THE TRINITY: Moral choices, ethical division & killing *SPOILERS*

[Tom]

To be honest, even though he's my all-time favorite, I would never assume Superman was right by default.

And y'know, that last paragraph is more than a little contradictory seeing as how you try to say that neither of them is right or wrong and then clearly implying that he's right and she's wrong.

[Calybos]

Not really... both WW and Supes are heroic in differing ways. But if there's a moral conflict between them, it makes sense to start from Superman's position (since he's usually the more heroic) and try to determine where they differ and why.

Starting from the "soldier" viewpoint--valid though it may be--is not as intrinsically heroic. I don't say Superman is clearly right here, because that would make Wonder Woman clearly in the wrong... and she's not. But by default, I always put Superman first in the assumption of moral and ethical superiority until the differences are sorted out.

[IamtheRock3]

As I said, there have been several threads analyzing this "Diana had no choice... no, she had a choice but didn't realize it" question. And legality and diplomatic status have NOTHING to do with it. We're talking about views of right and wrong, not what you can legally get away with.

I don't know if Superman thought Diana had no choice, or if he just said so to spare her feelings... but I DO know that someone with Clark's sense of ethics and morality would be very troubled by a friend who not only killed, but showed no signs of remorse for it, regardless of necessity.

And no, there's never a case of "someone's always wrong." That only works in a black-and-white universe, and DC Comics have more colors than that. Maybe YOU didn't find the logic of the anti-killing arguments "compelling"... maybe YOU prefer to reduce it to either/or situations ("Either Diana kills Max, or the universe is doomed--I guess you want to doom the universe, huh?")... but the fact remains that both characters have their own, differing moral codes. And in this instance, they disagree.

No matter how you twist it, that doesn't make Diana "right" and Clark "wrong." I'm surprised that anyone's even trying for such a vicious, bloodthirsty perspective; frankly, I'd expect more comics fans to assume Superman's right by default (he is, after all, the quintessential hero) and wonder what the heck WW was thinking. But maybe the bloodlust of the 90s is still with us.

On the the other side one cant assumed Diana Wrong..and Clark Right either

They were Are COOL with killing meduasa

but when it max there upset

[Tom]

Not really... both WW and Supes are heroic in differing ways. But if there's a moral conflict between them, it makes sense to start from Superman's position (since he's usually the more heroic) and try to determine where they differ and why.

Starting from the "soldier" viewpoint--valid though it may be--is not as intrinsically heroic. I don't say Superman is clearly right here, because that would make Wonder Woman clearly in the wrong... and she's not. But by default, I always put Superman first in the assumption of moral and ethical superiority until the differences are sorted out.
Sorry, not only don't I agree, but I don't think you're making much sense. Superman is more heroic than WW? If there's a conflict, it's best to start from his position? Soldiers are not as intrinsically heroic? These are all value judgments, not facts.

Look, you apparently think he was right and she was wrong and that's fine, but trying to dress up a moral judgment with false reasoning doesn't really work.

[Calybos]

No, I'm not saying those are facts. I'm saying I'd expect more comics fans to automatically sympathize with Supes in a moral disagreement. I don't feel either one was wrong in this case, but based on my own personal ethics, I automatically come down in favor of Clark until the details are established. It seems odd to me that so many people would start from the opposite perspective.

Yes, I feel that soldiers are not intrinsically heroic; they're hired to kill enemies of the state. That's my personal evaluation, of course; you may disagree. But neither one of us "has to be wrong," as someone claimed earlier is the case in any moral dispute.

And if dressing up a moral judgment with false reasoning doesn't work--why were there several threads devoted to trying to "logically prove" that Diana had no choice but to kill Max?

The point of this topic was asking why Superman had a "problem" with Wonder Woman's actions. It quickly developed into the long-standing debate about why and how anyone could presume to judge Diana's decision to kill someone and show no remorse for it. My point is that Clark DOES have a valid reason to judge her action and have a "problem" with it, because his moral code differs from hers. And no one's going to prove him wrong, any more than they can prove Diana right. That's what a value judgment means.

[Tom]

No, I'm not saying those are facts. I'm saying I'd expect more comics fans to automatically sympathize with Supes in a moral disagreement. I don't feel either one was wrong in this case, but based on my own personal ethics, I automatically come down in favor of Clark until the details are established. It seems odd to me that so many people would start from the opposite perspective.Well, you said it yourself. You're expecting everyone to have the same personal ethics as you. Speaking for myself, I didn't come from the opposite perspective if what you mean by that is to automatically think Superman was wrong. I think Superman is wrong because he judges other heroes based on his own abilities. Could Superman have stopped Max? Maybe, but Superman is head and shoulders above everyone else in terms of his power levels - even Diana. For me, it all comes back to Diana's immortal line from Kingdom Come. "Not all of us have heat vision."
Yes, I feel that soldiers are not intrinsically heroic; they're hired to kill enemies of the state. That's my personal evaluation, of course; you may disagree. But neither one of us "has to be wrong," as someone claimed earlier is the case in any moral dispute.I don't really disagree with you here except that I can't really wrap my head around "intrinsic" heroism. Heroism is borne out by your deeds, not who or what you are.
And if dressing up a moral judgment with false reasoning doesn't work--why were there several threads devoted to trying to "logically prove" that Diana had no choice but to kill Max?And would you say those threads "worked?"
The point of this topic was asking why Superman had a "problem" with Wonder Woman's actions. It quickly developed into the long-standing debate about why and how anyone could presume to judge Diana's decision to kill someone and show no remorse for it. My point is that Clark DOES have a valid reason to judge her action and have a "problem" with it, because his moral code differs from hers. And no one's going to prove him wrong, any more than they can prove Diana right. That's what a value judgment means.
Sure. This part I agree with.

[IamtheRock3]

We dont have to moral sympytize with supes..because even though some people gave good no killing argument..Superman didnt. He Didnt give her Any third Option..just yelled at her. He came off very Weak. WW least saw both sides. While it may of been a 3rd option in THIS sitiation..to think it NEVER not a third option..is just well wrong

And It not like her killing is NEW...she done it before


See I go from the charcter perspective..try to get in there head


Why we expect heroes to live on a higher Level..We know the heroes will ALL WAYS find a way in the comics..got the releaze WW doesnt know she in a comic Book



Sure it a CHANCE max could of been stop but it Like a 100 times higher change letting him live could of ended with a body count in the 1000's. She made a decesion in a couple of second..and coultn really go through a 1000 scenerion

Could batman find a way, MAYBE..it also could of ended up having Max escape and caused people to die while he thinks up a way not to kill max..both scenarios possible


Kind of like if some guy have a gun on someone, you go for the easy shot if you have a gun. Yea WW as a higher Level then me..but she dealing with people at high power levles too..so the annolgy fit

It ALLWAYS a chance you wont have to shoot the guy, but if a gun pointed at someone as a cop your Job is to take the person down if innocent threaten. Sure there a Change you can pick up a Rock, hit the wall with the rock so it can riccoce off a wall and hit him in the head..but it isnt very likely

[VietN]

Again, he acknowledged she had no options at the time.

