Power Level complains

[Gaius]

I'm sorry to tell you but WW is less than Superman and Batman, the only reason why she is part of the trinity is because she is a woman, her sales have never been up to these 2 (Superman the best-selling in history, Batman the second ), her power is also second to Superman, because WW was born as a response to Superman, she depends on him. that you always put the theme of bad men, good women, shows that WW has nothing, beyond being a woman, if it had, you would talk about his qualities as a character, not always blaming the bad man.

Man, it says something when this is the funniest post I've read in this thread. Thanks for the laugh.

[Rightoya]

I'm sorry to tell you but WW is less than Superman and Batman, the only reason why she is part of the trinity is because she is a woman, her sales have never been up to these 2 (Superman the best-selling in history, Batman the second )

I like how you just ignore the very obvious sexism that played a huge part in this, and that Wonder Woman being a woman was historically the exact opposite of an advantage, and also that being part of the trinity was even in more modern times often anything but helpful.

her power is also second to Superman, because WW was born as a response to Superman

Yeah, as an equal response to represent women, which the back then very openly sexist DC just did not care for.

she depends on him. that you always put the theme of bad men, good women, shows that WW has nothing, beyond being a woman, if it had, you would talk about his qualities as a character, not always blaming the bad man.

That is like saying Superman depends on Hercules, and your entire post here can get basically summarized as using historical sexism to justify modern sexism, and showing that you have no clue about Wonder Woman.

And if your claims here would have any true substance, you should have absolutely no problem with the nowadays far more popular and valuable Batman shitting on Superman, and Aquaman and Wonder Woman should also **** on Superman in the DCEU, because he is lesser than them there and basically everywhere lesser than Batman if we use your type of reasoning.

[WonderLight789]

I'm sorry to tell you but WW is less than Superman and Batman, the only reason why she is part of the trinity is because she is a woman, her sales have never been up to these 2 (Superman the best-selling in history, Batman the second ), her power is also second to Superman, because WW was born as a response to Superman, she depends on him. that you always put the theme of bad men, good women, shows that WW has nothing, beyond being a woman, if it had, you would talk about his qualities as a character, not always blaming the bad man.

Sorry to burst your bubble. But Superman title nowadays is selling in the same range as WW. And his box office trackrecord is beyond tragic.

WW doesn't depend on SM. There are a lot of qualities to her character. That don't get explored because of sexism and prejudice. The only thing WW has in common with sm, is the fact that she is supposed to be an absolute powerhouse. That's where it ends. And if she hasn't been treated like him in that regard. It is because of sexism. There is a lot to talk about in her lore. Queer stuff, feminist stuff. Sisterhood, truth. Submission to love. And many topics that challenge the status quo of the patriarchal world. Unlike the safe, white straight farm boy american way superman. batman and superman were given opportunities that the industry made sure to never give WW. Because her core themes challenge their perception of where women should be in society. The truth is WW was never allowed to develop and settle enough. Because of the sexist industry, that constantly tried to change her origin, her theme, her supporting cast. In order to be safe for the white straight privilege over 30 dudes with fragile egos that read comics. Which is why we have the generic stories that we usually get these days with WW. And a watered down super human, instead of the big powerhouse second to no man that she was always meant to be.

[DochaDocha]

Sorry to burst your bubble. But Superman title nowadays is selling in the same range as WW. And his box office trackrecord is beyond tragic.

There are some tragic elements to Superman and movies, but "beyond tragic" describes movies that flopped miserably. There've been six solo Superman movies, and if I had to be honest I'd have a hard time putting together the equivalent of three quality movies out of all the footage, but only one of them bombed. The others range from somewhat disappointing to good.

Superman - number one movie of 1978
Superman II - number two movie of 1981
Superman III - number 11 movie of 1983
Superman IV - yeah, it sucked by any metric
Superman Returns - number five movie of 2006
Man of Steel - number five movie of 2013

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you mean that the fact that Superman solo films will have generated $0 from 2014-2024 is tragic for the franchise and its fans, though.

[WonderLight789]

There are some tragic elements to Superman and movies, but "beyond tragic" describes movies that flopped miserably. There've been six solo Superman movies, and if I had to be honest I'd have a hard time putting together the equivalent of three quality movies out of all the footage, but only one of them bombed. The others range from somewhat disappointing to good.

Superman - number one movie of 1978
Superman II - number two movie of 1981
Superman III - number 11 movie of 1983
Superman IV - yeah, it sucked by any metric
Superman Returns - number five movie of 2006
Man of Steel - number five movie of 2013

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you mean that the fact that Superman solo films will have generated $0 from 2014-2024 is tragic for the franchise and its fans, though.

If most of those movies didn't generate enough money. They flopped. Just calculate the budget, plus the distribution cost and marketing. And compare that to how much money they made at the bo. I wouldn't call the sm movies post 1981 a hit.

[Rightoya]

If most of those movies didn't generate enough money. They flopped. Just calculate the budget, plus the distribution cost and marketing. And compare that to how much money they made at the bo. I wouldn't call the sm movies post 1981 a hit.

