Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 83
  1. #61
    Extraordinary Member SiegePerilous02's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    9,994

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kjn View Post
    But in a way, the personal connection here is arguably a minus for Cheetah as Diana's arch-enemy, because there is no real ideological opposition between Cheetah and Diana: their conflict is entirely based on their personal history.
    I feel like the classical theme that Priscilla represented, women preying and tearing down other women to prop themselves up to contrast the themes of sisterhood of the Amazons, is still present here and could be expanded upon.

    But really, I don't know if an ideological opposition is a requirement for arch nemesis status. I don't know that Lex, the Joker or the Green Goblin have consistent ideological oppositions to their respective arch enemies, most of it is the personal history that seals the deal. or they function as black mirrors like Barbara does for Diana. Arguably the Joker was a much better character before they started applying the "agent of chaos" ideology onto him.

    Quote Originally Posted by Frontier View Post
    Honestly, I think this was my problem with Rucka's take. I think we needed to see Barbara actually make the choice to become Cheetah and embrace that power before we jump to her already as Cheetah like we did. I think he needed to commit to her as a villain more then he did.
    I think there is enough context clues to let us know her own recklessness/ambitions lead her down her path and Godwatch just sped it along, but some of it may be down to Rucka leaving the book when he had more he wanted to do.

    I think the atmosphere of Diana finding the transformed Barbara for the first time in the Godwatch arc is perfect, but I wouldn't be opposed to an Rucka/Scott Cheetah: Year One miniseries that re-tells that scene from her perspective

  2. #62
    Fantastic Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    349

    Default

    Like ares and Circe are also contenders for arch-enemy too

  3. #63
    The Comixeur Mel Dyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,413

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Frontier View Post
    ...Honestly, I think this was my problem with Rucka's take. I think we needed to see Barbara actually make the choice to become Cheetah and embrace that power before we jump to her already as Cheetah like we did. I think he needed to commit to her as a villain more then he did.
    I'm not talking about Cheetah, as we might re-imagine her, but, the complex Cheetah that Rucka gave us. She was equally tragic and deliberate. She was not a victim to mourned or pitied.

    How does Cheetah, as she is presently portrayed in the WW comic, define Wonder Woman, in the way that Superman and Batman are defined by their archenemies? What special thing about her enmity with Diana ..makes her the arch?
    Look alive, Kangaliers!

  4. #64
    Astonishing Member Tzigone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    2,427

    Default

    in the way that Superman and Batman are defined by their archenemies?
    I don't really think they are defined by their archenemies. Though theirs are, of course, much more famous.

    What special thing about her enmity with Diana ..makes her the arch?
    I think that, realistically, what makes one arch is being the most popular or the most known. They don't have to be the most personal or the most dangerous. Though being personal tends to lead to more famous stories.

    Joker has no definitive backstory and no world-conquering ambitions yet he's the most iconic supervillain in comics. I don't think these things matter as much for a comic book villain as having an engaging personality, memorable look and compelling dynamic with their nemesis. And of course having good stories and a strong presence in outside media helps a lot.
    I agree with this. And also think time helps. It's difficult to take Johnny-come-lately seriously as an old hero's archenemy when you know they might be gone soon. And how long did it take (I have no idea) before Lex or Joker became the enemy. And plenty of heroes work well without having one - at least, I never thought Spider-Man had one particular archenemy. Not like Superman or the Fantastic Four - when I heard about reboot (or first movie for the FF), I immediately thought of one specific villain for each (not that I'd mind getting away from Lex and Zod at this point), but for Spidey I had a list of several options. I'm perfectly okay Diana not having an archvillain if she could have that strong and deep a bench.
    Last edited by Tzigone; 06-26-2020 at 06:17 PM.

  5. #65
    Astonishing Member kjn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    4,438

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SiegePerilous02 View Post
    I feel like the classical theme that Priscilla represented, women preying and tearing down other women to prop themselves up to contrast the themes of sisterhood of the Amazons, is still present here and could be expanded upon.
    If there are, I think Veronica Cale is a much better option to explore those themes. Sure, you can add them onto current-day Cheetah, but it'd have to be largely as retcons.

    Quote Originally Posted by SiegePerilous02 View Post
    But really, I don't know if an ideological opposition is a requirement for arch nemesis status. I don't know that Lex, the Joker or the Green Goblin have consistent ideological oppositions to their respective arch enemies, most of it is the personal history that seals the deal. or they function as black mirrors like Barbara does for Diana. Arguably the Joker was a much better character before they started applying the "agent of chaos" ideology onto him.
    You're correct in that ideological opposition isn't a requirement, but it helps a lot, and Wonder Woman is a different character than Batman or Spiderman. Since she is here to change society along feminist lines, she ought to have an archnemesis that plays up that element. Veronica Cale (and Golden Age Paula von Gunther) fit into that slot nicely on one end; Doctor Psycho does so on another.
    «Speaking generally, it is because of the desire of the tragic poets for the marvellous that so varied and inconsistent an account of Medea has been given out» (Diodorus Siculus, The Library of History [4.56.1])

  6. #66
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    23,361

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SiegePerilous02 View Post
    Yeah but there really isn't a reason for them to regard each other as arch enemies beyond that. Other writers never developed anything beyond that, they just had them fight because it was pretty much expected they do. No personal feud ever existed.
    Sometimes that's all is needed. The Joker was considered Batman's arch enemy even before he killed Jason Todd or crippled Barbara Gordon for example. Lex Luthor's reasons for hating Superman basically boil down to hating him for foiling his plans.

