Wonder Woman in animation general discussion

[Primal Slayer]

I wouldn't say absolute no to a WW animated show but we can do better than Timm and Weisman.

Timm can barely do a decent Batman these days, he bottomed out at that embarrassment of a Harley Quinn movie and has remained there since. Guarantee a WW show by him would be all the flaws of SS:TAS and DCAU WW with none of the redeeming qualities.

Never been enamored with Weisman outside of Spectacular Spider-Man. YJ had one good season and his own headcanon for WW in that world leaves so much to be desired.

Would be interested in James Tucker. Animated movies he helmed had their own problems but he's apparently a fan of the character and at least has the current best animated WW on his resume.

Timm is giving us another animated series Batman so...we'll see if that is just his gift instead of cheap dtvs. But I think he's done an amazing job building the DCAU. I loved STAS.

Weisman brought us the AMAZING Gargoyles, Spiderman, and YJ. His only problem with YJ is that he's given tooooo much freedom and needs to be reigned in. But I liked what he's told us about WWs history..

I see Bloodlines as far below WW 09...so...we'll just have to agree to disagree on those lol

[SiegePerilous02]

It's the same way she killed Ares in her first movie and no one was asking if that was too gruesome. Considering we see her killing guys by stabbing or hitting them in the first film, I'm not sure why this is so egregious.



I feel this is a very simplistic take on how Snyder actually depicts her. The most egregious thing is the severed heads which he ultimately did not use and it's not like supposedly more mature writers haven't had her do similar or worse.

Your take on how she is written in the movies reminds me more of how Grant Morrison, Geoff Johns or Mark Waid have written her if anything.

I would say her killing the terrorists was over the top and unnecessary. Rucka wrote a similar scene in Year One where her powers are unlocked for the first time, and she didn't need to kill a single person. And Ruckas Diana is willing to kill when she needs to, so he doesn't have a strict stance that she doesn't kill. Year One Diana as a rookie was more competent than a veteran Diana who had been active for 100 years

In the first film, Diana is only just discovering her powers and is still fighting as a normal Amazon in a war time setting, so her killing foes there makes sense. Whatever faults the movie may have, Patty had the right idea in WW84 that a more powerful and experienced Diana wouldn't kill weaker opponents she could subdue by other means. Seeing her kill mortal villains who are like ants to her and causing needless property damage in the process isn't heroic or awe inspiring, it's pretty juvenile. Comic writers making similar mistakes doesn't absolve the movie from criticism. Not every idea was good in the comics either

[Guy_McNichts]

It's funny, I recently re-watched both the '09 movie and Bloodlines, and honestly--might be controversial around here--not only did '09 hold up much better than I thought it would, I thought it blew Bloodlines out of the water.

The '09 movie has glaring flaws, no question, and there are definitely elements that don't hold up at all, but on re-watch, back to back, Bloodlines is totally mid.

Just in overall quality and simply sitting and enjoying a movie, I found the '09 movie much better. Despite it's flaws, there's a level of effort on display that is severely lacking in Bloodlines. The plot is more focused, the voice-acting is far superior, and the actions sequences have real impact.

That last thing is something that really stuck out to me. Even though the '09 Diana is presumably less powerful than Bloodlines Diana in terms of stats, she comes across way stronger in her fight scenes with Deimos and Ares than anything she does in Bloodlines.

That's most likely a matter of better directing and animation, but it reinforces my point that the overall quality of '09 is better.

One can appreciate the "throw everything at the wall" approach of Bloodlines--and I do on some level--but combining three to four different stories hurts the overall film. This is most apparent in the final battle where they combine Silver Swan's redemption with Eyes of the Gorgon.

Where in the comic Diana is evenly matched with Medusa and blinding herself is the trump card moment that gives her the opening to win, in Bloodlines, Diana is dominated by Medusa, blinds herself, and then gets her ass kicked even more so Vanessa can save her.
Meanwhile, the Amazons are just cannon fodder to get wiped out, and all the whole time, Hippolyta stands back and watches with zero emotion as her daughter gets destroyed.

There are also small things I'd forgotten about or mistook from the '09 movie. Like, for the longest time, I didn't approve of Diana casually killing security guards. But on re-watch...she doesn't. Steve does, but Diana just gives them a Judo chop and knocks them out.

Honestly, if you ran a tally on what elements one movie gets right and wrong vs. the other, they'd probably even out overall.
Like, '09's Steve and Etta are abominable, but Bloodlines Hippolyta is a disaster and the Amazons are useless. Bloodlines gives us Ferdinand, but '09 has Artemis. Bloodlines gives us more rogues, but every fight scene is better in '09. Diana flies in Bloodlines, but comes across much more powerful in '09.

Neither movie is perfect, though they're both better Wonder Woman animated content than we've gotten...pretty much ever. But, speaking for myself, put the two in front of me, I thought '09 was the more enjoyable watch in spite of its flaws.