Did you not just meant nowadays, because if you meant historically i have to strongly disagree, especially Superman's first movie was not just an extreme success, but also absolutely revolutionary for the superhero cinema and could basically carry the Superman cinema on it's own.

[DochaDocha]

If most of those movies didn't generate enough money. They flopped. Just calculate the budget, plus the distribution cost and marketing. And compare that to how much money they made at the bo. I wouldn't call the sm movies post 1981 a hit.

There's a big difference between "not a hit" and "beyond tragic," unless your scale of evaluating movie success is a three-tiered scale that goes from Great > Good > Beyond Tragic. And "track record" means the entire history unless you specify the bookends.

I get this is an emotional topic for you and all, but seriously...

[Gaius]

There are some tragic elements to Superman and movies, but "beyond tragic" describes movies that flopped miserably. There've been six solo Superman movies, and if I had to be honest I'd have a hard time putting together the equivalent of three quality movies out of all the footage, but only one of them bombed. The others range from somewhat disappointing to good.

Superman - number one movie of 1978
Superman II - number two movie of 1981
Superman III - number 11 movie of 1983
Superman IV - yeah, it sucked by any metric
Superman Returns - number five movie of 2006
Man of Steel - number five movie of 2013

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you mean that the fact that Superman solo films will have generated $0 from 2014-2024 is tragic for the franchise and its fans, though.

Yeah, Quest for Peace is probably the one that can legit be considered a failure.

Superman Returns and BvS are in the range of "did make money but not enough considering the budgets and expectations".

[Rightoya]

There's a big difference between "not a hit" and "beyond tragic," unless your scale of evaluating movie success is a three-tiered scale that goes from Great > Good > Beyond Tragic. And "track record" means the entire history unless you specify the bookends.

I get this is an emotional topic for you, but...

To be fair, if we nowadays use NaVi's metric for what makes a character allegedly lesser, Superman would be definitively lesser than at least Aquaman, Wonder Woman, and Batman in the DCEU.

[DochaDocha]

To be fair, if we nowadays use NaVi's metric for what makes a character allegedly lesser, Superman would be definitively lesser than at least Aquaman, Wonder Woman, and Batman in the DCEU.

Well, technically, WW's movie track record is half bad. Just putting it out there...

(I'm willing to pretend that WW 1984 doesn't exist, though, so we can say WW's track record is a sample size of one good movie)

[WonderLight789]

There's a big difference between "not a hit" and "beyond tragic," unless your scale of evaluating movie success is a three-tiered scale that goes from Great > Good > Beyond Tragic. And "track record" means the entire history unless you specify the bookends.

I get this is an emotional topic for you and all, but seriously...

After the second movie. His trackrecord is not good. So yup. That's what i mean. A tragic history overall at the bo.

SM may be writen as the mvp in comics, usually by having other characters jobb to him. But i can hate on him easily and shade his poor performances a the bo. There is nothing his overrated ### can do about it.

[WonderLight789]

Did you not just meant nowadays, because if you meant historically i have to strongly disagree, especially Superman's first movie was not just an extreme success, but also absolutely revolutionary for the superhero cinema and could basically carry the Superman cinema on it's own.

I mean his movies after the second one.

[Rightoya]

Well, technically, WW's movie track record is half bad. Just putting it out there...

(I'm willing to pretend that WW 1984 doesn't exist, though, so we can say WW's track record is a sample size of one good movie)

Wonder Woman's first movie easily carries against Superman's poor track record in the DCEU to be honest, and even though i dislike Wonder Woman 1984 with a passion it seems to do well on the secondary market, but i strongly disagree with NaVi's reasoning anyway in case that wasn't clear.

[Stanlos]

I'm sorry to tell you but WW is less than Superman and Batman, the only reason why she is part of the trinity is because she is a woman, her sales have never been up to these 2 (Superman the best-selling in history, Batman the second ), her power is also second to Superman, because WW was born as a response to Superman, she depends on him. that you always put the theme of bad men, good women, shows that WW has nothing, beyond being a woman, if it had, you would talk about his qualities as a character, not always blaming the bad man.

I am not sorry to laugh in your face and inform you that there are NO ways she is less than either of those heroes with the notable exception of basicness. Her design was ahead of the times in the 40s and remains largely so today as evidenced by your own post, the sentiment of which was foretold in black and white decades ago in the early 40s.

What makes the Batman, the Superman, and the Wonder Woman the Trinity is their shared historic performance as the most durable, most longstanding comics IPs surviving all of the industry's challenges to be continuously published without interruption. No others have done that.

That is why each of them are iconic. That is why they are the Trinity.

Just as you or those like you can't alter the historical facts of each of their designs, no amount of hate posting on your part can alter their iconic status nor can you elevate character XYZ to equal status because like it or not you can't re-write history.

Enjoy your salt bath!

[marhawkman]

Yeah, Quest for Peace is probably the one that can legit be considered a failure.

Superman Returns and BvS are in the range of "did make money but not enough considering the budgets and expectations".

that's the Nuclearman movie right? Screwiest part... is that they drastically changed the PLOT of the movie while filming, and the result just.. didn't fully make sense as a result. which was apparently a result of budget for filming... :/ If they'd gotten it right and used the original story? ooh... I'd love to see that movie.