"Wonder Woman's" Meredith & David Finch Discuss Donna Troy's New 52 Introduction

[Ascended]

I think Hal was Parallax (or "villain" in other words) for about a year. After that there were some time travelling stuff where he would pop up but nothing worth mentioning, I think.

Hal went insane in 94, maybe late 93. Remained Parallax until Final Night in 96/early 97, where he died. And yeah, I think there were a couple time travel stories that happened afterwards, where Zero-Hour era Hal would pop up to cause trouble, including young, rookie Hal coming into the present in Green Lantern #100.

Overall, Kyle held the title of primary Green Lantern for about eleven years, from Emerald Twilight to Rebirth. But Hal was the Spectre for a good chunk of that time.

As for Donna, I dont think her turn as a villain will last more than a storyline or two. If she's still a villain when the Finches leave, it'll be fixed by the next creative team. Or she'll be ignored and forgotten and eventually replaced by a different version with no ties to the person who just climbed out of a cauldron.

[pad]

Well I think it is great that Donna Troy is a villain.

> Wonder Woman lacks a mirror villain
> she looks villainous in the preview image
> I like how she is being set up as representing old Amazon values (the man-killin', baby tradin' kind)

Already I'd give this issue a 10/10

Why not create a new character, or revamp Genocide, who was supposed to be Diana's "mirror villain?" Donna as a villain, no matter how short-lived it will be, would be the same as introducing Tawky Tawny as a man-eating tiger who's goal in life is to eat the Marvel Family.

[pad]

she could make company to first born, maybe find love, start a family...

And that's how the New 52 version of Lord Chaos was born! LOL (we really shouldn't give new-DC any ideas!)

[LoneNecromancer]

Why not create a new character, or revamp Genocide, who was supposed to be Diana's "mirror villain?" Donna as a villain, no matter how short-lived it will be, would be the same as introducing Tawky Tawny as a man-eating tiger who's goal in life is to eat the Marvel Family.

Well, I guess it's just hard to make some new characters stick in the memories of fans. Case in point, who the hell is Genocide?

[Pinsir]

Well, I guess it's just hard to make some new characters stick in the memories of fans. Case in point, who the hell is Genocide?

Gail Simone villain

[Blacksun]

And that's how the New 52 version of Lord Chaos was born! LOL (we really shouldn't give new-DC any ideas!)

lol hope they don't read forums

[Pinsir]

Why not create a new character, or revamp Genocide, who was supposed to be Diana's "mirror villain?" Donna as a villain, no matter how short-lived it will be, would be the same as introducing Tawky Tawny as a man-eating tiger who's goal in life is to eat the Marvel Family.

Maxwell Lord was originally a good guy too.

[Kid A]

Well, I guess it's just hard to make some new characters stick in the memories of fans. Case in point, who the hell is Genocide?

An awful attempt at giving Wonder Woman a Doomsday, as if Doomsday wasn't bad enough.

[pad]

Well, I guess it's just hard to make some new characters stick in the memories of fans. Case in point, who the hell is Genocide?

I get that you don't know who Genocide is (a Gail Simone creation), but DC does. If they had use Genocide, then to you it would have been a new character. Instead, they used a character who has always been known as the "heart" of her peers and remade her as "Wonder Woman without a heart."

[pad]

Maxwell Lord was originally a good guy too.

It's not like Maxwell Lord was the most heroic guy around and was then turned into a cold blooded bastard in the new 52. Lord, for most of his existence, was a morally gray character who progressively got more evil (or under the influence of evil) until he became the villain that killed Blue Beatle and then in turn was killed by Wonder Woman (we don't have to go into that again, do we?). Donna, even with the various retcons about her origin, stayed the same person. Since we are talking about Donna in the New 52 compared to the old one, I don't think it compares to Lord turning evil in stories set in the same continuity.

[dangleo61288]

Why not create a new character, or revamp Genocide, who was supposed to be Diana's "mirror villain?" Donna as a villain, no matter how short-lived it will be, would be the same as introducing Tawky Tawny as a man-eating tiger who's goal in life is to eat the Marvel Family.

That would be a good idea. How about Hippolyta having a daughter older than Diana who is takes the Amazon ideology to the extreme. Maybe the by product of an earlier affair with Zeus.

[Sacred Knight]

As to the question as why not create a new character...simple answer is that Finch didn't want to create a new character. She wanted this role for Donna. And its perfectly acceptable. It only requires that the reader be a little patient and let the story be told and not jump the gun and assume that she's already evil. That's where the Tawky Tawny example fails. Introducing the character as a man-eating tiger jacks him up right off the bat because well, he's eaten people before. Introducing Donna as the antagonists' means to replace Diana doesn't mess her up because she hasn't done anything truly evil. She hasn't done anything yet, as she's basically just been born. Yes she'll be manipulated by the story's true villains into dancing to their tune for a while, simply because its all she'll know, but as a clean, unwritten slate, it'll be Wonder Woman's heart that ultimately writes to it, not Hecate and Derinoe's whims. Count on it.

[Darius]

As to the question as why not create a new character...simple answer is that Finch didn't want to create a new character. She wanted this role for Donna. And its perfectly acceptable. It only requires that the reader be a little patient and let the story be told and not jump the gun and assume that she's already evil.

I'm not sure about that ... The way I read the interview it sounded more like bringing Donna back was something she was told to do not necessarily her own decision.

[Sacred Knight]

Fair enough. That could be amended to DC wanted this for Diana. In any case, whether it was DC telling Mrs. Finch to do it or her idea herself, I still stand by the idea she's not going to be a villain, and only be the villain's pawn until the Annual. Look to that book for Donna to break free and essentially her origin story to come to fruition.

[Darius]

Fair enough. That could be amended to DC wanted this for Diana. In any case, whether it was DC telling Mrs. Finch to do it or her idea herself, I still stand by the idea she's not going to be a villain, and only be the villain's pawn until the Annual. Look to that book for Donna to break free and essentially her origin story to come to fruition.

I tend to agree ... I'd be surprised if they didn't bring her back to the side of the Angels at some point