New Wonder Woman creative team!

[RealWonderman]

A little bit of overreaction on your part. The book is still about Wonder Woman, she is still the main focus of the story. Her brother is only a part of the story.

What overreaction? We had a great run by Rucka that simplified everything, and gave her back her origin. Now, in order to shoehorn a brother into all this, we have to suffer through it's destruction. And how tone deaf can they be to plan this at the height of Diana's popularity? Did anyone, one single person, leave the theater thinking "Damn. I sure wish there was focus on something completely random like a secret brother. Maybe I'll have better luck in the comics!" Spoiler Alert: NO

[Fenix]

What overreaction?

we have to suffer through it's destruction.

That overreaction.

[Awonder]

I just think DC needs new leadership and has for a very long time now.

Totally agree. DiDio keeps making money mainly by rebooting whenever sales get low. He's made a few good hires here and there, but I haven't seen much in the way of creative leadership in quite some time.

[RealWonderman]

That overreaction.

Not an overreaction. A statement based on the information. But your assessment of my statement is of no consequence to me. Move along.

[RealWonderman]

Totally agree. DiDio keeps making money mainly by rebooting whenever sales get low. He's made a few good hires here and there, but I haven't seen much in the way of creative leadership in quite some time.

Shhhh. This will get back to him and we'll get another reboot.

[Vanguard-01]

Gosh, aren't you acting just a wee bit like people aren't allowed to have a negative impression of a really over-used and lazy trope? Do we have to like every idea they throw at us?

Further, a brother is not a "guest star." For starters, he's not a star, he's a hang-on; his only claim of any importance is "Hey, look, WW has a long-lost brother. Again." And, guest starts like Superman don't fundamentally change a title character's back story the way a new sibling does.

You are, of course, assuming that Jason:

1.) Will remain a permanent addition to Diana's supporting cast. As experienced Wonder Woman readers, I would think we would both be aware of how often that ends up not being the case.

2.) Will, in fact, be proven to be her brother and not some kind of red herring.

3.) Will be a significant presence in Diana's book once this story centering around him ends.

4.) Will not die by the end of this story.

5.) Will not turn out to be evil by the end of the story and join Diana's rogues gallery.

6.) Any combination of the above.

If your mom and dad told you now that, at the time of your birth, they threw your twin out the window, because they didn't want a daughter, wouldn't that affect how you think of them?

Good news! Unless the story summary is completely misleading, then Hippolyta likely gave up Jason to PROTECT HIM. Not just because he happened to have a sex organ she didn't like. Or? Maybe she gave him up because he was evil and she could already see that no good would come from him. There is certainly no evidence to suggest that Hippolyta just threw him away for reasons.

B) What's sexist about wanting to read the adventures of the title character? I read WW, in part, to get away from the greedy boys that need to dominate industry. If there's one thing superheroes don't need more of, it's men (more specially straight, white, American men).

Good news! We have no idea that Jason is straight or white and we KNOW he's not American. He's Themiscyran.

[Awonder]

You are, of course, assuming that Jason:

1.) Will remain a permanent addition to Diana's supporting cast. As experienced Wonder Woman readers, I would think we would both be aware of how often that ends up not being the case.

2.) Will, in fact, be proven to be her brother and not some kind of red herring.

3.) Will be a significant presence in Diana's book once this story centering around him.

4.) Will not die by the end of this story.

5.) Will not turn out to be evil by the end of the story and join Diana's rogues gallery.

6.) Any combination of the above. .

Please, show me where I made any of those statements you are attributing to me. Or, is it YOU that is making assumptions here? I will now accept your apology.

Good news! Unless the story summary is completely misleading, then Hippolyta likely gave up Jason to PROTECT HIM. Not just because he happened to have a sex organ she didn't like. Or? Maybe she gave him up because he was evil and she could already see that no good would come from him. There is certainly no evidence to suggest that Hippolyta just threw him away for reasons.

"Taken away from Themyscira in the dead of night, the mysterious Jason (the only male ever born on the island) has been hidden somewhere far from the sight of gods and men…but his life and Wonder Woman’s are about to intersect in a terrifying way, bringing them face-to-face with a cosmic threat they never imagined!"

Where does it say to "PROTECT HIM"?

Good news! We have no idea that Jason is straight or white and we KNOW he's not American. He's Themiscyran.

He's another twin of a different color? And making him gay or bi doesn't make the gimmick of a long lost sibling any better. It's still a tired cliche. So, again, I ask, when was the last time this idea was made into a good story?

[MajorHoy]

What overreaction? We had a great run by Rucka that simplified everything, and gave her back her origin.