She was all beaten and bruised from a prolonged fight with Superman, and Supes, bloodlusted, was coming for her *again*, ready for more. She asked Max, with the lasso of truth, what she could do to stop it.

What Max said wasn't "Kill me, or just knock me out untill you find out another solution. I assure you my power over him will stop working if I'm unconscient". All he said was "Kill me."

She didn't have the time to think of anything else, and she didn't have the strenght to fight Superman for another round. And the "collective braitrust of the DCU" wasn't there to help her either.

I'll say it again. He can believe whatever he wants. It doesn't mean its true. He thinks he can't be stopped. Thats all the rope tells WW.

If WW used the rope on a Star Wars fanatic who believes and says Jar Jar Binks is a cool character he'll pass the rope test. Beyond that however we all know he blows.


----
*edit*
The point is simple. Heroes are expected not to kill unless they have to. Diana did not have to (as I have explained)... therefore her decision was flawed.

If it can be logically explained that she made a flawed decision then Superman and Batman have a case. Basic stuff.

[Absalom]

Originally posted by VietN

I'll say it again. He can believe whatever he wants. It doesn't mean its true. He thinks he can't be stopped. Thats all the rope tells WW.

If WW used the rope on a Star Wars fanatic who believes and says Jar Jar Binks is a cool character he'll pass the rope test. Beyond that however we all know he blows.
And I'll say it again: she had no time to make anything but a quick judgement. Superman was a few meters away from her, coming at superspeed.

She had to make a quick decision, in a life-or-death situation, judging only by the little piece of information she was given. Hardly the same case as your "rope test on SW fan".
The point is simple. Heroes are expected not to kill unless they have to. Diana did not have to (as I have explained)... therefore her decision was flawed.
No, you haven't explained anything really. Desperate situation requiring a desperate move, therefore her decision was not flawed.
If it can be logically explained that she made a flawed decision then Superman and Batman have a case. Basic stuff.
Again, how it can be logically explained if a) you have no proof that her situation wasn't life-or-death; b) you have no proof she had more information about how Max's powers work than the one he told her himself, and c) you have no proof she had more than a *second* to make a judgement, before Superman tagged her again.

[Paul Newell]

Guys, the main thrust of this thread is the two characters feelings for each other due to the actions.
Not the argument that's been ranging for months about whether she had other options or not. Each time it just ends with one group saying she had no option, the other group saying she had other options and the discussion usually ends with both your points being reiterated in several thousand variations all saying the same two things. So lets end the neverending here, OK?

[cletus510]

Am I the only one who thought Batman's insult to Superman ("The last time you inspired someone was when you were dead.") was a contrived line, forcing drama and tension in a manner that is false to both characters? I'll admit that it WOULD have been a great diss, a classic line; but I just didn't buy it. I'm surprised that no one has called Johns on it. Even more surprising is that some readers find truth in it. (Keep in mind that Batman is my favorite character, so I'm not reacting this way in loyal defense of Superman.)

The statement is completely false and goes against the portrayal of Superman that we've read in comics year after year. Take any comic--particularly the team-ups such as in JLA. Story after story, there seems to be some point that the other team members such as Flash or GL stop and remark how inspirational Superman is--how he continues to fight bravely in the face of adversity or certain loss. At times, it seems that this is Superman's greatest attribute as a team member: how he leads by example, facing each challenge courageously and selflessly, a role model for the younger heroes. Even Batman begrudgingly acknowledges Superman's leadership and inspirational abilities. In addition, because Superman is the hero closest to being a friend to Batman (especially as portrayed by Loeb, who's the best writer at portraying their relationship), I really can't see Batman ever saying something this cruel to him. The only two reasons I can think of are that either he's still bitter for the a$$kicking he received, or the attitude is foreshadowing the necessary and imminent change in the Batjerk personality the Crisis might engender.

Either way, this line seemed as empty as if Superman had said to Batman, "When was the last time you ever solved a crime?"

[Xero Kaiser]

Well, considering the fact that the people Batman inspires wind up dead or crippled, he shouldn't be saying anything

[Arkham Resident]

Am I the only one who thought Batman's insult to Superman ("The last time you inspired someone was when you were dead.") was a contrived line, forcing drama and tension in a manner that is false to both characters? I'll admit that it WOULD have been a great diss, a classic line; but I just didn't buy it. I'm surprised that no one has called Johns on it. Even more surprising is that some readers find truth in it. (Keep in mind that Batman is my favorite character, so I'm not reacting this way in loyal defense of Superman.)

The statement is completely false and goes against the portrayal of Superman that we've read in comics year after year. Take any comic--particularly the team-ups such as in JLA. Story after story, there seems to be some point that the other team members such as Flash or GL stop and remark how inspirational Superman is--how he continues to fight bravely in the face of adversity or certain loss. At times, it seems that this is Superman's greatest attribute as a team member: how he leads by example, facing each challenge courageously and selflessly, a role model for the younger heroes. Even Batman begrudgingly acknowledges Superman's leadership and inspirational abilities. In addition, because Superman is the hero closest to being a friend to Batman (especially as portrayed by Loeb, who's the best writer at portraying their relationship), I really can't see Batman ever saying something this cruel to him. The only two reasons I can think of are that either he's still bitter for the a$$kicking he received, or the attitude is foreshadowing the necessary and imminent change in the Batjerk personality the Crisis might engender.

Either way, this line seemed as empty as if Superman had said to Batman, "When was the last time you ever solved a crime?"

Well, i think the diss was said as a personal opinion of Batman not as a universal fact to be accepted by all. Everyone's free to disagree with it, funny thing though.. Supes and WW were put in silence when he said the line. Does the silence mean.. acknowledgement of the fact or not .. we dont know.

[Alan2099]

Look at the decissions, choices, and opinnions out forth by Batman latley. I wouldn't put too much stock into them being the right thing.

[Chip Whitley]

Anyone think Bruce might have been trying to give Supes a kind of wake-up call (sensing that something big's brewing), and not just going for the low-blow?
Given their friendship (especially in Superman/Batman), Bruce knows Clark well and may have directed that comment to get Clark thinking in the right direction.