[Guy_McNichts]

The prospect of an animated series makes me very wary.

I definitely agree about the importance of having one and the impact it can have on people's perception of her. It would also just be nice if she finally had one for once. But at the same time, that's a double-edged sword, because if the people running the show have a lousy concept of Diana and her world, it does more harm than good. So there's always going to be the "Do it right or don't bother at all" mentality.

I don't know who I would trust with a Wonder Woman animated series. Bruce Timm has cache, but we've seen his take on Diana, and more relevant, I think he's past his prime as a creator. The last few animated movies he's been behind were not great.

And I don't care for Weisman's ideas on Diana and her world at all. Maybe it would be different or better if he approached her as an individual and not a small part of a larger world--as he is in Young Justice--but I wouldn't want his ideas on her backstory, history, and the Amazons to be the basis of her series. Maybe if they brought in someone who does know and understand Wonder Woman better to balance it out, you might get something.

The truth is, if you're a Wonder Woman fan long enough, you learn to live by the saying "I'll believe it when I see it." We've all seen and heard plenty of lip service that crumbles when put into action.
If Diana ever does get an animated series, all we can do is hold our breath and wait.

[I'm a Fish]

Honestly I've had trouble rewatching the '09 movie because Steve is such a turn off. Diana is OK in the film. I could be mistaken because I haven't seen it in a while but I remember most of Diana's character being chiseled down to "is really good at beating people up and is haughty and kinda rude" (I mean, with jerk Steve being her liaison I understand the rude part.)

Artemis was good.

Did not like the relationship between Hippolyta and Ares.

[Guy_McNichts]

I didn't find Diana particularly haughty or violent. She does admittedly get aggravated quite a bit because she's bouncing off Steve, who is a major tool in this movie. And yeah, Steve in '09 is a major drag. They're going for a 'scoundrel on the outside, decent guy on the inside' arc, but it doesn't work that good and we end up with a trite 'not all men' message that holds up even less now than it did then.

Also, on re-watch, the Hippolyta/Ares stuff (and their son) really was kinda pointless in the end. It doesn't pay off in any meaningful way, doesn't add to Ares' motivation, it's barely acknowledged by Hippolyta once it's over. I'm not sure what they were going for. It really could've been cut and nothing would be lost.

[Frontier]

I think there's good stuff and stuff that could've been done better in both the '09 film and Bloodlines, but overall I think they both present that Diana can work well solo in animated form.

[I'm a Fish]

I didn't find Diana particularly haughty or violent. She does admittedly get aggravated quite a bit because she's bouncing off Steve, who is a major tool in this movie. And yeah, Steve in '09 is a major drag. They're going for a 'scoundrel on the outside, decent guy on the inside' arc, but it doesn't work that good and we end up with a trite 'not all men' message that holds up even less now than it did then.

I don't necessarily mean that Diana is violent when I refer to her personality being "good at beating people up", I mean that I think the film itself places greater value on individuals who are good at physical combat than those who are not. Like that bookish amazon (can't remember her name) is placed as "unworthy" to be an amazon because she's not good a fighting. And I could be misremembering that aspect of the film but I remember her literally saying something like, "In life I was a coward, but in death I get to be an Amazon."

So they have the one amazon who's bad at fighting and a bookworm, and give her a story arc that culminates in "she was a lesser person until she finally picked up a sword and went to kill people". Like, why was this subplot in the movie if not to say an individuals worth is equal to their physical capabilities and willingness to engage in combat? (and again, I could be misremembering aspects of the movie)
And I get that it's a warrior culture (this film especially doubles down on that), but Marston's amazons had plenty of other roles that made them important without being foot solders. Same with Perez, Rucka, ect.

Also, on re-watch, the Hippolyta/Ares stuff (and their son) really was kinda pointless in the end. It doesn't pay off in any meaningful way, doesn't add to Ares' motivation, it's barely acknowledged by Hippolyta once it's over. I'm not sure what they were going for. It really could've been cut and nothing would be lost.

I think they wanted to use it to double down on Hippolyta never allowing anyone off the island to have a life (since never being able to find Thymiscira again wasn't a punishment for leaving). But it's just silly because a lifetime of battles that never end could equate that just as easily.

[Psy-lock]

For me the worst part of Bloodlines (besides Hippolyta and Julia) was the ending. Cale admits to killing Julia and being responsible for Villainy Inc's attack on Themiskyra...and Diana just walks away and lets her get away with everything? Like, what? At least the 09 movie had a cool ending with her fighting Cheetah.

[WonderLight789]

Timm is giving us another animated series Batman so...we'll see if that is just his gift instead of cheap dtvs. But I think he's done an amazing job building the DCAU. I loved STAS.

Weisman brought us the AMAZING Gargoyles, Spiderman, and YJ. His only problem with YJ is that he's given tooooo much freedom and needs to be reigned in. But I liked what he's told us about WWs history..