But how much of her "origin" did Rucka "give back"?
Yes, we had Steve crash by the hidden island home of the Amazons.
Yes, we had Diana leave her home to take Steve back to the United States.
Yes, we had her become "Wonder Woman" once she was in the United States.

So, in what issue did we learn if Diana was created from clay or not? In what issue did it clearly state Zeus was or was not her birth father?
(We still have issue #25 left, where those answers may be supplied, but was there a specific issue number under the Rebirth run where Rucka made it crystal clear what was involved in Diana's "birth"?)

[SiegePerilous02]

"Taken away from Themyscira in the dead of night, the mysterious Jason (the only male ever born on the island) has been hidden somewhere far from the sight of gods and men…but his life and Wonder Woman’s are about to intersect in a terrifying way, bringing them face-to-face with a cosmic threat they never imagined!"

Where does it say to "PROTECT HIM"?

Where does it say in that statement that Hippolyta wanted to get rid of him because of his awful, awful penis? If anything, the phrase "taken away from Themyscira" made me immediately think that Jason was stolen from Hippolyta, not that she wanted in any way to give him up. I don't have complete faith in every decision DC makes, but I doubt they'd be that stupid to spend a year getting rid of the misandrist Amazons and representing them positively in the movie only to have Hippolyta ditch her son for being male.

I'm not too thrilled with this long lost sibling trope either. Frankly, I'm here mainly for Giganta. But we just had a year long run that largely dealt with the interactions between many different women, and are now adding at least two more while Jason isn't on the cover. They still had the sense to tell the female driven origin story without a hint of Jason. It may suck and it may not, but I agree with those saying that the sky isn't falling and it's kind of nuts to react that way right out of the gate. Nobody seriously thought this was going away, did they?

[Vanguard-01]

Please, show me where I made any of those statements you are attributing to me. Or, is it YOU that is making assumptions here? I will now accept your apology.

You're the one who's all upset about this story. Since we know almost nothing about the story, such a strong reaction can only be based upon assumptions.

"Taken away from Themyscira in the dead of night, the mysterious Jason (the only male ever born on the island) has been hidden somewhere far from the sight of gods and men…but his life and Wonder Woman’s are about to intersect in a terrifying way, bringing them face-to-face with a cosmic threat they never imagined!"

Where does it say to "PROTECT HIM"?

"Hidden somewhere far from the sight of gods and men" definitely doesn't mean "Thrown away because Hippolyta didn't like what she saw between his legs."

Typically, if you're hiding someone away from gods and men alike, there's usually a deeper reason than "Nope! I don't want it. Get rid of it." Seems pretty likely that Hippolyta had a good reason for hiding him away.

He's another twin of a different color?

In mythology? Stranger things have happened. Artemis was born from her mother Leto, then instantly grew into a little girl, turned around and assisted her mother in delivering her brother. Pegasus was born from the severed neck of Medusa.......along with an adult humanoid warrior in full armor. Those two don't even appear to be the same SPECIES.

And making him gay or bi doesn't make the gimmick of a long lost sibling any better. It's still a tired cliche. So, again, I ask, when was the last time this idea was made into a good story?

I don't know. And since I'm willing to give this story the benefit of the doubt before I start condemning it as "The worst thing ever," I don't feel particularly inclined to wrack my brain about it.

[Silvanus]

No, we don't know what will happen. But, why do comments like yours only pop up when people don't like an idea? If I had said, "I'm so excited for this," would you have still replied, "but, you don't know what will happen?" Have you never made a statement about a book or movie you hadn't read or seen?

While I don't know the specifics of this story, I do know just how tired I am of lazy writing tropes, of which, 'long lost family' is a top contender. When was the last time that cliche resulted in a really good story? And, besides the Summers family tree, how many superheroes have more long lost family members than WW?

It's not an original idea. It's not even the author's own idea. He's a fill-in for an old gimmick. Why should I wait to have an impression? Are they confident enough that this is so great that they offer a money-back guarantee? No? They only want me to have an opinion after I give them my money. Sorry, but they have a poor track record here to trust them on this.

Glad you don't like the sound of this--not because I'm mean, but because Robinson writing Wonder Woman sounds good to me, and it's been too long since you and I have argued! (I can't seriously disagree with anything you've said about this yet, but here's hoping.)

ETA--Ooo, wait, I found something we can probably already disagree about:

So, again, I ask, when was the last time this idea was made into a good story?

When Azzarello added Lennox et al.

[Awonder]

You're the one who's all upset about this story. Since we know almost nothing about the story, such a strong reaction can only be based upon assumptions.