I may be way off as it's more likely this is just the harshest example of the splintering between the big 3, driving the point home and getting new readers up to speed.
It just seems so out of character that I thought I'd throw that theory out there.

Either way: Bat-Dick Strikes Again! :evilsmile

[aeastwic]

I think Batman, Superman and Wonder Woman were all out of character and it's part of the story. Batman's comments were out of line, considering that you could pull a lot of contradictory statements from comics since Superman "died".

Wonder Woman (overt bloodlust) and Superman (ignoring his friends and completely shutting them out) are also both out of character and I think that this is part of the overall Crisis.

However, each of these examples is an exaggeration of something already in their characer, it's being magnified for some reason to keep them apart.

[literally exaggerated]

I actually thought they were fairly spot-on.

Its pretty clear from the context of the conversation that when Batman is speaking of inspiration, he is referring not to the inspiring of other heroes, but to the inspiring of the people of America/the Earth in general.

Now, he's not entirely correct. Superman has used his status as a symbol proactively after his death, with Mageddon and with the Hyperclan.

But he is correct that Superman, for the last few years especially, has been loathe to be anything more than a really powerful man. He fights bravely and all that, but thats now that Batman is talking about. Superman as a hero is such a powerful figurehead that if he chose to embrace his role as symbol and icon and use it, he could unite the world, inspire the common man to do more with his life, make real sweeping changes for the better. He could be a leader, and right now, that is what he needs to be.

Instead, for the last several years or so, he's been pretty damn wishy washy. At best an assuming, brave, selfless guy who fights evil, at worst a wishy washy pussy who would make Hamlet say "Just act already!". What he has not been is actively a symbol for any non-Superheroes, or a leader for the people of earth in dark times.

So while Batman was exaggerating some, his overall point is, I think, correct.

[Zugernaut]

Yeah, it's contrived in the sense that it's an attempt to conflate events in the DCU with missteps by DC editors and creators. Superman hasn't inspired anyone because most of his stories since his death and return have been crappy. I'm all for a sequel to Crisis on Infinite Earths, but how it's going to solve the lack of quality Superman stories is beyond me. The result of COIE was largely mechanical: once there were many earths, then there was one. The purpose of IC seems much more abstract--what it takes to be a hero, or somesuch. Almost as if they're going to reach some new level of storytelling through a narrative. I'm along for the ride, but I don't see how they're going to accomplish it.

[mohammedali]

Made perfect sence to me. When Superman died new superheroes came into exsistance as a tribute to what he was and what he stood for. Since then, nothing has really happened because of his presence. No one has taken up crime-fighting because of him other than family and clones. He could have done a lot more, and if nothing else, led a lot more people to do the right thing, but instead he turned a blind eye and carried on his own thing.
I'm not suprised Batman said what he did. He isn't in the same position that Sups is, and he must be getting quite frustrated that Superman is not doing as much as he could to stop everything from messing up. He said it as a friend with a little dickery in there as well - coz that's the friend that Batman is...

Mohammed Ali

[lead sharp]

The big problem with all this Infinate Crises on infinate crossovers involving Omac/villians/magic judgements and so forth is that all the characters involved are too well liked and entrenched in their own 'mytholagies' so that anything they do that suddenly seems fresh or different seems completley alien.

If the Midnighter had acted like Batman for example ie a complete jerk, it would have been an addition to his character that the reader would have been interested to learn more about.

But because a 60 year old vintage like Batman and so forth does somthing out of the norm, it sticks out like something stuck on for the sake of shouting 'Look we can do somthing beyond the everyday fair we hack up for these characters.'

Frankly this is all smacking far to much like DC's answer to the Spider Clone Saga and should be shot as soon as possible.

[Christopher O]

I think Batman, Superman and Wonder Woman were all out of character and it's part of the story.
I agree. I have two words: Psycho and Pirate. Seriously, I'm guessing he's got something to do with their behaviour.

[trickster]

I agree. I have two words: Psycho and Pirate. Seriously, I'm guessing he's got something to do with their behaviour.


Oh really? Well I'll blame the Psycho Pirate next time I hurt someone's feelings.
Actually I'd hate it if it was the Psycho Pirate. That would be lame.

[cletus510]

Arkham Resident: Yeah, I got the same weird feeling by WW and Supes' "acknowledgement" of the line. That gave it more weight than if either protested.

Chip: Good point about the "wake up call." I can actually buy that--if it is played out and explained as such. I just don't want to believe that Batman really believes what he said.

Literally and Zugernaut: It is agreed that the contrived line could be setting up a return to a new heroic Superman for the people. His "wishy-washyness" and the lack of quality stories is a whole other topic! Except for Loeb's run in "Superman" around issues 151 to 170-ish, and Rucka's work in "Adventures," the 3 titles have been poor. His characterization has been bad. So I know what you mean. Personally, I think his marriage to Lois has been a huge mistake. It seems his only motivation nowadays is Lois--always doing whatever's needed to protect her. "Screw the world, I'm here for Lois." I cringe every time there is a page devoted to the two of them cuddling and making goo-goo talk. Talk about emasculation of the world's mightiest being! (One of the Crisis architects (Didio?) gives me hope when he said that a problem with the DC universe now is how no one has secret identities anymore. Unfortunately, I don't see how they would "dissolve" the marriage and make his identity a secret again.)

[Sean Whitmore]

I took the line to be more exaggerated than out-and-out false.

It's like when you say to someone, "you're the biggest jerk in the world." That's not literal...he's just a really big jerk.

So when Batman said, "you haven't inspired anyone since you were dead", he probably meant Superman hadn't inspired anyone for about a year or two.

Or something. :)


SEAN

[converge241]

i just took it as bats being a little frustrated (at himself and his situation lately..Brother I and Todd being back) and just wanting the all powerful superman to do something..to save the day

[Brian Cronin]

I found the entire conversation to be a major case of outside writing (http://goodcomics.blogspot.com/2005/01/comic-dictionary-outside-writing.html).

-Brian

[lonewolf23k]

If I'd been Superman, I'd have replied:

"And how many people have you tried inspiring lately?"

[Yoda]

Whats that line from Napeolan Dynamite? "God! This is the worst video in the world!"

It wasn't meant to be taken as a literal statement. It was an overstatement, and sure Superman has inspired people since he was dead. But Batman's point was that he should be doing more, he is capable of more, and he's failed himself.

[Yoda]

If I'd been Superman, I'd have replied:

"And how many people have you tried inspiring lately?"

That wouldn't really be good reply, because the whole point of Batman's attack was that Superman isn't him, he isn't human. He's SUPERMAN.