  7. #67
    Extraordinary Member Dr. Poison's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Green Bay, WI
    Posts
    5,506

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Z View Post
    Sometimes that's all is needed. The Joker was considered Batman's arch enemy even before he killed Jason Todd or crippled Barbara Gordon for example. Lex Luthor's reasons for hating Superman basically boil down to hating him for foiling his plans.

    One of the early reasons Luthor hated Superman was because Superman as Superboy sort of made Luthor lose his hair.
    Currently Reading:Death Metal, Hawkman, Justice League, Justice League Dark, Legion of Super Heroes, Shazam, Wonder Woman, & Young Justice.

  8. #68
    The Comixeur Mel Dyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,413

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tzigone View Post
    I don't really think they are defined by their archenemies. Though theirs are, of course, much more famous.

    I think that, realistically, what makes one arch is being the most popular or the most known. They don't have to be the most personal or the most dangerous. Though being personal tends to lead to more famous stories...
    I think you're dead-on, with that.

    Fans and writers really choose the arch, ..unless you're a Marvel Comic, in the Sixties or 70s, and you've got the excelsiorific Stan Lee for editor. Tio Stan charted the destiny of a comic or a superhero, like no other comic book editor, before or sense. He read fan letters, followed trends in popular media and, based on what looked most solid to him, picked sidekicks, archenemies, iconic cities, etc...so forth. If only the WW comic had an editor, like Stan El Hombre, we wouldn't even be having this conversation.

    Stan and editors, like him, developed the classic superhero enmities we know, today - Iron Man and the Mandarin, Spider-Man and Green Goblin, Doctor Strange and Dormammu, Fantastic Four and Doctor Doom and so many others. It took years. It took good stories, good writers, good artists (pecillers, colorists, etc) and better editors! Would Stan Lee have matched Wonder Woman, with the Cheetah, Clea or Cyber?

    Who knows?

    The problem with establishing Wonder Woman with an archenemy, supporting cast, iconic city and the rest is trying to make something, written yesterday, look like it's been in place, since the Fifties. All of that takes so long to become classic and consensus, it's almost impossible to do that, in one story arc, ..especially, if the editors don't mandate their use in stories.

    So, what does any of that have to do, with Cheetah?

    I think, to answer the OP's question, Cheetah is Wonder Woman's consensus archenemy, primarily ..because of sentimental fan recognition following her use in the famous Super Friends TV cartoon. Before Geoerge Perez rebooted the character in the mid-80s, there were great stories pitting her against Nubia, Queen Atomia, Queen Bee, Doctor Cyber, Silver Swan and Osira. It didn't matter to my generation, because Saturday morning TV told us Cheetah was Wonder Woman's go-to super-villain, and the rest were just keeping her bench warm. Had Lynda Carter's TV show developed a regular foil for her, like Gloria Marquez, Doctor Solano or Cassandra Loren, that might have derailed our Cheetah-curiosity. Since that didn't happen...

    It seems, we are stuck with Cheetah, as Wonder Woman's archenemy. Maybe, forever.
    Last edited by Mel Dyer; 06-27-2020 at 05:15 AM.
    Look alive, Kangaliers!

  9. #69
    Extraordinary Member AmiMizuno's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    7,180

    Default

    In many cases, she has three archenemies. Cheetah is more of her personal. The only thing I would change is the god who gave Cheetah her powers

  10. #70
    Extraordinary Member SiegePerilous02's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    9,994

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Z View Post
    Sometimes that's all is needed. The Joker was considered Batman's arch enemy even before he killed Jason Todd or crippled Barbara Gordon for example. Lex Luthor's reasons for hating Superman basically boil down to hating him for foiling his plans.
    Yes but they encountered each other so much and built up so much shared history that it would make sense for an organic dynamic to come into play. Though also pre-COIE Clark and Lex knew each other as kids and that's where the feud started.
    I think Perez's beginning could have lead to something similar, but there wasn't much follow up. He himself sort of lost interest in her after Diana defeated her in Bana-Mighdall, and subsequent writers didn't do much to add depth to the feud. Plus just looking at the post-COIE canon, their number of encounters with each other is still pitifully small compared to the stories Lex and Joker had even just Pre-COIE, let alone afterward.

    I just think the parallels Perez established between Diana and Barbara to make Barbara her dark mirror are still present with Rebirth, but adding in aspects of Priscilla Rich has made for a stronger character with clearer motivations so it all comes together much more effectively.

