Frank Miller and Raphael Grampa launch TDK: The Golden Child

[Deiasilva10]

In addition to the kid being magical based which leans more to Diana, Grampa posted this to his Instagram story a few months ago, teasing possible combination designs of Superman and Wonder Woman’s logo. So there is some distinction and uniqueness presented.

I see a license to print money from cosplayers and couples merchandise.

A possible soon combined, a union of two different franchises expands the universe of both ... fall down certain walls, we can have villains in partnership more often ... as I said before is a range of possibilities almost infinite. And obviously it would attract fans of both franchises.

[LoveStar]

I'm not sure what this has to do with their son's name.

From your previous post, I bolded what I was referring to which is questioning representation of Diana. Also, I said what it was in my post.
But honestly, not understanding what’s the big deal over a name? It was said multiple times, this was already in development/established, the name isn’t exclusive, and has been used multiple times before.

I see a license to print money from cosplayers and couples merchandise.

A possible soon combined, a union of two different franchises expands the universe of both ... fall down certain walls, we can have villains in partnership more often ... as I said before is a range of possibilities almost infinite. And obviously it would attract fans of both franchises.

No surprise that just might be the goal.

[hellacre]

In addition to the kid being magical based which leans more to Diana, Grampa posted this to his Instagram story a few months ago, teasing possible combination designs of Superman and Wonder Woman’s logo. So there is some distinction and uniqueness presented.

Ah I really want to see the final logo that they settled with!

I see a license to print money from cosplayers and couples merchandise.

I would say you could right.

[Nelliebly]

A possible soon combined, a union of two different franchises expands the universe of both ... fall down certain walls, we can have villains in partnership more often ... as I said before is a range of possibilities almost infinite. And obviously it would attract fans of both franchises.

Or it will repel fans of both franchises who don’t feel, as you do, that the two franchises need to be combined to be successful and, in fact, (much like the Siegel family and the Marston family) find that it guts both franchises when they are.

There are people who would argue (and the Marston family is one of them) that taking the most prominent female superhero —a superhero literally created for the reason of challenging the concept of the male superhero and tying her franchise to any male superhero but, in particular, to the one male superhero that matches her in power level is insulting at best and a downright misogynist abomination at worst. There are those who might argue that the very idea that her franchise is better tied to his misses the point entirely of why she exists. The Siegels and Marstons definitely feel that way. But what do they know, right?

[stargazer01]

I definitely never want to see the Superman and Wonder Woman franchises tied as one. It will definitely hurt one of them (probably WW) in favor of the other.

I'm fine with elseworld stories of them together on ocassion, but that's it. Let them be the boss of their own universe, which is plenty rich to stand separate.

[Deiasilva10]

Or obviously it will also repel fans of both franchises who don’t feel, as you do, that the two franchises need to be combined to be successful and, in fact, (much like the Siegel family and the Marston family) find that it guts both franchises when they are.

There are people who would argue (and the Marston family is one of them) that taking the most prominent female superhero —a superhero literally created for the reason of challenging the concept of the male superhero and tying her franchise to any male superhero but, in particular, to the one male superhero that matches her in power level is insulting at best and a downright misogynist abomination at worst. There are those who might argue that the very idea that her franchise is better tied to his misses the point entirely of why she exists. The Siegels and Marstons definitely feel that way. But what do they know, right?

Some fans may not like it, others will like it, most can love it, this is life, my dear... franchises don't have to match to be successful but the combination is a pleasant surprise and a gift for fans who love them. There is something that people need to accept: SMWW have fans around the world, more or less than other couples here is irrelevant ... As for the families of the creators of the characters, well they should understand, just as most parents must understand, that their creations cease to be their own the moment they become public, the moment they gain fans they belong to the world and evolve with it. If they wanted them unchanging they should keep them in their private little circle. It is like having a child and raising him/her ... at a certain time he/she leaves home and takes over the world and starts to live influenced by it. As for the Marston family ... I don't give a damn about their opinion ... WW has changed a lot since Marston's time and this WW that's here now that interests me. And how is uniting WW with a male character of her power level misogyny? For me it's equality. Or would WW feel insecure with such a powerful, kind, and honest man at her side? As for what the Siegels or Marstons know ... well when I want to know what they know I will buy the biography or ask in person.

