Snyder cut MIGHT be released...

[Agent Z]

This isn't a good example when you pay attention to the context. This is an alternate reality parody that highlights wrong trends. Superman is deliberately written OOC here as well, and it makes fun of the increasingly ridiculous stakes going on in Gotham to break Batman, and has a throwaway line of dialogue with Aunt Agatha filling in for Batman. The comic itself reinforces how OOC this is for Wonder Woman.

Except that the trend Morrison himself was criticizing wasn't applicable to either the comics or the movies at the time and had pretty much died away. As I said, this take on Diana is largely only an issue in elseworlds or writers who have a bone to pick with her not matching up to some weird pacifist take on the character that never existed. Remember that Morrison was complaining about Diana in BvS just for having a sword before the film ever came out.

Do you have any examples from JLA or Earth One? I can't recall any from either of those. Even in the bad future of Rock of Ages, I don't think she does anything too outrageous or even uses a sword.

From JLA we have how Johns wrote her and in his original JL run Morrison didn't exactly expand much on her other than the warrior thing.

They are flaming hypocrites because Rucka wrote them to be that way to make a point. Another writer could have written Superman as having an issue with both deaths. There was precedent for both of them.

It's been consistent with how DC heroes treat the killing of non-humans. Morrison himself had Superman say his rule doesn't apply to sentient machines.

Like you said, Rucka didn't write this in a vacuum.

[SiegePerilous02]

Except that the trend Morrison himself was criticizing wasn't applicable to either the comics or the movies at the time and had pretty much died away. As I said, this take on Diana is largely only an issue in elseworlds or writers who have a bone to pick with her not matching up to some weird pacifist take on the character that never existed. Remember that Morrison was complaining about Diana in BvS just for having a sword before the film ever came out.

It hasn't really died away, or at least it's still fairly recent in people's mind. Plus we have the recent Injustice games, which reach a wider audience and may be the worst of the lot.

Is Morrison (or anyone) just not allowed to express uneasy feelings about the movie direction? Considering the dour tone of the films at the time, the then recent comics (like Johns' run in the New 52), and someone on the production staff suggesting the red on her costume reflected "the blood of all her victims," expressing trepidation doesn't seem unreasonable (https://heroichollywood.com/justice-...-wonder-woman/). It's an outside-context issue and the BvS scenario made it reasonable for her to use a sword against Doomsday, but it also didn't give us much indication of what she is like out of that scenario. What are his thoughts (if any) on her solo films, which are the true test?

From JLA we have how Johns wrote her and in his original JL run Morrison didn't exactly expand much on her other than the warrior thing.

But that's Johns, not Morrison.
Morrison didn't delve into her character very much (plus she was absent for half the run), but she wasn't any more of a blood thirsty warrior than anyone else really. And he rarely, if ever, put a sword in her hand there, so at least he's consistent with that.

It's been consistent with how DC heroes treat the killing of non-humans. Morrison himself had Superman say his rule doesn't apply to sentient machines.

Like you said, Rucka didn't write this in a vacuum.

I'm sure in Superman's 80 year history, you can find evidence to support him not taking any life (even non-humans) and others where he values humans over others. You can probably find the same for Wonder Woman if we look before Perez.

Hell, Superman judged himself harshly after killing Mxy, who is non-human. So much so that Moore treated it as the first and last time he ever did it.

[Pinsir]

But again that is kinda on Snyder. He needed to plan that stuff out far better. Don’t make a 3 1/2 hour cut of a movie and not expect the studio to ask you to trim it down. The guy does some great visuals but he really needs help with story flow.

I agree totally. Snyder and co. should absolutely be criticized for being self-indulgent and creating a work that was too long for theatres. WB is also at fault for not curtailing Snyder's ambitions earlier. The fact that after this experience Snyder seems to have doubled down when working on JL too shows a problem.

It's nice to see Snyder get his vision completed, but he should have worked better within the limits of the medium instead of producing films that were unscreenable.

[WebLurker]

That's called being cautious. And as wary as she was about Superman, she was far less trusting of Lex.

Fair enough.

Let's just say that I don't find Snyder's version of Superman very enjoyable, but I'm not a Superman fan in the first place, so I'm probably not the person to ask about it.

[Pinsir]

Hey, I just realized the Snyder cut might just give us a great scene of Wonder Woman beheading Steppenwolf!

tumblr_d4865747a14747356bdd8485b75a06aa_5ec47157_500.jpg

[Agent Z]

It hasn't really died away, or at least it's still fairly recent in people's mind.

And sooner or later, people would have pretty much forgotten about it. Again, if Morrison doesn’t like that take on Diana (and just to be clear, I’m not saying he’s wrong for that) he can just ignore it and write Diana in a way that doesn’t match that depiction. The comics were moving on from it, the films never depicted her that way (and to keep this a bit more on topic, no, killing Steppenwolf, a guy who had invaded Earth with the goal of subjugation and had already killed some of the Amazons is not grimdark anymore than the Avengers doing the same to the Chitauri or Thanos).