I'm one of the biggest Superman fan's out there, don't even like the Bat books. But I agree with Batman.

[Babylon23]

I think Batman, Superman and Wonder Woman were all out of character and it's part of the story. Batman's comments were out of line, considering that you could pull a lot of contradictory statements from comics since Superman "died".

Wonder Woman (overt bloodlust) and Superman (ignoring his friends and completely shutting them out) are also both out of character and I think that this is part of the overall Crisis.

However, each of these examples is an exaggeration of something already in their characer, it's being magnified for some reason to keep them apart.

I agree that I think this entire situation is part of the grander scheme of IC. We've already seen Psycho-Pirate and Despero manipulating the heroes, and I'm fairly certain that the big bad guy will be revealed to be controlling and enhancing the emotional states of the heroes and villains.

However, I have another theory as well. Back in the Animal Man Crisis sequel, part of the story involved heroes breaking the 4th barrier and interacting with their creators. I wonder if the comment is a part of that. The Superman titles haven't really been top sellers since the Death of Superman days, so maybe Batman is subconsciously referencing that as well.

[trickster]

"And how many people have you tried inspiring lately?"

Batman isn't in it for the gratitude or to be an inspiration.

[trickster]

However, I have another theory as well. Back in the Animal Man Crisis sequel, part of the story involved heroes breaking the 4th barrier and interacting with their creators. I wonder if the comment is a part of that. The Superman titles haven't really been top sellers since the Death of Superman days, so maybe Batman is subconsciously referencing that as well.
I hope they don't do that. That's so lame.

[Sk8maven]

However, I have another theory as well. Back in the Animal Man Crisis sequel, part of the story involved heroes breaking the 4th barrier and interacting with their creators. I wonder if the comment is a part of that. The Superman titles haven't really been top sellers since the Death of Superman days, so maybe Batman is subconsciously referencing that as well.Frankly, only Grant Morrison has the right writing style to pull that off.

Maven

[CaptMagellan]

I found the entire conversation to be a major case of outside writing (http://goodcomics.blogspot.com/2005/01/comic-dictionary-outside-writing.html).

-Brian

Yup. And it felt like contrived outside writing to me.

I also hope they're not playing around with breaking the 4th wall but there's been a lot of little nuggets dropped around the DC books that make it possible (the worst offender being Geoff Johns' use of the industry term 'retcon' in story during the Degaton JSA arc).

[Astonishing X-Fan]

"Except for Loeb's run in "Superman" around issues 151 to 170-ish, and Rucka's work in "Adventures," the 3 titles have been poor."

Gail's Action Comincs has been a great read.

[davids]

This one has killed medusa, snapped Max lords neck and was about to stick her sword in Mongull two heart before superman stopped her. How do we know she is our wonder woman.

I rememebr another Wonder woman who got exilled from pardise island for being to gentile. stabbed von bock in the back and led the super heroes in kingdom come into a final bloody battle.

With all the talk about kingdom come perhaps entering the infinate crisis could this wonder woman be in fact the wonder woman from kingdom come, wife to superman mother of jonathan?

Has she come back in time and croased the barriers of hypertime on her own mission. she does not age there is now way to tell them a part. Unless she has stretch marks from her pregnancy?

Is the Diana who shocked the world by killing Max Lord a Diana from 30 or 40 yers in the future or a diffrent hypertime reality?

[Buried Alien]

If that's the case, what has become of the Perez Wonder Woman?


Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

[davids]

If DC pulled the switch with out telling us the readers what a wonderfull, shocking twist when they tell us! To the whole sacrifice and infinate story line! Many readers have speculated on the death of wonder woman and being replaced by donna troy. What if she will be replaced by the wonder woman from the kingdom come hypertime reality?

What id Diana our Diana is trapped some were while this other woman carries out her plan?

What a great surprise and joke on us!

[glennsim]

I had considered that one way to make sure all of the heroes are less dark when this is all over is to say they are replaced by alternate versions of themselves from the Multiverse...

[Nodrog]

I figure with all the stress going on within the league and the death of Kord, killing would seem like an enticing option. I don’t know too much about these alternate Earths, but I just think Wonder Woman is at her breaking point----fighting fire with fire.

[The Shadow]

... I HATE the Multiverse!

Have I mentioned that before?

YOu do raise some interesting points though davids... food for thought.

[Guts/Batman]

... I HATE the Multiverse!

Have I mentioned that before?

YOu do raise some interesting points though davids... food for thought.

Only a few times... ;)

[Fenix]

davids
With all the talk about kingdom come perhaps entering the infinate crisis could this wonder woman be in fact the wonder woman from kingdom come, wife to superman mother of jonathan?

I seriously doubt that, because play it like that is cheating in terms of writing, not good drama. At least, they should have given us more than a sudden strange character twist to backup the kindom come version of Diana interacting with the current reality.

If that turn out to be the case, all the "big plannig" and "superduper massive crossovers" and the 2 years of seeding evidence will conclude in a plain massive rip off.

[PatrickG]

Super-hero stories are more about cheating than good drama.

[Young Avenger]

Just because there are two Luthor's that doesn't mean there is two of every character. It would be lazy writing if a character who is being mischaraterized is the alternative version of the character.

[trickster]

Just because there are two Luthor's that doesn't mean there is two of every character. It would be lazy writing if a character who is being mischaraterized is the alternative version of the character.
Especially when that so-called "miscaracterization" is wishful thinking from some readers. I for one am in the pro WW camp.

[Paradox]

The Shadow apparantly DOESN'T know:

... I HATE the Multiverse!

Have I mentioned that before?

Yes, you have...Mary. :D

[GabrielleWP]

I don't think if anyone remembered WM Loebs version of WW this question would be asked. All characters have to grow and mature. Diana has seen enough of war and possibly just had enough.

But WM Loebs Wonder Woman after zero hour kicked serious ass. Although she didnt' kill she sure knocked the crap out of a few. Its not like she really had a choice this time around. She was between a rock and a hard place. These weren't glory killings but ones that needed to be done. And if you think about it after Max's death, she'd been fighting Supes, was seriously tired and hurt and fed up and probably reached a breaking point.


Perez's Wonder Woman simply grew up.


GWP

[Paradox]

GabrielleWP is allowed her opinion...:

I don't think if anyone remembered WM Leobs version of WW this question would be asked. All characters have to grow and mature. Diana has seen enough of war and possibly just had enough.

But WM Leobs Wonder Woman after zero hour kicked serious ass. Although she didnt' kill she sure knocked the crap out of a few.

That would be...the one that worked at Taco Whiz???