  11. #71
    Amazing Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2020
    Posts
    82

    Default

    I'm not an expert in ww and his universe, but I think ww already has 2 great villains, but misused. Ares, has to be the definitive villain, the villain that when he appears, creates an entire event around him, when not only the world appears, but also the ww herself must be afraid, prepare for her last combat. Circe is the great villain who threatens the world once or twice a year, something Breiniac-style. the villain he lacks is his luthor (although it is not noticeable, I'm a fan of superman), a villain who challenges her as a person, her idea of ​​the world, a villain that makes you think that maybe she is right, the power or the connection Amazon, magic, supernatural is totally secondary.

  12. #72
    Extraordinary Member SiegePerilous02's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    9,994

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kjn View Post
    If there are, I think Veronica Cale is a much better option to explore those themes. Sure, you can add them onto current-day Cheetah, but it'd have to be largely as retcons.



    You're correct in that ideological opposition isn't a requirement, but it helps a lot, and Wonder Woman is a different character than Batman or Spiderman. Since she is here to change society along feminist lines, she ought to have an archnemesis that plays up that element. Veronica Cale (and Golden Age Paula von Gunther) fit into that slot nicely on one end; Doctor Psycho does so on another.
    I think the issue is that Veronica Cale is too similar to Lex Luthor, thus making Diana come off more as a She-Superman than she should. This is less of an issue in Rebirth version where aspects of Paula are folded into her (much like aspects of Priscilla are folded into Barbara Ann), and I think she can be an essential villain, I like her as the #2 behind Cheetah and the two having their own feud. But evil businesswoman is just too dull visually to stand in opposition to the colorful and larger than life hero for the arch enemy spot. It's why I'm not too fond of evil businessman Lex and prefer earlier versions.

    Psycho and the evil he represents is essential, he should be among the top 5 of her villains. But the biggest female superhero ever having an arch nemesis who is an evil man who hates women is...kind of too on the nose. Plus, while an argument could be made that her arch nemesis shouldn't be a woman because she's here to fight the evils of the patriarchy, an argument can also be made that her franchise exists to subvert the standard roles that are filled by men. In an IP where most of the key classically male roles are filled by women (the parent of focus, mentors, benefactors, allies, sidekicks, rogues gallery), the important Arch Nemesis spot should be as well. That's why I've never liked the idea of Psycho or Ares or any male villain being her #1 foe, even though they should still be major figures among the rogues gallery. The spot should go to Cheetah, Cale or Circe over them.

  13. #73
    Astonishing Member Mutant God's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    2,730

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kjn View Post
    I think Diana's relationship towards Cheetah as a motivation is very different than Peter Parker's or Bruce Wayne's motivations, and I certainly wouldn't describe it as haunted. In the examples of Spiderman and Batman, they are both directly motivated by a tragedy in the past.

    Diana, on the other hand, is motivated by helping people—that's why she is a hero. Her emotional stance towards Cheetah is a lot more complex. It's both the desire to help a friend, and the knowledge that you failed to help her or him when they needed you. The tragedy here is not driving Diana's heroism, but it might help in driving Diana to over-achieve in being there for her friends.

    But in a way, the personal connection here is arguably a minus for Cheetah as Diana's arch-enemy, because there is no real ideological opposition between Cheetah and Diana: their conflict is entirely based on their personal history.
    I thought it was Man vs Animal or Restraint vs Wildness?
    Skeeter: Hey time traveling O5 members of the X-Men We don't take kindly to people who create a time paradox around here!

    Bartender: Now calm down Skeeter they aint hurtin nobody.

    Skeeter: No! I wanna know som'in from the "O5" How come you cant go back to your own timeline in the first place and how come when Reed Richards "fixed" the universe you wasnt put back and how come the changes that happn to you dont happn to your present day selves?

    Bartender: Skeeter I dont want trouble

  14. #74
    Fantastic Member Psy-lock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Location
    Moscow
    Posts
    383

    Default

    I think the problem with Cheetah as an arch is not her motivations, it's the lack of defining villainous stories (or just good stories). She's been around for almost as long as Diana but what are her biggest accomplishments? Creating Genocide and killing Aphrodite (the latter could've been major if Aphrodite still had her Golden Age status). That's a rather weak resume compared to Joker or even Black Manta. She needs to do something big to truly cement her status as an arch-enemy. The episode in Super Friends where she travels into the past and takes Diana's place as Wonder Woman and turning Diana back into clay in Justice are the coolest things she ever did as a villain.

  15. #75
    Spectacular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    202

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mutant God View Post
    I thought it was Man vs Animal or Restraint vs Wildness?
    I'm not trying to be mean but these are rather weak ideological oppositions, and I find it a stretch to even call them ideological.

    I think Rucka has found the sweet spot for Cheetah with their new personal history, and the idea that Cheetah is the one person Diana can never truly save.

Posting Permissions

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