Plus we have the recent Injustice games, which reach a wider audience and may be the worst of the lot.

True but from what I’ve seen people don’t care much for Injustice’s Wonder Woman outside of her gameplay so at worst we have one take on the character that people don’t care for and would rather not be the norm for Diana. And it isn’t.

Is Morrison (or anyone) just not allowed to express uneasy feelings about the movie direction? Considering the dour tone of the films at the time, the then recent comics (like Johns' run in the New 52), and someone on the production staff suggesting the red on her costume reflected "the blood of all her victims," expressing trepidation doesn't seem unreasonable (https://heroichollywood.com/justice-...-wonder-woman/). It's an outside-context issue and the BvS scenario made it reasonable for her to use a sword against Doomsday, but it also didn't give us much indication of what she is like out of that scenario. What are his thoughts (if any) on her solo films, which are the true test?

Again, this comic was about two years too late to start criticizing something that for the most part did not apply to Diana. BvS hadn’t been released when Morrison made that complaint and whatever else can be said about the film, people ended up liking Diana. And yes, we did see what she was like outside of battle through her interactions with Bruce. In fact, if we go by what Snyder was implying in BvS, she actually didn’t like fighting at all (ironically, she comes across as more battle-hungry in her solo film and no I am not saying the WW film was bad. Far from it). As for that quote by a costume designer (which I think was made after Snyder was no longer involved with the JL movie), it is completely irrelevant to how Diana actually acts in the film and is just something that people pounced on just so they could have something else to whine about when it comes to the DCEU.
All in all, Morrison’s writing in that image is basically him going after a problem that was, if not no longer in existence, was becoming less and less of an issue. Stories like that are basically an entitled fan rant in comic form and as we’ve seen time and time again, don’t actually solve the problem they’re criticizing anyway.

I'm sure in Superman's 80 year history, you can find evidence to support him not taking any life (even non-humans) and others where he values humans over others. You can probably find the same for Wonder Woman if we look before Perez.

Hell, Superman judged himself harshly after killing Mxy, who is non-human. So much so that Moore treated it as the first and last time he ever did it.

The funny thing is that the Mxy and Zod killings (the former of which was an elseworld) are the only times Superman has expressed regret over killing non-humans. And the non-humans in particular both look human despite not being human (though Mxy can alter his appearance).

[SiegePerilous02]

And sooner or later, people would have pretty much forgotten about it. Again, if Morrison doesn’t like that take on Diana (and just to be clear, I’m not saying he’s wrong for that) he can just ignore it and write Diana in a way that doesn’t match that depiction. The comics were moving on from it, the films never depicted her that way (and to keep this a bit more on topic, no, killing Steppenwolf, a guy who had invaded Earth with the goal of subjugation and had already killed some of the Amazons is not grimdark anymore than the Avengers doing the same to the Chitauri or Thanos).

It's also just a throwaway scene that anyone who was reading the series and knows the premise and has basic reading comprehension would know was a satire and played for dark laughs. It may have come a bit late, but it also wasn't going to open the floodgates and bring back the depiction either.

Killing Steppenwolf would have been fine in that context. But having a back to back trilogy in which every film ends with the heroes killing a villain is a bit much.

Again, this comic was about two years too late to start criticizing something that for the most part did not apply to Diana. BvS hadn’t been released when Morrison made that complaint and whatever else can be said about the film, people ended up liking Diana. And yes, we did see what she was like outside of battle through her interactions with Bruce. In fact, if we go by what Snyder was implying in BvS, she actually didn’t like fighting at all (ironically, she comes across as more battle-hungry in her solo film and no I am not saying the WW film was bad. Far from it). As for that quote by a costume designer (which I think was made after Snyder was no longer involved with the JL movie), it is completely irrelevant to how Diana actually acts in the film and is just something that people pounced on just so they could have something else to whine about when it comes to the DCEU.
All in all, Morrison’s writing in that image is basically him going after a problem that was, if not no longer in existence, was becoming less and less of an issue. Stories like that are basically an entitled fan rant in comic form and as we’ve seen time and time again, don’t actually solve the problem they’re criticizing anyway.

There was barely any characterization for Diana outside the fight scenes beyond being a flirty femme fatale so the audience expectations could be subverted when she shows up as Wonder Woman. Again, the the context of that particular battle, it makes sense to come with a shield and a sword, but as the big screen debut for a heroine known for her diplomacy and compassion, plus the movie surrounding her, that sets off a few alarm bells. Morrison can express concern pre-release. Not even "Oh my god the sky is falling" hyperbole, just concern. You say he isn't wrong for expressing it, but you also dismiss a lot of other stuff as entitled fandom whining, even reasonable criticisms. Considering that article about the red in her costume came out after her debut film, which featured Batman mowing people down and planning pre-meditated murder while Alfred just enables it and drinks, I can see why the author would express concern. And they then went on to say they were looking forward to her solo film and Aquaman, so this wasn't a DCEU as a whole bashing.