You're too smart for such lazy replies, and still doing a piss poor job or trying to speak for me. Show me where I said the STORY was "the worst thing ever." You can't, because I didn't. I said the IDEA of another long lost sibling is a bad idea because it's an over-used, lazy trope. It's not even the author's own idea. It's a gimmick.

Is it possible that it turns into a good story? Sure. But, why should I give it my money? Because DC has such a solid track record? Ha! Because the author himself hasn't written crappy stories? Ha!

If it turns out great, I'll happily say they proved me wrong. Until then, my impression of their lazy tropes remains. And, yes, I find it telling you have "such strong reaction" to criticism of a story idea, but you can't name a single time said idea turned out well?

[Awonder]

Glad you don't like the sound of this--not because I'm mean, but because Robinson writing Wonder Woman sounds good to me, and it's been too long since you and I have argued! (I can't seriously disagree with anything you've said about this yet, but here's hoping.)

Ah, my Reverse Flash (or am I the Reverse?). Good to see you.

Robison doesn't excite me. At all. From what I've read, he's been riding his own old coat tails for too long. Perhaps more important, Jason isn't his idea. So, it's not like he was stuck by inspiration and pitched them some gold. It's more Johns wanting to push his gimmick and found a fill-in writer. A writer not even committed enough to the idea to sign on for more than six issues. Nothing about this set-up screams "good idea" to me.

I've been wrong berfore, but, won't be buying, and, honestly, hope it flops hard.

[Vanguard-01]

You're too smart for such lazy replies, and still doing a piss poor job or trying to speak for me. Show me where I said the STORY was "the worst thing ever." You can't, because I didn't. I said the IDEA of another long lost sibling is a bad idea because it's an over-used, lazy trope. It's not even the author's own idea. It's a gimmick.

Pretty much all of storytelling is the use of gimmicks, so I really fail to see the problem. Right now we know nothing about this story, so such an impassioned response seems woefully premature to me.

Is it possible that it turns into a good story? Sure. But, why should I give it my money? Because DC has such a solid track record? Ha! Because the author himself hasn't written crappy stories? Ha!

DC does have a solid track record producing good stories. If they didn't, they would've gone under a long time ago.

Robinson has written crappy stories and he has written some absolute gems. His track record in no way gives any assurances of quality one way or the other. This story could be great, it could be terrible, or it could be mediocre. It's also only six issues long, so one way or the other it won't be a huge problem.

If it turns out great, I'll happily say they proved me wrong. Until then, my impression of their lazy tropes remains. And, yes, I find it telling you have "such strong reaction" to criticism of a story idea, but you can't name a single time said idea turned out well?

I have not had a strong reaction. I see people acting like this news is some kind of personal insult, and I address the issue by saying "We don't know enough about this story to have any strong reactions at this point."

I assure you, if tomorrow James Robinson does an interview in which he makes it clear that Diana's going to be pushed to the sidelines and Jason is going to be the star of "Wonder Woman" for six issues, I will not be saying "We don't know enough" from that point on. THAT will be genuine cause for strong reactions.

[Awonder]

Where does it say in that statement that Hippolyta wanted to get rid of him because of his awful, awful penis? If anything, the phrase "taken away from Themyscira" made me immediately think that Jason was stolen from Hippolyta, not that she wanted in any way to give him up. I don't have complete faith in every decision DC makes, but I doubt they'd be that stupid to spend a year getting rid of the misandrist Amazons and representing them positively in the movie only to have Hippolyta ditch her son for being male.

I'm not too thrilled with this long lost sibling trope either. Frankly, I'm here mainly for Giganta. But we just had a year long run that largely dealt with the interactions between many different women, and are now adding at least two more while Jason isn't on the cover. They still had the sense to tell the female driven origin story without a hint of Jason. It may suck and it may not, but I agree with those saying that the sky isn't falling and it's kind of nuts to react that way right out of the gate. Nobody seriously thought this was going away, did they?

I don't have any faith in DC leadership. None. Even when they make good hires, they often chase them away. Even when they put out good stores, it often doesn't take long to screw them up. DiDio thought Amazons Attack was a good idea. This is the same leadership that thought sex piracy and baby murder should be a defining trait of WW's mother.

Now, if Rucka (or Simone) were writing this, I would give it a shot. But, him avoiding it? That doesn't give me any hope. And, yes, it should go away. If Johns doesn't think enough of his own idea to actually write it, then it's just another gimmick, which, sadly, DC often relies on way too much.

Since you brought up the interactions among women, I have no problem with more men in the stories. But, the don't need to be shoe-horned into as siblings (Nubia was a bad idea, too, for the record). I'd gladly buy the Secret Advetures of Steve and his Merry Men prequel. But, DC had no foresight and commitment to actually plan for a successful WW movie. That's the leadership I have no faith in.