[Nelliebly]

I see a license to print money from cosplayers and couples merchandise.

Cosplayers are lovely but WB does not care about how people cosplay nor does it make them revenue.

They also don’t care about “couples merchandise.” Once they sell the license to someone, WB could genuinely care less. It’s not how they make money. Wonder Woman and Superman are often used by companies to show male/female binary. It does not hold the weight you think it does.

What WB and DC care about is the revenue from media franchises. Smallville, for example, remained on the air for 10 seasons, in part, (and this is according to WB big wig at the time Peter Roth) because it sold like gangbusters on DVD and was a literal goldmine for WB. Smallville made so much money that it was, at the time, (and might still be tbh) the 2nd highest selling franchise in WB history —second only to Friends.

Media is where WB/DC make a fortune. Cosplayers are very cute but they care about as much about people cosplaying as Superman or Wonder Woman as they do about people cosplaying as Batman or Poison Ivy (a popular one) or Batgirl. It doesnÂ’t bring them any revenue.

[LoveStar]

Or it will repel fans of both franchises who don’t feel, as you do, that the two franchises need to be combined to be successful and, in fact, (much like the Siegel family and the Marston family) find that it guts both franchises when they are.

There are people who would argue (and the Marston family is one of them) that taking the most prominent female superhero —a superhero literally created for the reason of challenging the concept of the male superhero and tying her franchise to any male superhero but, in particular, to the one male superhero that matches her in power level is insulting at best and a downright misogynist abomination at worst. There are those who might argue that the very idea that her franchise is better tied to his misses the point entirely of why she exists. The Siegels and Marstons definitely feel that way. But what do they know, right?

Wonder Woman was created to be the answer and counterpart to Superman. For men and women to be shown as equals, not in physical power, but the emotional, and intellectual strength.

No one has brought up power level. Their dynamic is far more than that and has been shown more than that many times before. Given the definition of misogyny, this dynamic is not that either. You can dislike it, there are take of the characters that are bad no matter what the status quo is, but the constant buzzword labels are unnecessary.

I definitely never want to see the Superman and Wonder Woman franchises tied as one. It will definitely hurt one of them (probably WW) in favor of the other.

I'm fine with elseworld stories of them together on ocassion, but that's it. Let them be the boss of their own universe, which is plenty rich to stand separate.

Their franchises have technically been tied together for decades with DC consistently marketing them as a couple outside of comics. Just recently they have a joint anthology celebrating their connection be it platonic or romantic. Their logos being combined has been done by fans for years being a united symbol of what Superman and Wonder Woman represent as individuals but also together.

[Lasil]

I couldn't care less about what the children of the creators think but what the vision of the creators should always be respected. Jerry Siegel wrote imaginary stores where Superman would fall in love and even marry but Diana was never one of the women in those stories. Superman's love life should not involve characters that aren't a part of his mythos.

You don't respect the character if you don't respect who created him.

[hellacre]

Some fans may not like it, others will like it, most can love it, this is life, my dear... franchises don't have to match to be successful but the combination is a pleasant surprise and a gift for fans who love them. There is something that people need to accept: SMWW have fans around the world, more or less than other couples here is irrelevant ... As for the families of the creators of the characters, well they should understand, just as most parents must understand, that their creations cease to be their own the moment they become public, the moment they gain fans they belong to the world and evolve with it. If they wanted them unchanging they should keep them in their private little circle. It is like having a child and raising him/her ... at a certain time he/she leaves home and takes over the world and starts to live influenced by it. As for the Marston family ... I don't give a damn about their opinion ... WW has changed a lot since Marston's time and this WW that's here now that interests me. And how is uniting WW with a male character of her power level misogyny? For me it's equality. Or would WW feel insecure with such a powerful, kind, and honest man at her side? As for what the Siegels or Marstons know ... well when I want to know what they know I will buy the biography or ask in person.