Since he was brought up and we're discussing authors who can approach Diana's kill rule maturely, Rucka expressed concern before MoS was released. And this was before he was spoiled about the neck snap, so once can imagine how he feels post-release. He might have had similar feelings towards Diana as Morrison pre-release of BvS:
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/he...-pg-man-448386

The funny thing is that the Mxy and Zod killings (the former of which was an elseworld) are the only times Superman has expressed regret over killing non-humans. And the non-humans in particular both look human despite not being human (though Mxy can alter his appearance).

It being an elseworld doesn't make it any less valid, especially as these are all imaginary anyway, and the subsequent story arc with his reaction to Max Lord happened in a new continuity that replaced the previous one and wasn't the first version of Superman. Looking at his entire 80 year history, I'm not confident that there are examples of him upholding all life in his "no kill rule," but I'm not sure you're as completely well versed overall either.

Funnily enough, Mxy did not look human when he was actually killed and Superman reacted with guilt.

[Agent Z]

Killing Steppenwolf would have been fine in that context. But having a back to back trilogy in which every film ends with the heroes killing a villain is a bit much.

Eh, it isn't an issue for the MCU heroes and those guys have way larger body counts than the DCEU heroes. With Diana it isn't as if she has a no killing rule anyway.

There was barely any characterization for Diana outside the fight scenes beyond being a flirty femme fatale so the audience expectations could be subverted when she shows up as Wonder Woman. Again, the the context of that particular battle, it makes sense to come with a shield and a sword, but as the big screen debut for a heroine known for her diplomacy and compassion, plus the movie surrounding her, that sets off a few alarm bells.

Femme fatale?

Again, the the context of that particular battle, it makes sense to come with a shield and a sword, but as the big screen debut for a heroine known for her diplomacy and compassion, plus the movie surrounding her, that sets off a few alarm bells.

At the time BvS was coming out, the most well known version of Wonder Woman was from the Justice League cartoon where she was frequently depicted as ill-tempered and violent (and for the most part did not use a sword). I think you are overestimating how much people knew her for her diplomacy and compassion.

Morrison can express concern pre-release. Not even "Oh my god the sky is falling" hyperbole, just concern.

"[The warrior woman thing is] not what [Wonder Woman creator] William Marston wanted, that’s not what he wanted at all! His original concept for Wonder Woman was an answer to comics that he thought were filled with images of blood-curdling masculinity, and you see the latest shots of Gal Gadot in the costume, and it’s all sword and shield and her snarling at the camera. ".

And I wasn't the only one who thought Morrison was jumping the gun either as seen by this excerpt from Screen Rant:

"Unless Morrison has seen more of the finished film, it sounds like he's rushing to judgment a bit with this quote. Yes, a majority of Gadot's screen time in the Comic-Con trailer is dedicated to showing Wonder Woman in action, but we have no idea what her character will actually be like in the finished product."

https://screenrant.com/grant-morriso...r-woman-movie/

Nothing that Morrison described in that quote matched what we saw of Diana in the film. Hell, it didn't even match what we saw of her in the marketing.

It being an elseworld doesn't make it any less valid, especially as these are all imaginary anyway, and the subsequent story arc with his reaction to Max Lord happened in a new continuity that replaced the previous one and wasn't the first version of Superman. Looking at his entire 80 year history, I'm not confident that there are examples of him upholding all life in his "no kill rule," but I'm not sure you're as completely well versed overall either.

Funnily enough, Mxy did not look human when he was actually killed and Superman reacted with guilt.

Well, I've seen plenty of examples in main continuities of him disregarding this rule when it comes to non-humans and have Morrison himself writing Clark as claiming this to be the case. I may not have read every single Superman comic in existence but I have read the ones relevant to this particular conversation.

[SiegePerilous02]

Why? It isn't an issue for the MCU heroes and those guys have way larger body counts than the DCEU heroes.

This is about adapting DC characters to screen.
I don't care what the MCU heroes are doing. What do they have to do with this?

... How did you watch that movie and get "femme fatale" from Diana's depiction?

Did you miss the entire "mysterious Bond-girl type who is playing the same game as Bruce" thing? Gadot even originally thought she was reading for Selina or someone like her

At the time BvS was coming out, the most well known version of Wonder Woman was from the Justice League cartoon where she was frequently depicted as ill-tempered and violent (and for the most part did not use a sword). I think you are greatly overestimating how much people knew her for her diplomacy and compassion.

