NYCC: Phil Jimenez At The LGBT Panel – Why Would Anybody Want To Make A Movie Out Of This Wonder Wom

[Pinsir]

I think Phil is thinking more along the lines of things like the Invisible Jet, Amazon tech, cross-dressing villains, proteges like Donna, Cassie, & Vanessa(to some extent), and being a leader in the superhero community like she was in that story he did where Diana heads-up the team of female heroes to take on Circe's team of female villains.

I like Marston's originally WW a lot, but that version of the character mostly died with him.

[Blacksun]

Challenge accepted

Bottom left panel.

I think I should frame and put this on a wall. I think most writers forget that women also have their own desires

[brettc1]

Yeah, I know, but ever since Azz's run began and especially since WW was announced for BvS he seems intent on lecturing other wirters on how to WW should be written. If he wants WW to be written in a certain way he should try writing her.

Well, that invalidates the opinions of just about everyone who reads Wonder Woman

[Razor Tiara]

See all the extraneous flowers? That's the kind of stuff I was talking about.

Someone should bring Trevor Barnes back as a villain. He's got to have an ax to grind, and deservedly so. IIRC his sister said something about him being in danger by being in Wonder Woman's world and sure enough it got him killed.

[Silvanus]

I think Phil is thinking more along the lines of things like the Invisible Jet, Amazon tech, cross-dressing villains, proteges like Donna, Cassie, & Vanessa(to some extent), and being a leader in the superhero community like she was in that story he did where Diana heads-up the team of female heroes to take on Circe's team of female villains.

Those are all fine things, but she can be "crazy" and "up for the challenge" without them. She can even be a leader without the superhero community; in recent issues she has been more clearly than ever the leader of the gods and Amazons around her. And she's a "non-conformist" leader, too--a God of War who wants to stop the killing, and a Queen of the Amazons who wants to bring the boys back home.

Accessories, villains and supporting characters aren't character traits, and Jiminez was supposedly talking about character traits, particularly in the "crazy, fun-loving and up for the challenge" line that I was referring to. If he thinks that the Invisible Jet, for example, is key to appealing to the large, wide audience of movie-goers, who don't necessarily start out caring very much about WW's comic book history, I'd be interested in hearing his argument.

[brettc1]

I'm pretty sure this is the kind of thing Phil does NOT want to be seeing with Wonder Woman...

[Sacred Knight]

I don't even think Jimenez's run was that great, yet he seems to think of himself as the sole arbiter of what WW is...

I think he's just passionate. Kinda like how Mark Waid is with Superman. In both cases I don't agree with everything they personally see as essential, but its within understanding how a passion for a character combined with the fact that said creators had the privilege of actually writing said characters can lead the strong presentation of their opinions. I'm sure Jimenez is well aware that in reality he is not the authority on Wonder Woman.

[ed2962]

I'm pretty sure this is the kind of thing Phil does NOT want to be seeing with Wonder Woman...

I'm guessing this is from Injustice?

It's funny cuz it reads like Frank Miler's satire in All Star Batman, but I think we're supposed to take it seriously here.

[brettc1]

I'm guessing this is from Injustice?

It's funny cuz it reads like Frank Miler's satire in All Star Batman, but I think we're supposed to take it seriously here.

It's from Doomed #1 - the beast she is talking about is Doomsday.

Wonder Woman being romantic by wanting to mount an enemy's head as a trophy is the kind if thing Phil Jimenez is talking about when he says he doesn't want to see this version of the character on screen. Personally I agree with him. That's not the WW I want my daughter to see. Ever.

[Pinsir]

Well, that invalidates the opinions of just about everyone who reads Wonder Woman

Exactly!

[Dr. Poison]

Yeah, I know, but ever since Azz's run began and especially since WW was announced for BvS he seems intent on lecturing other wirters on how to WW should be written. If he wants WW to be written in a certain way he should try writing her.

I've had several conversations via Facebook with Phil about Wonder Woman over the years, most of which took place after the New 52 began. I think it's safe to say that neither of us has ever been unhappier with how Diana and her world are being portrayed. In my 30+ years of reading comics, I've never been more upset about an overhaul that a character has received. I'll admit that Azz isn't alone in portraying Diana poorly in the New 52 but IMO he does it the most often. When you're as passionate about a character as Phil and I am and you see something like what's been done in the New 52 to Diana, your only real option is to vent and try to get people to understand where you're coming from to try and inspire a change at some point. As much as Phil would like to write Diana again(NOT the New 52 version, he's made that very clear to me), that's not his call to make. That's up to editorial or Didio to decide so Phil's left to watch Diana burn until something better comes along.

[Dr. Poison]

Those are all fine things, but she can be "crazy" and "up for the challenge" without them. She can even be a leader without the superhero community; in recent issues she has been more clearly than ever the leader of the gods and Amazons around her. And she's a "non-conformist" leader, too--a God of War who wants to stop the killing, and a Queen of the Amazons who wants to bring the boys back home.