[GabrielleWP]

That would be...the one that worked at Taco Whiz???

Taco Wiz was before zero hour.. so

Um no....yes he wrote #63 to #100 But I'm talking about his later work. What he turned Diana into. The contest, the betrayal the new uniform (ugh) and the F you attitude. Her character changed and she grew up a bit more during that time. So seeing her doing the things she's doing now isn't that new to me. Sure she didn't exactly snap anyones neck but she did knock a few teeth out and just about shoved a guys chin thru the top of his head.


GWP

[Magneto_X]

Gabrielle:

Is that the WW who lost her powers in the 60's?

Btw, nice Alias avatar.

[Guts/Batman]

This Wonder Woman seems very much the same one as the Kingdom Come version.

Current WW and KC Wonder Woman think awfully alike. So if this isn't the same Diana, then it could be KC Wonder Woman or this isn't the same Wonder Woman as the one in KC as well.

Crinos had an interesting theory in the Death Spiral. When Clayface found out that Wonder Woman was made of special clay he tried to absorb her. He thought maybe that his personality had rubbed off on her and vice versa...

[Magneto_X]

Maybe Post-Crisis WW is the version who becomes like that in Kingdom Come.
It is an alternate future IIRC.

[GabrielleWP]

Gabrielle:

Is that the WW who lost her powers in the 60's?

Btw, nice Alias avatar.

Nope, this is around 1995 or so. Deodato's T&A / Artemis as WW era.
And thanks! Alias season one was always my favorite. Although after last weeks episode I gotta say I'm excited about the show again.

But as far as Diana goes, I like what Rucka is doing now, just hope that come next year they start fresh or keep it going in this direction. I'd had to see another 'Byrne' era or that complete cockup that followed it.

How is Loebs doing anyway since the accident and loosing his trailer? I've not heard anymore news. Maybe they should bring him back..

GWP

[jadegiant77]

You know, Di's been goin down this road for awhile now. She suggested the League should have killed Dr. Light and that Superman should have killed Ruin(did we ever find out who he REALLY was?). Like Waid said, she's from Paradox Island--preach peace, practice violence.

BTW, I liked Deodato's Wonder Woman.. :D

[Buried Alien]

Interesting footnote: In Pre-COIE continuity, the Earth-1 Wonder Woman was one of the JLA members (along with Kator Hol Hawkman and Aquaman) who voted to banish the Flash (Barry Allen) from the JLA after Flash killed Professor Zoom. Wonder Woman's stance (and Hawkman's and Aquaman's) was that killing was never justified, and those who killed had no place in the JLA, regardless of their past record of merit. In light of what's happened with Wonder Woman (and Hawkman), it's ironic.

Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

[Paradox]

jadegiant77 interests me in real estate:

Like Waid said, she's from Paradox Island--preach peace, practice violence.

I have my own island now? COOOOOOL! :cool:

[Chad G.]

If I'd been Superman, I'd have replied:

"And how many people have you tried inspiring lately?"

Thats just it. Batman doesn't want to inspire people. Right now, Bruce is angry, hurt and confused, and has no idea who to trust. I don't have any idea what he meant by that comment. Maybe he was trying to wake Clark up. Maybe he was trying to be hurtful. I just don't know...

[Satana Hellstrom]

... I HATE the Multiverse!

Have I mentioned that before?



LOL!!! :D

[LibrarianThorne]

Arkham Resident: Yeah, I got the same weird feeling by WW and Supes' "acknowledgement" of the line. That gave it more weight than if either protested.

Chip: Good point about the "wake up call." I can actually buy that--if it is played out and explained as such. I just don't want to believe that Batman really believes what he said.

Literally and Zugernaut: It is agreed that the contrived line could be setting up a return to a new heroic Superman for the people. His "wishy-washyness" and the lack of quality stories is a whole other topic! Except for Loeb's run in "Superman" around issues 151 to 170-ish, and Rucka's work in "Adventures," the 3 titles have been poor. His characterization has been bad. So I know what you mean. Personally, I think his marriage to Lois has been a huge mistake. It seems his only motivation nowadays is Lois--always doing whatever's needed to protect her. "Screw the world, I'm here for Lois." I cringe every time there is a page devoted to the two of them cuddling and making goo-goo talk. Talk about emasculation of the world's mightiest being! (One of the Crisis architects (Didio?) gives me hope when he said that a problem with the DC universe now is how no one has secret identities anymore. Unfortunately, I don't see how they would "dissolve" the marriage and make his identity a secret again.)

I actually love the Clark/Lois marriage. Superman as a character isn't going to change much, but Clark Kent was going places in the '90s, and the adventures of "mild-mannered" Clark Kent were almost as cool as those of his underwear-wearing alter-ego. Recently, we've seen far too much of the Super, not enough of the man.

I think it relates to Kingdom Come, and what that Superman learned. It wasn't the powers that made him Superman, it was who he was. And he was, after all, a man, not a god. That was something he lost sight of after Lois was killed.

Personally, if the rumors of a Lois/Clark divorce are true, i'll be deeply saddened. You can get drama out of the pairing in more ways than something as hamfisted as a breakup. Why not see how DC's first couple deals with annoying neighbors? That would make for a great issue, I think. Superman is great to read about and all, but there's not a lot of meaningful conflict with Big Blue. We all know he's going to beat the bad guy, and we know he's going to do it with some combination of superstrength, heat vision, and super speed. However, we haven't really seen how he deals with the common, every day stuff that we have to live with. Making Clark Kent single again and reworking the Lana/Clark/Lois love triangle would just be incredibly lame on DC's part, nostalgia or no. He's the only one of the big three who has evolved significantly since his inception, and I'd rather they kept that advancement than discard it.

But this is Geoff Johns, so I'm betting we'll see Clark Kent living the single life pretty soon. Damnation...

[tk421atpost]

I took the whole thing as Batman just being pissy about being judged for how he's been screwing up lately and was taking a cheap shot at Superman.

[Calybos]

Well, that's really what it was. Since Batman's incapable of admitting how he screwed up, his automatic defense is to go on the attack. A classic distraction tactic, and sadly, Clark fell for it.

It would've been nice to see him show a little backbone and say, "Oh, yes... I'm not being as 'super' as you'd prefer. That's a much worse problem than you regularly betraying the people who fight alongside you and rigging up systems to kill them when you're not busy calling them idiots. This is about ME, all right. After all, whereeas you're just killing thousands of innocents--I let you down. And your feelings are hurt. Poor baby."

Bat-dick.