I see Bloodlines as far below WW 09...so...we'll just have to agree to disagree on those lol

What is there to like? weisman's WW is almost lifeless personality wise and she is a weaklink. tim's take on WW is one of the worst ever.

[WonderLight789]

Wonder Woman is the only character I know of that gets hit with this argument and it never ceases to confuse me. There are numerous characters who who are both super strong and not only use swords, but an even bigger arsenal of weapons than what Diana typically carries. No one questions the strength of Kratos, Ichigo, Erza just about any Final Fantasy main protagonist. There are numerous characters from mythology whose power is taken as a given despite them using swords. WildCATs has a Superman pastiche who uses a sword and isn't seen as any weaker for it. But for some reason, a sword makes no sense for a character who is explicitly stated to be a superhumanly powerful Amazon. But a magic lasso that isn't always useful and whose abilities depend entirely on who is writing her is for some reason.



Here's Wonder Woman fighting Darkseid with a sword.



Here's her fighting him without one.



Now, I'm sure you're going to say that the second image shouldn't happen and I'd be inclined to agree with you. But if you're going to argue that the lasso is all Wonder Woman needs, history isn't exactly on your side.



Two guys whom the lasso has been useless against and at least one of them has thoroughly trounced Diana every time they encountered each other.



The lasso hasn't had that ability since the end of the Silver Age.

Having a sword and shield hasn't stopped her from still being treated as a punching bag for doomsday or mongul. If her stats, skills and classic gear were writen as all the DC lipservice tells us about them. She wouldn't need a sword and a shield. But in the end. Her stats suck, her skills suck, her classic gear sucks. And the need tools are also useless against any big fie. Because God forgive that WW could be seen doing something that is usually in Superman's territory. So yea, empty lipservice as usual. They can keep it.

[John Venus]

Lauren Montgomery was the director of the '09 movie as well as several other DC DTV movies. Her movies always had a strong fight scenes. One she and also Joaquin De Santos moved on to do different projects the fight scenes took a noticeable dip. I used to follow her blog as well as DeviantArt account, she was a big proponent of doing more female led animated superhero movies which sadly never came to fruition. She is also the one who revealed that the higher ups at DC didn't want to do more female led movies because WW didn't do as well as they had hoped.

Anyway, the 00's and '10's can be described as the period where DC tried to put WW in a box. Much like how Rucka's Sacrifice sadly led to DC learning all the wrong lessons and pushing Diana as the angry warrior woman, the great fight scenes she got in the early DTV movies (Crisis on Two Earths, '09 Wonder Woman, Superman/Batman: Apocalypse) lead to DC thinking that WW's primary purpose was to be a great fighter, forgetting all the other aspects of the character. It's so limiting and unimaginative for them to think she can't be both a great fighter and a diplomat/ambassador. (Yes, she is not bench pressing planets but she was shown as a good wrestler and creative with the lasso during the early DTV movies)

One thing I give the Patty Jenkins movie credit for is how much they spotlighted Diana's compassion and wide eyed joy of her exploring the outside world.

[Gaius]

Honestly I've had trouble rewatching the '09 movie because Steve is such a turn off. Diana is OK in the film. I could be mistaken because I haven't seen it in a while but I remember most of Diana's character being chiseled down to "is really good at beating people up and is haughty and kinda rude" (I mean, with jerk Steve being her liaison I understand the rude part.)

Artemis was good.

Did not like the relationship between Hippolyta and Ares.

Steve's character type was pretty popular at the time (Hal Jordan was written pretty similarly around the same time) but it's fallen pretty out of favor in the years since just looking at how he was written in the '17 movie.

[Primal Slayer]

What is there to like? weisman's WW is almost lifeless personality wise and she is a weaklink. tim's take on WW is one of the worst ever.

As I said in my post. I ike what he's told us about her history.

[HestiasHearth]

I would say her killing the terrorists was over the top and unnecessary. Rucka wrote a similar scene in Year One where her powers are unlocked for the first time, and she didn't need to kill a single person. And Ruckas Diana is willing to kill when she needs to, so he doesn't have a strict stance that she doesn't kill. Year One Diana as a rookie was more competent than a veteran Diana who had been active for 100 years

In the first film, Diana is only just discovering her powers and is still fighting as a normal Amazon in a war time setting, so her killing foes there makes sense. Whatever faults the movie may have, Patty had the right idea in WW84 that a more powerful and experienced Diana wouldn't kill weaker opponents she could subdue by other means. Seeing her kill mortal villains who are like ants to her and causing needless property damage in the process isn't heroic or awe inspiring, it's pretty juvenile. Comic writers making similar mistakes doesn't absolve the movie from criticism. Not every idea was good in the comics either

And the sheer tone-deafness of the writing, which actually had a little girl who witnessed Diana massacre all those men tell her that she wanted to be like Diana when she grows up. WTF I mean, tells you right there what the mindset of the writers was.