Accessories, villains and supporting characters aren't character traits, and Jiminez was supposedly talking about character traits, particularly in the "crazy, fun-loving and up for the challenge" line that I was referring to. If he thinks that the Invisible Jet, for example, is key to appealing to the large, wide audience of movie-goers, who don't necessarily start out caring very much about WW's comic book history, I'd be interested in hearing his argument.

I don't think that he necessarily think that the Invisible Jet is a make it or break it for Diana to be appealing, just that the jet and other types of things that I mentioned along with other things like having a female sidekick with curves are what made Diana unique when she first appeared. Most of Diana's uniqueness has been diluted over the years, especially in recent times.

[Silvanus]

I don't think that he necessarily think that the Invisible Jet is a make it or break it for Diana to be appealing, just that the jet and other types of things that I mentioned along with other things like having a female sidekick with curves are what made Diana unique when she first appeared. Most of Diana's uniqueness has been diluted over the years, especially in recent times.

But I assume he does think that she can be unique without a lot of those things, including the invisible jet or super-curvy, super-fabulous Etta, because I don't remember either the jet or Etta (at least, that version of Etta) being prominent in this run. (My memory is hazy about that, so please correct me if I'm wrong. I didn't particularly dislike the run, by the way.) Going by what he said in the panel that we're discussing here, I gather that he thinks the core, the essence, of what makes Wonder Woman unique is her personality and attitude, which includes being "crazy" and up-for-challenge." And I'm saying that essence is still present, in Azz's run; see my examples above. And sure, I like the idea that she should be "queer" or non-conformist in some way. But which is more (to quote from Jiminez) "the ultimate non-conforming 'other'": a woman who like to chat about sexy guys and enjoys fashion (as in Jiminez's run), or a mythic Amazon who loves her brothers and who becomes a peace-loving god of war? (I'm happy for Wonder Woman to do conventionally "feminine" things like chat about sexy guys and change her clothes a lot, but I guess I have trouble seeing how those things make her, as a woman, queer. I'm not saying that Jiminez and others are wrong about what makes her "queer," though; I wouldn't want to be that arrogant. I'm trying to understand this point of view, but I don't think I quite get it yet.) ETA--Maybe it's less that the Jiminez Wonder Woman actually IS, in herself, all that a non-conformist or (even metaphorically) queer, and more that she is someone certain gay guys can identify with, and someone who represents a certain queer idea of what it means to be be fabulously feminine? That would make sense to me, and I can admire that Jiminez's book played that role for some guys.

I do sometimes wonder if some of the more wondementalist fans (those who are most protective of the "fundametals" of the character and her world) would have been happier with Azz's run if certain things, like embracing Sirracca or shooting Hades with love or wrestling Moon Bear in that "loving submission" moment closer to the beginning of the run. Even though Isrracca and some of this other stuff weren't, as such, part of Wonder WOman's original mythos, I think that they capture the spirit of that mythos in a different way. For me, a pretty big part of the drama of this run was discovering all this depth and warmth under what some might call a "warrior maiden" exterior; but I can understand that these moments came too late for some, perhaps like Jiminez, who had already made up their mind in a negative way about the New 52 Wonder Woman (including Azzarello's). I think he did say the "I love everyone" moment was Ok....

[SteveGus]

For me, a pretty big part of the drama of this run was discovering all this depth and warmth under what some might call a "warrior maiden" exterior; but I can understand that these moments came too late for some, perhaps like Jiminez, who had already made up their mind in a negative way about the New 52 Wonder Woman (including Azzarello's). I think he did say the "I love everyone" moment was Ok....

After #7, I realized that the character I wanted to read about was dead. My ability to enjoy the DC universe imploded with that issue. At the very least, it needs to be removed from continuity without discussion or becoming a plot point.

[Silvanus]

After #7, I realized that the character I wanted to read about was dead. My ability to enjoy the DC universe imploded with that issue.

I understand. I'm curious if you would have felt better about the run if it had started, somehow, with issue 14 (Diana refusing to fight Sirracca, and instead embracing her and telling her, with a smile, "that's not how sisters behave"), for example. Alas, I guess we'll never know. Similarly, I'd love to hear Jimnizez's view on how the character progressed past the opening issues, with special attention to whether she is, in fact, a "non-conforming other" in respect to the gods (not conforming to the role that a "god of war" is expect to play) and the Amazons (not conforming with their beliefs about men, and pushing them to change their questions). But I can understand why he probably wouldn't be interested in engaging with the book, or any version of the New 52 Wonder Woman, at that level of detail; he just answers the questions people ask him.

Though I don't share your hope that this run will be ignored, I do hope that you will someday be able to enjoy a run of the book again.