Wonder Woman - General Discussion

[king81992]

Okay so who is playing him, Pierce Brosnon, Timothy Dalton, Daniel Craig?

Pierce Bronson

[PopQuezy]

I just finished reading Rucka's second run again, "The Lies," "The Truth," "Godwatch," and "Year One." Reading this made me miss the seriousness and stakes and weight of Rucka's second run.

While I like Cloonrad's run, I do think there's silliness and lightheartedness to it that never makes anything feel particularly grave. I'm not trying to be critical of the run because we have definitely had worse, but sometimes I think I'm just happy by the amount fan service Cloonrad provides. Villainy Inc. returning, Diana's foes, Holliday Girls, Diana Prince, Nubia, An Amazons event, and probably what I think has been the best part of Cloonrady's run, the introduction of Seigfried. They do a lot well, but ultimately, I don't feel the urge and excitement to read the next issue like I did with Rucka. I think that's awful since Rucka's run was twice a month as opposed to the monthly format of Cloonrad.

Anyway, I hope we are going to get an amazing 800 from them, but I wouldn't be heartbroken if they either changed their tone moving forward or if we tried a new writing team.

[bardkeep]

I just finished reading Rucka's second run again, "The Lies," "The Truth," "Godwatch," and "Year One." Reading this made me miss the seriousness and stakes and weight of Rucka's second run.

While I like Cloonrad's run, I do think there's silliness and lightheartedness to it that never makes anything feel particularly grave. I'm not trying to be critical of the run because we have definitely had worse, but sometimes I think I'm just happy by the amount fan service Cloonrad provides. Villainy Inc. returning, Diana's foes, Holliday Girls, Diana Prince, Nubia, An Amazons event, and probably what I think has been the best part of Cloonrady's run, the introduction of Seigfried. They do a lot well, but ultimately, I don't feel the urge and excitement to read the next issue like I did with Rucka. I think that's awful since Rucka's run was twice a month as opposed to the monthly format of Cloonrad.

Anyway, I hope we are going to get an amazing 800 from them, but I wouldn't be heartbroken if they either changed their tone moving forward or if we tried a new writing team.

This is exactly how I felt after re-reading the Perez, Jimenez, and Rucka Post-Crisis runs. It doesn't have to be 100% serious all the time - for example, Jimenez's run had some lighthearted bits and Gail Simone's run was often super silly - but Cloonrad's run just never ups the ante, and the fact that Diana's characterization is so inconsistent makes it even harder to care.

It's also weird because they've taken a few big swings and done almost nothing with them - in fact, I'm pretty sure Steve Orlando broke more new ground in his fill-in arc than Cloonrad have in their entire run. We saw some HUGE, exciting changes with Trial of the Amazons and Nubia's series (especially the newly-united Amazons re-entering Man's World as a political force) and there's so much to explore there, but the subsequent stories haven't even touched that and instead we've followed Diana...*checks notes*...stopping an Info Wars-ified Dr. Psycho from selling evil milk and doing a very by-the-numbers secret lab break-in.

Maybe things will amp up a little bit with the upcoming arc with the gods, but yeah...I'm finding it tiresome at this point.

[Thor2014]

Perez run was very serious and grim, that's one of the

[Perseus]

Perez run was very serious and grim, that's one of the

The origin of the amazons... sure. It needs to be, you can't turn what happened to them into a joke, this isn't Thor: Love and Thunder. And you can't pussy foot around it like the films and Johns, state what happened, take it with some seriousness, and be clear about it. If it's all whimsical and silly, why should I care about any of these characters?

[HestiasHearth]

I just watched Thor4, and not gonna lie: the whole notion that a film with whimsy and jokes somehow negates the stakes and the seriousness of the film's central plot is absolutely bonkers to me. Love and Thunder had a lot of funny moments and great sight gags, and yet at no point did I feel that the serious parts of the film were invalidated, or made less important. In fact, Love and Thunder proves once again that comic book fandom tends to look at everything through a very simplistic, rigidly black OR white lens. Goddess, I wish Wonder Woman 1984 had been 1/8 as strong as Love and Thunder (especially the fight choreography and special effects). And I will say it once again, Waititi would probably be a solid director to bring a Golden Age aesthetic to Themyscira in a film, instead of the usual one-note sword-and-sandals visuals we get. A film could have whimsy and silliness and still make audiences care about the characters (the MCU has made a hugely successful, critically acclaimed billion-dollar empire out of precisely that; when did the fandom start thinking that these two things are mutually exclusive?

After watching THOR4 I realized that all the online hatred the film got was because of how female-centric and gay positive it was (which is how a Wonder Woman film should be when you think about it).