[ApexPredator]

I think you Batman was talking about Superman the Character but the writer was throwng a jab at the actual comic book regarding sales and editors and writers. It has a double meaning...OMG....comics can be deep.

Supes had at one time given Batman some kryptonite in case of an emergency...you dont do that to someone you dont trust. And Batman IMHO is the only person that is not his wife or adopted family, that could give him this kind of straight talk.

I mean Batman called Clark Naive in the start of the book.

Clark is a little naive

And he was right


Contrived? You people are morons...all of you. I think some people just want to read the ORIGIN story of the character over and over and over. Even lovers fight....ask your mom

[da noble savage]

man i'm getting so tired of all the bat bashing. God get over it of course he would have contengency plans for the jla. It's who he is he's batman for god's sake damn get over it. If where him i would do the same thing. :D

[trickster]

Well, that's really what it was. Since Batman's incapable of admitting how he screwed up, his automatic defense is to go on the attack. A classic distraction tactic, and sadly, Clark fell for it.

It would've been nice to see him show a little backbone and say, "Oh, yes... I'm not being as 'super' as you'd prefer. That's a much worse problem than you regularly betraying the people who fight alongside you and rigging up systems to kill them when you're not busy calling them idiots. This is about ME, all right. After all, whereeas you're just killing thousands of innocents--I let you down. And your feelings are hurt. Poor baby."

Bat-dick.

Dude, too much pot is bad for you. Batman killed "thousands of innocents"? Where did you pull that from? It's just that "wouldn't-hurt-a-fly" Superman would have killed the whole Justice League if left unchecked, not to mention God knows how many people.

[Calybos]

He built Brother Eye and equipped it with way too much power and weaponry... it went out of his control. Therefore, he is directly responsible for all the damage it caused.

[trickster]

with way too much power and weaponry... it went out of his control.
Too much power? You mean like Superman has?
And out of control. Oh, like Superman was?


Therefore, he is directly responsible for all the damage it caused.


Yeah, and by that twisted logic, car manufacturers are responsible for all the victims of car accidents.
Or if I use a knife to kill somebody, then it's the knife manufacturer's fault. Way to go. Real smart.

Batman killed "thousands of innocents"?
Even so, damage is one thing, killing thousands is another. And not even Superman said anything about thousands killed. You're pulling facts out of your... pocket.

[Christopher O]

Oh really? Well I'll blame the Psycho Pirate next time I hurt someone's feelings.
Actually I'd hate it if it was the Psycho Pirate. That would be lame.
He seems to be central to the Crisis, and the big three are all being a bit extreme with their stances, so it wouldn't surprise me if Luthor or whoever the "big, bad" turns out to be used the Pirate to drive a wedge between the cracks of the Trinity. Lame or not, Psycho Pirate has a role in the Crisis, and it's possible that this is part of it.

[da noble savage]

He built Brother Eye and equipped it with way too much power and weaponry... it went out of his control. Therefore, he is directly responsible for all the damage it caused.

actally the brother eye batman built was just a monitor system. The power and weaponry where added by max. :D

[Calybos]

So Batman's defense is that he's no more guilty than Superman was... and at least Supes didn't go into it with the intent of screwing over innocent people and comrades, like Batdick did. Niiiiiice defense. (Here's a hint: It doesn't help Bush's supporters when they whine that "I suppose Clinton was an angel!"--or "But Saddam tortured people MUCH worse than that!" That's a distraction, not a defense.)

And yes, manufacturers ARE liable if their products hurt someone. Ever heard of a civil suit? Product liability? Gross negligence? (All of them terms that could be readily laid at Bruce's doorstep.....)

As for the demonstrated damage: OMACs have already been shown killing dozens of people, and described as killing many more--not to mention the poor suckers who got turned into kill-drones themselves.

And all because Bruce was, once again, a paranoid and arrogant dick who elected himself judge/jury/executioner over his fellow heroes--errr, crimefighters. (Because he sure doesn't qualify as much of a hero.)

[Paul Newell]

Guys, tone it down a notch. There's no need for insults or getting heated.

[Yoda]

And yes, manufacturers ARE liable if their products hurt someone. Ever heard of a civil suit? Product liability? Gross negligence? (All of them terms that could be readily laid at Bruce's doorstep.....)

Batman didnt build the OMACs. Max Lord did. Batman built a harmless monitoring satellite. That would be like holding GMC liable for the car bomb some terrorist put in it.

[Christopher O]

Batman didnt build the OMACs. Max Lord did. Batman built a harmless monitoring satellite. That would be like holding GMC liable for the car bomb some terrorist put in it.
Not so harmless. He built it to spy on his friends and colleagues, and now the autonomous Brother Eye is using that information against the metahuman populace. Batman has a lot to answer for.

[AlterEgo]

So Batman's defense is that he's no more guilty than Superman was... and at least Supes didn't go into it with the intent of screwing over innocent people and comrades, like Batdick did. Niiiiiice defense. (Here's a hint: It doesn't help Bush's supporters when they whine that "I suppose Clinton was an angel!"--or "But Saddam tortured people MUCH worse than that!" That's a distraction, not a defense.)

And yes, manufacturers ARE liable if their products hurt someone. Ever heard of a civil suit? Product liability? Gross negligence? (All of them terms that could be readily laid at Bruce's doorstep.....)

As for the demonstrated damage: OMACs have already been shown killing dozens of people, and described as killing many more--not to mention the poor suckers who got turned into kill-drones themselves.

And all because Bruce was, once again, a paranoid and arrogant dick who elected himself judge/jury/executioner over his fellow heroes--errr, crimefighters. (Because he sure doesn't qualify as much of a hero.)

dude, you're getting way too worked up over this. [police voice over megaphone] Sir, show me your hands and step away from the comic books. :D

[Calybos]

Sorry... I'm just not fond of antiheroes posing as heroes. Although it IS fun watching them squirm when it blows up in their faces and the jerk gets called on his actions.

(Note, I'm attacking Bruce Wayne here, not any of the posters.)

[trickster]

Sorry... I'm just not fond of antiheroes posing as heroes. Although it IS fun watching them squirm when it blows up in their faces and the jerk gets called on his actions.

(Note, I'm attacking Bruce Wayne here, not any of the posters.)

Yeah, but you're just twisting facts. The government also has antimetahuman defenses. How come you don't hate the government (the DCU government of course)? Actually the OMACs are created by said government. (See "For tomorrow").