The thing is the franchises will always have opportunities to be separate and or amalgamate other DC properties because there is something called multiverse and multimedia. It started from the time they decided to do Justice League and have franchises crossover and AU. And the most ironic thing is how many TV series eg the CW TAKE other properties and their characters, or villains or plotlines etc to boost certain TV series because they know alone they cannot sustain a show that can run for seasons with just one property. And Legacy characters, heck they fall in an area whereby they are the future. They do not stop Superman from being Superman ( unless they take his history) or Wonder Woman from being Wonder Woman. Jonathan of the DK verse is a legacy character who was born decades AFTER his mother and father did their thing and still do their thing.

And canon is stagnant. To stay with one status quo we have to tolerate and read a lot of silliness at times or constant reboots. I have no problems a franchise evolve like this in another verse than constant convoluted retcons just so characters can do the same stuff over and over. I mean are all of fandom ever truly happy? Seems to me many are not with current canon given the complaints I see and the flagging sales and WW has nothing to do with SM nor SM with WW in Rebirth. SM and WW have issues on their own which AU has nothing to do with as far as I see.

Also these properties are destined to eventually go into the public domain where someone will take them and do as they please. Also DC being the owner can do as they please. Like you I am happy to have choice in terms of what I can read and different ideas etc explored. And DC giving us more DK verse and Black Label means they understand this.

[Sacred Knight]

I don't know, you go down that road then it starts to become a slippery slope. I mean, there were lots of things (many good to great things too) that were done to Superman which Siegel and Shuster themselves did not pen and probably didn't intend. Even stuff Siegel wrote late in his career in the 50s, we'll never really know if they were things he would have done naturally because by that time he had lost creative control. I don't subscribe to the idea that doing something the original creator didn't necessarily intend or its impossible to know whether they would ever approve equals not respecting the character. Especially when the character is older than the actual time the original creators owned him for. That's not stumping for or campaigning against any particular thing, its just my general feeling when it comes to character respect. Honestly the only way I think a character is disrespected would be a situation where they're intentionally sabotaged. And as pessimistic as I am when it comes to DC and Superman and what I feel is consistent misuse, I would imagine times where he's been deliberately done dirty without a good intention regardless the quality of the idea, is probably pretty few and far between if not outright nil.

[Nelliebly]

We could get into the controversy over how WB treated the Siegel family but, frankly, it’s pretty depressing and off topic. But you would be hard pressed to argue that Superman and Wonder Woman as franchises have not changed and grown in 80 years. They most definitely have. Believing a franchise can change and evolve with the times and believing that the franchise should literally be combined with another franchise and no longer stand on its own isn’t remotely the same thing but ok.

And of course Wonder Woman wouldn’t feel “insecure” with a powerful and honest man. But, of course, she already has that with Steve Trevor. Her canon love interest. Unless, of course, we are back to defining “power” under such narrow terms as superpowers. There is also the pink elephant in the room that Wonder Woman has queer roots and is almost explicitly canon bisexual. She doesn’t need to be paired with a man at all but, oddly, literally always is. But probably best not to get into the inherent homophobia around that here as that’s a whole other ugly kettle of fish even aside from DC continuing to repeatedly tie Wonder Woman to Superman.

I recommend the book “Superboys” by Brad Ricca. It talks in depth about the reality that Jerry and Joe quite literally did it all “for a girl.” Her name was Joanne Siegel. You may have heard of her: she was the original model for Lois Lane. It’s a great book, very emotional. The history channel actually did a great piece on it and it’s very well done. I hope you get to see it at some point as I would think all Superman fans would appreciate such an intimate look at the history.

Jerry and Joanne’s daughter, Laura Siegel, has been pretty outspoken with her disdain for SM/WW. But, more importantly, she speaks fairly regularly in Cleveland and has been on some pretty amazing panels that talk about both Lois Lane and Wonder Woman. I truly hope you do get to see it at some point. It’s thoughtful and illuminating!