Which is why Wonder Woman fans were nervous, because it's not as if DC doesn't have a long history of mistreating her and the Amazons, right? And now they might have reinforced it to a much bigger audience.

You've commented on this stuff yourself.

Let's look at this reasonable criticism shall we?

"[The warrior woman thing is] not what [Wonder Woman creator] William Marston wanted, that’s not what he wanted at all! His original concept for Wonder Woman was an answer to comics that he thought were filled with images of blood-curdling masculinity, and you see the latest shots of Gal Gadot in the costume, and it’s all sword and shield and her snarling at the camera. ".

And I wasn't the only one who thought Morrison was jumping the gun either as seen by this excerpt from Screen Rant:

"Unless Morrison has seen more of the finished film, it sounds like he's rushing to judgment a bit with this quote. Yes, a majority of Gadot's screen time in the Comic-Con trailer is dedicated to showing Wonder Woman in action, but we have no idea what her character will actually be like in the finished product."

The trailer literally has her leaping into battle with a sword and shield and looking pissed when she is knocked back. In a very bleak setting. It's not as if they trailers gave us much of anything else to go when she was in Wonder Woman mode.

This being from the same director of the already controversial MoS who was diving right into TDKR-like imagery for Superman and Batman's cinematic team up

Just so we're clear, do you have any examples in main continuity of him applying this rule to non-humans who don't look human?

Which "main continuity" are we talking here? There have been like 4-5 of those at this point. The Rucka story came from like the third incarnation. it's not as if main continuity means an imaginary story is somehow more valuable than another imaginary story. Do you only value the post-COIE continuity?

Moore's story may be an elseworld, but it's built on the continuity of pre-COIE Earth-1 Superman and references then recent events. I've already admitted that I don't have knowledge of every single Superman story in existence because he's been around since 1938. Some of the older stories even have him being callous with human life. I'm sure there are stories in the pre-COIE period where both stances are represented and nobody comments on the contradictions. And at one point, Diana being willing to use lethal force would have been unthinkable before a certain point as well. These character going through different incarnations, even in the same canon, is not a new thing.

That's fine for the relevant discussion, but I've already said that writers shape the way the stories go based on their interpretations and so these characters are already all over the place. Rucka could have written it so that Clark accepted Diana's action and there probably would have been as much precedent for it. And would have helped both characters in the long run in that godawful story Wonder Woman cannot seemingly ever escape.

[Agent Z]

Okay, I think we've gone off topic for far too long and we clearly aren't going to budge on this. I'll just say that I disagree with complaints about Diana using lethal force unless those instances are very much not justified by the narrative and that I find Morrison's meta commentary is inaccurate, obnoxious and pointless in that story.

[adamTPTK]

The fact that there's no consent in what is the right way to depict these characters pretty much confirms that the right interpretation is simply in the eye of the beholder and there isn't some universal standard detractors keep insisting there is when try to devalue certain interpretations to give their opinions additional scores in these discussions.

Did casuals care for that Superman? Totally not on the same level as they did about Iron Man (for example) who's became an instant icon, that's for sure. But who said he wouldn't grow on them? The First Avenger was a disaster by current BO standards but look how in time CA brand was able to build itself. If the same Cap would've had the same amount of obsessed detractors back then and the execs would've listened to them, it's a completely different cinematic landscape we would be part of right now.

Like I said in another thread "focus on your fans, not on your haters" that's how things can only work for these verses. And the test of time has shown there are plenty of people who care about Snyderverse. They pushed back against the collective bullying of the media, bloggers and obsessed haters, and I find that pretty remarkable.

[manwhohaseverything]

Like I said in another thread "focus on your fans, not on your haters" that's how things can only work for these verses. And the test of time has shown there are plenty of people who care about Snyderverse. They pushed back against the collective bullying of the media, bloggers and obsessed haters, and I find that pretty remarkable.

Superman hates bullies, ironically.

[adamTPTK]

Superman hates bullies, ironically.

I would also guess he wouldn't be pleased with the people that borderline celebrate real life suicides so that their fix may get "purer", which sounds to me pretty twisted and cynical, which is also something Snyder gets well in his fiction. I guess these people don't like to see their own reflections in there so they overreact as the do....

[SiegePerilous02]

I would also guess he wouldn't be pleased with the people that borderline celebrate real life suicides so that their fix may get "purer", which sounds to me pretty twisted and cynical, which is also something Snyder gets well in his fiction. I guess these people don't like to see their own reflections in there so they overreact as the do....

He wouldn't be, but let's not pretend that they represent all of the detractors just as the Snyder cut supporters who spammed every DC-related media announcement are representative of everyone on that side either.

[adamTPTK]

He wouldn't be, but let's not pretend that they represent all of the detractors just as the Snyder cut supporters who spammed every DC-related media announcement are representative of everyone on that side either.

Tell me what's worse.