Why are they determined to keep her tied to ww2?

[Lord of Narrative]

Making her solo movie a period piece takes Superman, Batman and Aquaman out of the equation. We have seen it Marvel where Captain America 1 is a period piece and his story and the Capsequels have several other heroes and don't forget all the complains people had about Iron Man 3, the president gets kidnapped but where are the Avengers?

A period piece makes it a total Wonder Woman show.


Also to your BM/WW point in the OP, it seems like they will go for it. The picture from EW with Bruce and Diana dancing and trailer with both of them at the valet parking and Affleck saying Diana and Bruce know each others secrets. Gal also said she auditioned with Ben and was cast because of their chemistry.

Ppl complained that im3 was crap. Was tws a period piece? No? Then how come it is so highly (over)rated?!!! Do you realize how lazy your argument, especially when you know Batman won't have to have his movie in a different time period just to accommodate others. If anything, they'll accomodate him.

[Lord of Narrative]

[QUOTE=mathew101281;1380358]Etta Candy would be another character that was essentially sidelined(or reduced to a more minor role). I'm not saying Perez's run wasn't probably the best WW run since Marston, but none the less i do think it started some trends that have been detrimental to the character. Batman and Superman's supporting cast are iconic due to repetition, and reuse. Like them or hate them Wonder Woman had characters that were capable of being somewhat iconic, but Perez's run essentially took them out of the picture as main characters, and we've pretty much had a very inconsistent supporting cast ever since. Hippolyta has probably been the most consistently shown supporting cast member, but her nature and the fact that she rarely leaves the island kind of hinders her as a regular cast member. The Wonder Girl's both Cassie and Donna have always made relatively sparse appearance in the book, especially in comparison with their counterparts in the Batman and Superman books, and lets not even get into wonder Woman's villains. Character's like Artemis and a few others have potential, but for what ever reason aren't used more.[/QUOTE

Um.......Perez actually used Trevor and Candy, the latter of which had gone relatively unused for YEARS. By the time Kanigher came on the book, Etta was notoriously missing.

[Agent Z]

[QUOTE=Lord of Narrative;1380906]

Etta Candy would be another character that was essentially sidelined(or reduced to a more minor role). I'm not saying Perez's run wasn't probably the best WW run since Marston, but none the less i do think it started some trends that have been detrimental to the character. Batman and Superman's supporting cast are iconic due to repetition, and reuse. Like them or hate them Wonder Woman had characters that were capable of being somewhat iconic, but Perez's run essentially took them out of the picture as main characters, and we've pretty much had a very inconsistent supporting cast ever since. Hippolyta has probably been the most consistently shown supporting cast member, but her nature and the fact that she rarely leaves the island kind of hinders her as a regular cast member. The Wonder Girl's both Cassie and Donna have always made relatively sparse appearance in the book, especially in comparison with their counterparts in the Batman and Superman books, and lets not even get into wonder Woman's villains. Character's like Artemis and a few others have potential, but for what ever reason aren't used more.[/QUOTE

Um.......Perez actually used Trevor and Candy, the latter of which had gone relatively unused for YEARS. By the time Kanigher came on the book, Etta was notoriously missing.

Yeah Etta and Steve didn't have the roles they did in the Golden Age but they still appeared in Perez run.

[SiegePerilous02]

[QUOTE=Lord of Narrative;1380906]

Etta Candy would be another character that was essentially sidelined(or reduced to a more minor role). I'm not saying Perez's run wasn't probably the best WW run since Marston, but none the less i do think it started some trends that have been detrimental to the character. Batman and Superman's supporting cast are iconic due to repetition, and reuse. Like them or hate them Wonder Woman had characters that were capable of being somewhat iconic, but Perez's run essentially took them out of the picture as main characters, and we've pretty much had a very inconsistent supporting cast ever since. Hippolyta has probably been the most consistently shown supporting cast member, but her nature and the fact that she rarely leaves the island kind of hinders her as a regular cast member. The Wonder Girl's both Cassie and Donna have always made relatively sparse appearance in the book, especially in comparison with their counterparts in the Batman and Superman books, and lets not even get into wonder Woman's villains. Character's like Artemis and a few others have potential, but for what ever reason aren't used more.[/QUOTE

Um.......Perez actually used Trevor and Candy, the latter of which had gone relatively unused for YEARS. By the time Kanigher came on the book, Etta was notoriously missing.