So now we're toning it down, are we? It's no longer thousands, it's dozens :p?
Hate to do this, but where are the dozens of victims? So far only Ratcatcher is dead, and most people who were OMACs are safe and free from Brother Eye. Not even the one that Atom Smasher stomped on is dead.
jerk gets called on his actions.
Yeah, but when blue eyed pretty boy gets called on his actions they're perfectly excusable.
As far as I'm concerned, if people like Superman flew about every day, I'd want someone to be able to keep them in check. In this case Batman is smart enough to see it has to be done and to do it, so more power to him. If Superman had any decency, he'd admit it's not about him because he's powerful enough to be a danger to Earth itself. It's the same as in Kingdom Come. He went and built a prison and "screw regular humans I'll do what I think it's right".

[Fenix]

I`m going to say it:
Batman is right.

Why?
Check out the last page of Infinite Crisis #1. That`s why. That last page wouldn`t have had the impact that it has IF Batman were wrong. Think about it.

It has been almost 2 years of Super screw ups, of "what should I do, Lois?" Superman, of "For Tomorrow" and such things.
Blame the writers, blame whoever you want, but that´s superman right now, THE "I DON´T KNOW WHAT TO DO" Superman and because he is SUPERMAN, he can´t use that as an excuse, as Batman already point it out.
Superman should be above any other hero, everyone. IF he`s not, no matter what, he´s not the "inspiring" Superman he used to be.

[Guts/Batman]

Batman didnt build the OMACs. Max Lord did. Batman built a harmless monitoring satellite. That would be like holding GMC liable for the car bomb some terrorist put in it.

Harmless my butt...

If that's all he wanted it for, he wouldn't have made is a friggin semi-autonomus AI.

On topic...

Of course, Batman's insult of Superman was contrived. I mean ,seriously, some of the storylines in the past year and a half have been completely contrived themselves.

Batman, recently, says that things that Superman won't. Even if they are true. Clark will never say that outloud. Just to himself and to Lois...

If you look at the conversation that Clark and Bruce have in Adventures #643, Bruce says everything that Clark won't and he's very vocal about it...

In Wonder Woman #220, Diana explains what happens to Bruce and he flat tells her to go away...

There's nothing else. Just "go away."

[Calybos]

And since the OMACs wiped out every Checkmate agent on Earth, I think that counts as killing more than one person. And several thousand of them are STILL hovering out in space under Brother's control... all of which was originally caused, yet again, by Bruce being a paranoid and arrogant jerk.

(Kind of like when he decided the Outsiders tracking down a single super-thug was "more important" than letting GeoForce know he was needed to defend his homeland during a freakin' WAR. "I needed you here," Bruce intoned. Bat-dick.)

[trickster]

And since the OMACs wiped out every Checkmate agent on Earth, I think that counts as killing more than one person. And several thousand of them are STILL hovering out in space under Brother's control... all of which was originally caused, yet again, by Bruce being a paranoid and arrogant jerk.

(Kind of like when he decided the Outsiders tracking down a single super-thug was "more important" than letting GeoForce know he was needed to defend his homeland during a freakin' WAR. "I needed you here," Bruce intoned. Bat-dick.)

Killing the Checkmate agents was called protocol "Kingisdead", so it was something Max Lord designed. But hey, just keep presenting things the way you want.

[Guts/Batman]

Nothing about OMAC has changed since issue #6.

No one died as a result of Bruce pulling a deus ex machina (I won't bother to say that it totally contradicted what was said in #5).

I still find Bruce ultimately responsible for this. Without Bruce's intense rage and need for control...no, mere control doesn't cover it.

Without Bruce's need for absolute control over everything (not too mention a recent personality that is insanely secretive and doesn't let anyone know a goddamn thing), Brother MK1 doesn't even get up in orbit.

His need for control is so absolute that he makes Brother MK1 a semi-autonomous AI. Brother MK1 was a major security risk when it first went into orbit. The whole mini was a practice in contradictions.

Batman's need for absolute control leading to him creating only a semi controlled spy satellite. Am I the only one who doesn't get this one? I hope I'm not.

Max Lord not being an android. Max Lord being evil...

Massive Deus Ex Machina ending.

Yes, Max corrupted Brother MK1 and added the nanotech virus to it's repatoir (which I wouldn't be surprised if that got changed in the next few months to take blame away from Max). But it seems that Brother Eye was on the verge of breaking away from Bruce anyways. Brother Eye only lets you know where it is by choice (how they haven't found it yet doesn't make any sense either).

Brother MK1 was a ticking time bomb created by another ticking time bomb and Brother Eye was the time bomb that exploded first (to Batman's surprise, dunno why he was surprised but he was surprised).

Bruce's personal failure in this was that he let the rage control him. In doing so, he justified the creation of a now-autonomous being aiming on taking control of the world via OMACs by saying that a few people violated his trust without ever freaking confronting to them about it.

The paranoia, controlling nature of BatDick took over. Bruce uses the word "stolen" to rebut what Booster said in OMAC #2. However, what if the damn thing wasn't there in the first place?

OMAC Batman is Batman at his BatDickiest peak...

[RandallFlagg19]

While I do agree that Batman's creation of Brother I is a clear example of Batman-as-Batdick, I go back and forth on whether or not Batman can be held responsible for deaths caused by the OMACs.

I told a friend who has a rudimentary knowledge of comics the problem, asking him if Batman has culpability in those deaths. He said that Batman was no more responsible for those deaths than a person whose gun was stolen and said gun was used on a killing spree.

Still, I dunno.

[Guts/Batman]

I told a friend who has a rudimentary knowledge of comics the problem, asking him if Batman has culpability in those deaths. He said that Batman was no more responsible for those deaths than a person whose gun was stolen and said gun was used on a killing spree.

Still, I dunno.

I don't think a gun is a good comparison because unless it is a semi autonomous gun that had the risk of shooting people buy itself.

While I say that Batman is culpable of putting it up there, he is not responsible for the deaths of the people killed by Brother Eye.

However, without Batman's rage controlling him, Brother Eye doesn't exist in the first place...

[da noble savage]

Basically when they whiped his mind all his parinod assumptions came true. He couldn't trust anybody not even his friends. So what if the thing had AI it probally had to have ai to be able to monitor all meta's 24/7 god and new meta's. And also I think he made it ai because he didn't even trust hisself which to me say's alot about his char. I mean how many people are willing to admit that they are corruptable. He is not responsiable for the omac's he didn't make the omac's brother I,max and lex did. He made brother I not the omacs deal with it dang. :D

[trickster]

Basically when they whiped his mind all his parinod assumptions came true. He couldn't trust anybody not even his friends. So what if the thing had AI it probally had to have ai to be able to monitor all meta's 24/7 god and new meta's. And also I think he made it ai because he didn't even trust hisself which to me say's alot about his char. I mean how many people are willing to admit that they are corruptable. He is not responsiable for the omac's he didn't make the omac's brother I,max and lex did. He made brother I not the omacs deal with it dang. :D

This is a case of "the chicken or the egg". So Batman just did like Columbus or whoever it was that smashed the egg :p

[Guts/Batman]

I'm not sure we can lump Lex in with Max yet...