[Deiasilva10]

The thing is the franchises will always have opportunities to be separate and or amalgamate other DC properties because there is something called multiverse and multimedia. It started from the time they decided to do Justice League and have franchises crossover and AU. And the most ironic thing is how many TV series eg the CW TAKE other properties and their characters, or villains or plotlines etc to boost certain TV series because they know alone they cannot sustain a show that can run for seasons with just one property. And Legacy characters, heck they fall in an area whereby they are the future. They do not stop Superman from being Superman ( unless they take his history) or Wonder Woman from being Wonder Woman. Jonathan of the DK verse is a legacy character who was born decades AFTER his mother and father did their thing and still do their thing.

And canon is stagnant. To stay with one status quo we have to tolerate and read a lot of silliness at times or constant reboots. I have no problems a franchise evolve like this in another verse than constant convoluted retcons just so characters can do the same stuff over and over. I mean are all of fandom ever truly happy? Seems to me many are not with current canon given the complaints I see and the flagging sales and WW has nothing to do with SM nor SM with WW in Rebirth. SM and WW have issues on their own which AU has nothing to do with as far as I see.

Also these properties are destined to eventually go into the public domain where someone will take them and do as they please. Also DC being the owner can do as they please. Like you I am happy to have choice in terms of what I can read and different ideas etc explored. And DC giving us more DK verse and Black Label means they understand this.

No, they will never be completely happy, we are human we never agree 100% on anything. I believe DC will explore more of the multiverse in the near future and different aspects and realities of the characters ... it's a natural and necessary evolution.

[hellacre]

I couldn't care less about what the children of the creators think but what the vision of the creators should always be respected. Jerry Siegel wrote imaginary stores where Superman would fall in love and even marry but Diana was never one of the women in those stories. Superman's love life should not involve characters that aren't a part of his mythos.

You don't respect the character if you don't respect who created him.

So are you telling the readers who buy Superman books just like you because DC created and evolved the DCU and eventually had characters and franchises cross over, interact etc they do not respect Superman? I think that is pretty judgmental . Also DC did this. This is not fans forcing them. If you have issues then we should not have any franchises cross over.

There should not be a Justice League. No heroes should romance each other. No one should take DC characters from other properties for their TV series or books.

In short you are asking for DC to shoot themselves in the foot. Something they will never do.

And the books of the DK verse have been out for decades. So you can hate the idea of SMWW but she is with Clark. She is the mother of Jonathan and Lara. So Miller, Azzarello. Lee, Grampa, Kubert, Soule, Waid, Ross, Johns, and all the other DC people who have worked on , or created this verse and other SMWW books you are also saying have no respect for Superman.

[Yoda]

Some fans may not like it, others will like it, most can love it, this is life, my dear... franchises don't have to match to be successful but the combination is a pleasant surprise and a gift for fans who love them. There is something that people need to accept: SMWW have fans around the world, more or less than other couples here is irrelevant ... As for the families of the creators of the characters, well they should understand, just as most parents must understand, that their creations cease to be their own the moment they become public, the moment they gain fans they belong to the world and evolve with it. If they wanted them unchanging they should keep them in their private little circle. It is like having a child and raising him/her ... at a certain time he/she leaves home and takes over the world and starts to live influenced by it. As for the Marston family ... I don't give a damn about their opinion ... WW has changed a lot since Marston's time and this WW that's here now that interests me. And how is uniting WW with a male character of her power level misogyny? For me it's equality. Or would WW feel insecure with such a powerful, kind, and honest man at her side? As for what the Siegels or Marstons know ... well when I want to know what they know I will buy the biography or ask in person.

If it has fans around the world, they don't buy comics. Because it seems like most comic reader don't care about it (or any ship) at all actually. As sales of all the books, including SMWW show, the relationship isn't any different than any other gimmick. Their book was selling in the low 40's after a year and needed crossovers to boost it. Bendis is selling better. It was then ignored by the greater DCU since almost it's inception. This idea that it's some central concept to publishing success is a pipe dream. It was a gimmick that even the creators got bored with. It's not some formula for success.

And can someone explain how purported fans of such "equality" support Frank Miller as a "genius?" Just curios how that tracks.