Steve and Etta were being used in the Bronze Age, I believe. I know Etta appeared in a lot of the Dan Mishkin issues.

And though they were both used in Perez's run, they didn't have much reason to be there. Steve was older than Diana and robbed of his love interest status, and Etta was given a much meeker personality, made older than Diana, and rarely interacted with her enough to be her best friend. The main nucleus of the supporting cast were Julia, Vanessa, Hermes and Myndi Mayer. Combined with the fact that Diana no longer had her secret ID and worked with Steve and Etta, it's no wonder they didn't catch on in post-Crisis canon in anyway (not that any of their replacements did either). Perez's run had a lot of great stuff, but he really did some damage in the long term.

As for the topic at hand, I think it's due to creators always going back to the iconic Silver Age versions of these characters. But Diana didn't get much of a Silver Age renaissance like everybody else, instead spending time fighting Egg Fu, Mouse Man and having tedious relationship drama with Steve, so I think people go for the Golden Age for her. And she spent a lot of time in WWII conflicts in that period, perhaps more than any other hero, because fighting war with femininity was kind of her whole deal.

[Agent Z]

[QUOTE=SiegePerilous02;1381638]

Steve and Etta were being used in the Bronze Age, I believe. I know Etta appeared in a lot of the Dan Mishkin issues.

And though they were both used in Perez's run, they didn't have much reason to be there. Steve was older than Diana and robbed of his love interest status, and Etta was given a much meeker personality, made older than Diana, and rarely interacted with her enough to be her best friend. The main nucleus of the supporting cast were Julia, Vanessa, Hermes and Myndi Mayer. Combined with the fact that Diana no longer had her secret ID and worked with Steve and Etta, it's no wonder they didn't catch on in post-Crisis canon in anyway (not that any of their replacements did either). Perez's run had a lot of great stuff, but he really did some damage in the long term.

Steve didn't need to be a love interest to make appearances and a relationship between Diana and Etta could have been developed. Whatever damage the book suffered was due to later writers and editorial.

[SiegePerilous02]

[QUOTE=Agent Z;1381670]

Steve didn't need to be a love interest to make appearances and a relationship between Diana and Etta could have been developed. Whatever damage the book suffered was due to later writers and editorial.

Yeah but Perez didn't leave much of a foundation. Steve didn't have to be a love interest, but Perez didn't really provide much of anything else for him to do. He made a big deal about their fates being tied together early in the run, but following the Diana Trevor reveal (which I've always disliked) Steve just kind of became dead weight. The friendship with Etta could have been developed, but Perez tied Etta so heavily to Steve that when he got dropped, it's not surprising that she went with him. It was like making Lois and Jimmy 20 years older than Clark Kent, and then marrying them off together and keeping it that way for several decades.

[Dr. Poison]

[QUOTE=SiegePerilous02;1381783]

Yeah but Perez didn't leave much of a foundation. Steve didn't have to be a love interest, but Perez didn't really provide much of anything else for him to do. He made a big deal about their fates being tied together early in the run, but following the Diana Trevor reveal (which I've always disliked) Steve just kind of became dead weight. The friendship with Etta could have been developed, but Perez tied Etta so heavily to Steve that when he got dropped, it's not surprising that she went with him. It was like making Lois and Jimmy 20 years older than Clark Kent, and then marrying them off together and keeping it that way for several decades.

I have to co-sign just about everything that Siege said. As much as I liked Perez's run, especially his revamp of the Cheetah's abilities, he made some huge issues for Wonder Woman long-term such as making her debut in Man's World too late to found the Justice League, making Steve and Etta noticeably older than her, and making her have a huge advantage over the other Amazons in the contest by her having godly abilities. I think she should have been born with normal Amazon abilities and "won" her powers by winning the contest.

