Page 11 of 11 FirstFirst ... 7891011
Results 151 to 159 of 159
  1. #151
    Extraordinary Member SiegePerilous02's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    8,344

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Z View Post
    Speak for yourself.


    Between the mod era, the outdatedness of Marston's stories, Diana being the JSA's [I]secretary[\I] and a whole list of embarrassing things that any fan would want to forget about, removing Diana's utterly toxic pre crisis history was doing her a favor.

    I'll take Diana being a well written allegedly unimportant nobody over her being in the JL or JSA as nothing more than a token to make those teams look more progressive than they really are.
    it really doesn't have to be an either/or situation though. The iconography and lore of her being there can be preserved without going into the specifics of the stories, which are pretty incidental to it. This would be like removing Sue Storm from the FF since she was pretty embarrassing in the early issues. Instead they just do the sliding timescale, quietly ignore everything but the broad strokes and do better progressive writing for stories set in the past. Removing Diana entirely is a pointless step too far, and it played havoc with Donna's history, which is reason enough to not do it.

    They did this with Batman and Superman, I don't see why it's too much to ask for Wonder Woman. The mentality that she couldn't be a founding member has no logic in it since she'd be getting altered somewhat along with everyone else anyway.

  2. #152
    Boisterously Confused
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    4,678

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SiegePerilous02 View Post
    it really doesn't have to be an either/or situation though. The iconography and lore of her being there can be preserved without going into the specifics of the stories, which are pretty incidental to it. This would be like removing Sue Storm from the FF since she was pretty embarrassing in the early issues. Instead they just do the sliding timescale, quietly ignore everything but the broad strokes and do better progressive writing for stories set in the past. Removing Diana entirely is a pointless step too far, and it played havoc with Donna's history, which is reason enough to not do it.

    They did this with Batman and Superman, I don't see why it's too much to ask for Wonder Woman. The mentality that she couldn't be a founding member has no logic in it since she'd be getting altered somewhat along with everyone else anyway.
    This is what I was thinking. Tweaking WW's history? Sure. Wiping it away? There was no reason, and a ton of good reasons that would have served the character well not to.

  3. #153
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    20,884

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SiegePerilous02 View Post
    it really doesn't have to be an either/or situation though. The iconography and lore of her being there can be preserved without going into the specifics of the stories, which are pretty incidental to it. This would be like removing Sue Storm from the FF since she was pretty embarrassing in the early issues. Instead they just do the sliding timescale, quietly ignore everything but the broad strokes and do better progressive writing for stories set in the past. Removing Diana entirely is a pointless step too far, and it played havoc with Donna's history, which is reason enough to not do it.

    They did this with Batman and Superman, I don't see why it's too much to ask for Wonder Woman. The mentality that she couldn't be a founding member has no logic in it since she'd be getting altered somewhat along with everyone else anyway.
    Diana not being a founder isn't what screwed with Donna's history. It was DC not allowing Perez to set his run in the past. I remember Perez himself even stated that one of the reasons he was okay with Diana not being on the League was to avoid issues of Batman and Superman getting on her case for the occasions she used lethal force. And honestly, the recent writing decisions they've been making with Diana while she's a founder don't make me confident that they would have had more progressive writing while she was sharing space with a mostly male team.

  4. #154
    Extraordinary Member SiegePerilous02's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    8,344

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Z View Post
    Diana not being a founder isn't what screwed with Donna's history. It was DC not allowing Perez to set his run in the past. I remember Perez himself even stated that one of the reasons he was okay with Diana not being on the League was to avoid issues of Batman and Superman getting on her case for the occasions she used lethal force. And honestly, the recent writing decisions they've been making with Diana while she's a founder don't make me confident that they would have had more progressive writing while she was sharing space with a mostly male team.
    DC not allowing him to set his run in the past and losing her founding status are practically one and the same thing, because there would not be any reason whatsoever to not have her as a founder. And I don't buy the reasoning that her using lethal force when needed is enough to not put her near Batman and Superman. Why just those two specifically? They are far from the only to on the classic League with a no-kill code. And Perez didn't explore it that much anyway, he basically had her kill Deimos and Decay and that was it. Maybe it wasn't worth even establishing the trend, as we've seen it lead to some very dicey depictions.