[Agent Z]

There are numerous ways to make a superhero film that doesn't follow the MCU style (or Waititi's style to be specific). I don't know why people are acting like this is a binary choice between stuff like Love & Thunder and "grimdark". Then again, people treat anything slightly more serious than a Saturday morning cartoon as grimdark, so I guess I can chalk it up to nuance being practically non-existent on the Internet.

[Primal Slayer]

After watching THOR4 I realized that all the online hatred the film got was because of how female-centric and gay positive it was (which is how a Wonder Woman film should be when you think about it).

All? I hate it and see 84 as better..but it definitely aint for the reasons you listed

[Shimbo]

The origin of the amazons... sure. It needs to be, you can't turn what happened to them into a joke, this isn't Thor: Love and Thunder. And you can't pussy foot around it like the films and Johns, state what happened, take it with some seriousness, and be clear about it. If it's all whimsical and silly, why should I care about any of these characters?

While I agree with your sentiment, Perez's voice for Diana...is not my favorite. Too virginal, too chaste, not fun enough, too much bloviating. There's a reason one of the criticisms of the WW book is that it's "too preachy" and I truly feel that came from Perez's depiction of Diana. He did phenomenal stuff in reestablishing her and her mythos, but his Diana was often pretty milquetoast.

Please don't murder me, CBR Wonderfandom!

[Frontier]

Young Diana stories:

[Frontier]

[bardkeep]

While I agree with your sentiment, Perez's voice for Diana...is not my favorite. Too virginal, too chaste, not fun enough, too much bloviating. There's a reason one of the criticisms of the WW book is that it's "too preachy" and I truly feel that came from Perez's depiction of Diana. He did phenomenal stuff in reestablishing her and her mythos, but his Diana was often pretty milquetoast.

Please don't murder me, CBR Wonderfandom!

I agree with this. In fact, I didn't love how Diana was written in either of my 2 favorite runs (Perez, Rucka's Post-Crisis). Had the same issues as you do with Perez and Rucka made her way too grave/serious (he definitely got a better handle on her in his Rebirth run). They just had such brilliant storytelling, lore, and thematic depth and interesting enough supporting casts that they more than made up for it. Felt the same way about Legend of WW, which I also loved overall.

Phil Jimenez and Gail Simone probably wrote my favorite Dianas in the main book. And I thought WML did a fantastic job with her voice when he was at his best, but when he was off, he was REALLY off.

[Perseus]

While I agree with your sentiment, Perez's voice for Diana...is not my favorite. Too virginal, too chaste, not fun enough, too much bloviating. There's a reason one of the criticisms of the WW book is that it's "too preachy" and I truly feel that came from Perez's depiction of Diana. He did phenomenal stuff in reestablishing her and her mythos, but his Diana was often pretty milquetoast.

Please don't murder me, CBR Wonderfandom!

I mean no one likes to be preached at in general. I don't blame you for not liking it, and I actually agree with your sentiment on it being too virginal and chaste. I actually liked Rucka's voice for her though post-crisis. I don't believe the stories he wrote called for fun and adventure in Diana's voice. She was serious and formal because she needed to be at that time. Its when other writers take that as her defacto tone and put it in their own stories which weren't as deep as Rucka's.

[Perseus]

I just watched Thor4, and not gonna lie: the whole notion that a film with whimsy and jokes somehow negates the stakes and the seriousness of the film's central plot is absolutely bonkers to me. Love and Thunder had a lot of funny moments and great sight gags, and yet at no point did I feel that the serious parts of the film were invalidated, or made less important. In fact, Love and Thunder proves once again that comic book fandom tends to look at everything through a very simplistic, rigidly black OR white lens. Goddess, I wish Wonder Woman 1984 had been 1/8 as strong as Love and Thunder (especially the fight choreography and special effects). And I will say it once again, Waititi would probably be a solid director to bring a Golden Age aesthetic to Themyscira in a film, instead of the usual one-note sword-and-sandals visuals we get. A film could have whimsy and silliness and still make audiences care about the characters (the MCU has made a hugely successful, critically acclaimed billion-dollar empire out of precisely that; when did the fandom start thinking that these two things are mutually exclusive?

After watching THOR4 I realized that all the online hatred the film got was because of how female-centric and gay positive it was (which is how a Wonder Woman film should be when you think about it).

I disagree with all of this, sorry, I hated Love and Thunder, and they did virtually laugh at every moment. The film was a joke to me, I didn't care for any character, and it was solely working off of good will from the previous film and the MARVEL machine itself. It wasn't even that funny either. The MCU is a success because it's essentially cornered the superhero market with no real competition from DC, it has its corporate made formula and sometimes people make a good film with it, not L&T. I didn't even finish the film it was that bad for me.

[Perseus]

All? I hate it and see 84 as better..but it definitely aint for the reasons you listed

Its saying something when people prefer 84 over that garbage.