I think the Golden Age is the best place to start when reintroducing Wonder Woman. Those were her best selling years from what I've heard.

[Agent Z]

[QUOTE=Dr. Poison;1381811]

I have to co-sign just about everything that Siege said. As much as I liked Perez's run, especially his revamp of the Cheetah's abilities, he made some huge issues for Wonder Woman long-term such as making her debut in Man's World too late to found the Justice League, making Steve and Etta noticeably older than her, and making her have a huge advantage over the other Amazons in the contest by her having godly abilities. I think she should have been born with normal Amazon abilities and "won" her powers by winning the contest.

I think the Golden Age is the best place to start when reintroducing Wonder Woman. Those were her best selling years from what I've heard.

There is a lot of problematic stuff in the Golden Age.

[Dr. Poison]

[QUOTE=Agent Z;1381822]

There is a lot of problematic stuff in the Golden Age.

Can you be more specific please?

[Agent Z]

[QUOTE=Dr. Poison;1381849]

Can you be more specific please?

The racism, sexist depiction of women (even Marston wasn't safe from this), non-sensical plots, jingoism etc.

[Dr. Poison]

[QUOTE=Agent Z;1381850]

The racism, sexist depiction of women (even Marston wasn't safe from this), non-sensical plots, jingoism etc.

Weren't those issues pretty much across the board in comics those days? I seem to remember a Superman ad with a caption saying "It's ok to slap a Jap."

[Agent Z]

[QUOTE=Dr. Poison;1381895]

Weren't those issues pretty much across the board in comics those days? I seem to remember a Superman ad with a caption saying "It's ok to slap a Jap."

That's why I said the Golden Age and didn't just limit it to Wonder Woman.

[Punisher007]

A lot of the Golden Age comics can be enjoyed ironically these days. In a "wow, what were they thinking back then" kind of way.

As for the WWII thing, why not? Period pieces are unusual amongst comic book films (and can be quite interesting if done well). The Nazis are an easy villain to use (or Imperial Japan if your prefer), and it lets you do something different with Diana's character without having to reference/shoehorn in a bunch of nods to other DC properties. Heck you could even use Baroness Gunther and make her an actual Nazi and it'd fit. Then you can do a sequel in "modern day" times. Plus the WWII aesthetic has always been interesting to me.

And if the rumors of her being immortal, or at least extremely slow-aging, in the films turns out to be true, then there's a way to do both right there.

[Punisher007]

I think this is the whole point of BvS ... We are seeing previews showing where BM was I suspect we'll see where and why Diana is suddenly in Metropolis post Kryptonian invasion. I personally think it's a weak argument to attack her for not being there since there are a million easy explanations. Maybe she was on Olympus, maybe PI is in an alternative dimension as it was for parts of her various continuities. MOS was a Superman origin tale so no one else needed to be there. Now they are adding to the mythos.

Plus the time period from when Zod first shows up to the "neck snap" was like a day, maybe two at most. And the actual "invasion" lasted a few hours (at most). It's actually pretty easy to explain. She was off somewhere else and simply didn't have time to get there before everything was over. Or she was busy dealing with another problem. Or the Amazons decided that Zod and co "weren't their problem" and stayed out of things, and so on.

The point is, her absence, and others as well, from MOS is not as hard to explain as some people are making it out to be.

[Lord of Narrative]

A lot of the Golden Age comics can be enjoyed ironically these days. In a "wow, what were they thinking back then" kind of way.

As for the WWII thing, why not? Period pieces are unusual amongst comic book films (and can be quite interesting if done well). The Nazis are an easy villain to use (or Imperial Japan if your prefer), and it lets you do something different with Diana's character without having to reference/shoehorn in a bunch of nods to other DC properties. Heck you could even use Baroness Gunther and make her an actual Nazi and it'd fit. Then you can do a sequel in "modern day" times. Plus the WWII aesthetic has always been interesting to me.

And if the rumors of her being immortal, or at least extremely slow-aging, in the films turns out to be true, then there's a way to do both right there.

Then why not make green lantern in the civil war, or batman a best flick in the 40s?