    The recent writing decisions are not being done by the writers during the COIE time, so what does that have to do with it? Her founding status currently also has nothing to do with poor writing decisions by itself, they'd find other ways to screw her up. Rucka established her as the third public modern superhero in his run and he did it respetfully, he didn't need to avoid putting her with Batman and Superman to do it. Swapping out one token female with another (Black Canary) and acting like there is no difference is not progressive at all, but being additive and having more than one woman would have been better. Also, as far as the very first JL stories go, she's treated better than you'd think for the time period, practically one of the guys. She fares better than the early Marvel women. So her being in the JL from the beginning was never really a problem at all, just some forgettable stories afterward that nobody cared about.

  5. #155
    Fantastic Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    265

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BruceWayneJr. View Post
    What Convergence did with Crisis on Infinite Earths is appalling.
    Convergence was awesome!

  6. #156
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    20,884

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SiegePerilous02 View Post
    DC not allowing him to set his run in the past and losing her founding status are practically one and the same thing, because there would not be any reason whatsoever to not have her as a founder. And I don't buy the reasoning that her using lethal force when needed is enough to not put her near Batman and Superman. Why just those two specifically?
    They're the ones most extreme about the rule and often the first to get on someone's case if the rule is ignored.

    True others follow the rule which is probably even more reason to keep her off the League given that is going to come up and frankly I like Diana being different from other superheroes in some ways.



    The recent writing decisions are not being done by the writers during the COIE time, so what does that have to do with it? Her founding status currently also has nothing to do with poor writing decisions by itself, they'd find other ways to screw her up. Rucka established her as the third public modern superhero in his run and he did it respetfully, he didn't need to avoid putting her with Batman and Superman to do it. Swapping out one token female with another (Black Canary) and acting like there is no difference is not progressive at all, but being additive and having more than one woman would have been better. Also, as far as the very first JL stories go, she's treated better than you'd think for the time period, practically one of the guys. She fares better than the early Marvel women. So her being in the JL from the beginning was never really a problem at all, just some forgettable stories afterward that nobody cared about.
    DC just hasn't shown they can maintain any good will with her on the League or any major super team with a mostly male cast for long. Until, they really hammer out the issues they have with her on the team maybe I think it will be for the best to leave her out of it.

  7. #157
    Extraordinary Member SiegePerilous02's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    8,344

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Z View Post
    They're the ones most extreme about the rule and often the first to get on someone's case if the rule is ignored.

    True others follow the rule which is probably even more reason to keep her off the League given that is going to come up and frankly I like Diana being different from other superheroes in some ways.
    Was that true as much for those two at that time? it's been Flanderized since then.
    I feel that she's different enough to stand out that ditching the no-kill rule opened up an unnecessary can of worms. The topic is seldom going to be approached with nuance or maturity. We've seen that most often with her, but it has happened with the others being made strawmen as well.



    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Z View Post
    DC just hasn't shown they can maintain any good will with her on the League or any major super team with a mostly male cast for long. Until, they really hammer out the issues they have with her on the team maybe I think it will be for the best to leave her out of it.
    I'd be ok with her taking a break from the team in the present for the same reasons.
    But retroactively making it so she was never a founder is a needless step. It just makes her history too confusing, and there's a lot of content and merchandise you'd have to overlook just for the sake of some crappy comics that not everyone will even have read. Someone getting into comics can learn Diana was a JL founder and that's all they need to know, they don't need to know about the crappy comics along the way. You're giving too much power to those stories if we have to muck around with Diana's continuity to get rid of them, and that has hurt her in the long run.

  8. #158
    Astonishing Member manwhohaseverything's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    2,126

    Default

    Barry allen being the creator of speed force.cyborg not being a titan

  9. #159
    Mighty Member Tzigone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    1,407

    Default

    oops - wrong thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •