetah.....blah. Great concept, she's been in some great stories but.....the whole is less than the sum of its parts somehow. I've rarely, if ever, really enjoyed the character though I have greatly enjoyed some of the stories she's been used in. Rucka is a great example here; Rebirth gave us one of the best Cheetah stories/arcs I've ever seen and it was greatly enjoyable.....but Cheetah herself still comes of lacking, somehow.

That might be due to approaching the story with the expectation that Cheetah is her arch nemesis, whereas I believe Rucka said in one interview that he viewed her as Diana's Harvey Dent/Two-Face. Who seems to be Rucka's favorite Bat-villain and one he wrote with a lot of prominence, but who is not the arch. So maybe she comes up lacking for some in Rebirth if they expect her to be elevated firmly to Joker/Lex status, but he intended her to be a different level. YMMV, I loved the arc and think if she's not arch nemesis material yet, the foundation was lain to build her up more effectively than in prior versions. I think combining the strongest aspects of Barbara Minerva and Priscilla Rich's characters/stories helped tremendously.

It also begs the question of who Rucka DID intend to be WW's Lex/Joker. Probably Veronica Cale, which...those are lofty goals after only a couple runs. Though I've re-assessed my opinion on Veronica greatly after Rebirth and now she's like my #3 favorite WW villain, but she's got a long way to go herself before she can reach that status.

[Nyssane]

It also begs the question of who Rucka DID intend to be WW's Lex/Joker. Probably Veronica Cale, which...those are lofty goals after only a couple runs. Though I've re-assessed my opinion on Veronica greatly after Rebirth and now she's like my #3 favorite WW villain, but she's got a long way to go herself before she can reach that status.

At this point I don't think it's possible for anyone other than Cheetah to be her archnemesis. No hero of Wonder Woman's caliber has had a brand new villain created in recent years and promoted to archnemesis status. All A-List heroes have primary villains who have been around for almost as long as them. Veronica Cale was created in, what, 2000? That's 65 years of Wonder Woman stories without that character. So regardless of what Rucka wants, Cale could never reach that level, nor should she (and I say this as a big fan of what Rucka has done with her in recent years).

[Ascended]

That might be due to approaching the story with the expectation that Cheetah is her arch nemesis, whereas I believe Rucka said in one interview that he viewed her as Diana's Harvey Dent/Two-Face. Who seems to be Rucka's favorite Bat-villain and one he wrote with a lot of prominence, but who is not the arch. So maybe she comes up lacking for some in Rebirth if they expect her to be elevated firmly to Joker/Lex status, but he intended her to be a different level. YMMV, I loved the arc and think if she's not arch nemesis material yet, the foundation was lain to build her up more effectively than in prior versions. I think combining the strongest aspects of Barbara Minerva and Priscilla Rich's characters/stories helped tremendously.

It also begs the question of who Rucka DID intend to be WW's Lex/Joker. Probably Veronica Cale, which...those are lofty goals after only a couple runs. Though I've re-assessed my opinion on Veronica greatly after Rebirth and now she's like my #3 favorite WW villain, but she's got a long way to go herself before she can reach that status.

Its possible Ive never enjoyed Cheetah as much as I should because on some subconscious level I'm expecting Lex and Joker levels of awesomeness/badness and Cheetah just isn't there. I dont know, Im not sure why I dont enjoy the villain more.

I think if Cheetah's not the arch, then it's gotta be Circe.

[AmiMizuno]

I think a lot has to deal with how Dc comics writes cheetah outside Wonder Woman comics. Cheetah keeps getting defeated easily from heroes like Green arrow

[Koriand'r]

Its possible Ive never enjoyed Cheetah as much as I should because on some subconscious level I'm expecting Lex and Joker levels of awesomeness/badness and Cheetah just isn't there. I dont know, Im not sure why I dont enjoy the villain more.

I think if Cheetah's not the arch, then it's gotta be Circe.

My problem is she's too much "Roowwwr! Grooowll! I hate you, I hate you Rowwwwr! Groooowwlll!" she hasn't really had much of plan since she was obsessed with stealing the lasso. One of the last stories I thought she was formidable in was her debut when she met Wonder Woman in the woods, drew blood and knocked her through a tree. She felt dangerous then and in the New 52 Justice League arc but that's it. All I see is the whimpering cat lady begging Wonder Woman not to cut off her tail and a lackey to other supervillains. I need more.