He didn't create the nanotech virus, true, but I don't see how this absolves Bruce of any wrongdoing here.

Also, If he only wanted to monitor metahumans. Why create a spy satellite that could potentially be stolen by someone or just plain break away from Bruce easily.

Bruce had more than just monitoring on his mind. He also had monitoring + the means to stop metahumans. Max added the nanotech virus, true, but (like I said) if Bruce was merely interested in spying on metahumans why make it a semi-autonomus AI?

[Chad G.]

I'm not sure we can lump Lex in with Max yet...

He didn't create the nanotech virus, true, but I don't see how this absolves Bruce of any wrongdoing here.

Also, If he only wanted to monitor metahumans. Why create a spy satellite that could potentially be stolen by someone or just plain break away from Bruce easily.

Bruce had more than just monitoring on his mind. He also had monitoring + the means to stop metahumans. Max added the nanotech virus, true, but (like I said) if Bruce was merely interested in spying on metahumans why make it a semi-autonomus AI?

I would say that the reason it was semi-autonymous was that it was intended to be not only a monitoring station, but also an early warning system. Something that could warn Bats when a meta got a little too out of line(such as Supes leveling anything in his path when he was under Max's control.) Batman never intended for the satellite to be stolen, and thats just foolish to say. Everything on Earth is at risk from theft from somebody, and no matter how good your security is, there is always someone out there who wants the challenge of cracking it. But telling me that Batman was expecting someone to steal it is nuts.

Yeah, but you're just twisting facts. The government also has antimetahuman defenses. How come you don't hate the government (the DCU government of course)? Actually the OMACs are created by said government. (See "For tomorrow").

So now we're toning it down, are we? It's no longer thousands, it's dozens :p?
Hate to do this, but where are the dozens of victims? So far only Ratcatcher is dead, and most people who were OMACs are safe and free from Brother Eye. Not even the one that Atom Smasher stomped on is dead.

Yeah, but when blue eyed pretty boy gets called on his actions they're perfectly excusable.
As far as I'm concerned, if people like Superman flew about every day, I'd want someone to be able to keep them in check. In this case Batman is smart enough to see it has to be done and to do it, so more power to him. If Superman had any decency, he'd admit it's not about him because he's powerful enough to be a danger to Earth itself. It's the same as in Kingdom Come. He went and built a prison and "screw regular humans I'll do what I think it's right".

Everybody loves to call batman on the carpet for his actions. But when ever Supes does anything out of hand, people like to turn a blind eye to it, because of the bright ray of sunshine he is to the world, :p. It just drives me nut. I like Superman quite a bit, but his air of innocence gets old.

So Batman's defense is that he's no more guilty than Superman was... and at least Supes didn't go into it with the intent of screwing over innocent people and comrades, like Batdick did. Niiiiiice defense. (Here's a hint: It doesn't help Bush's supporters when they whine that "I suppose Clinton was an angel!"--or "But Saddam tortured people MUCH worse than that!" That's a distraction, not a defense.)

And yes, manufacturers ARE liable if their products hurt someone. Ever heard of a civil suit? Product liability? Gross negligence? (All of them terms that could be readily laid at Bruce's doorstep.....)

As for the demonstrated damage: OMACs have already been shown killing dozens of people, and described as killing many more--not to mention the poor suckers who got turned into kill-drones themselves.

And all because Bruce was, once again, a paranoid and arrogant dick who elected himself judge/jury/executioner over his fellow heroes--errr, crimefighters. (Because he sure doesn't qualify as much of a hero.)

You should drink far less caffine. Take it a little easier. Maybe take a vacation. :D

[da noble savage]

I would say that the reason it was semi-autonymous was that it was intended to be not only a monitoring station, but also an early warning system. Something that could warn Bats when a meta got a little too out of line(such as Supes leveling anything in his path when he was under Max's control.) Batman never intended for the satellite to be stolen, and thats just foolish to say. Everything on Earth is at risk from theft from somebody, and no matter how good your security is, there is always someone out there who wants the challenge of cracking it. But telling me that Batman was expecting someone to steal it is nuts.



Everybody loves to call batman on the carpet for his actions. But when ever Supes does anything out of hand, people like to turn a blind eye to it, because of the bright ray of sunshine he is to the world, :p. It just drives me nut. I like Superman quite a bit, but his air of innocence gets old.



You should drink far less caffine. Take it a little easier. Maybe take a vacation. :D

ya what this guy said expect spelled wrong with horriable sentence structre. :D

[Chad G.]

ya what this guy said expect spelled wrong with horriable sentence structre. :D

:p

*character dance*

[da noble savage]

:p

*character dance*

ok what do those things mean anyway. That's the second time i seen something like that.

[xnef1025]

Brother I, as Bruce built it, was a monitoring and warning device only. Bruce had no direct involvement whatsoever in creation of the OMACs. Brother I had no weapons and no attack protocols when Bruce built it. The OMACs and the anti-Meta protocols were added to Brother I by Max.

Batman is like a gun manufacturer who didn't make conversion of his semi-auto gun into a fully-auto difficult enough. Some psycho took his gun, converted it, and sprayed a crowded area with bullets. There is some culpability, and he should try to right the wrong, but the real blame still lays at the feet of the one who pulled the trigger.

[Chad G.]

ok what do those things mean anyway. That's the second time i seen something like that.

What do you mean?

[Calybos]

I don't agree with the gun analogy. Rather, I see Batman as the creator of a "thinking robot" in all those bad old sci-fi movies and TV shows.

You KNOW damn well it's going to go out of control. They always do. And when it does go on its inevitable rampage and finds some weaponry to play with... well, the creator is still back there in the lab, sneering, "Out of control? MY creature? Don't make me laugh, woman; I am the master!"

Really, it's all a horribly overdone cliche, with Batdick cast as the foolishly arrogant mad scientist.

[xnef1025]

I don't agree with the gun analogy. Rather, I see Batman as the creator of a "thinking robot" in all those bad old sci-fi movies and TV shows.

You KNOW damn well it's going to go out of control. They always do. And when it does go on its inevitable rampage and finds some weaponry to play with... well, the creator is still back there in the lab, sneering, "Out of control? MY creature? Don't make me laugh, woman; I am the master!"

Really, it's all a horribly overdone cliche, with Batdick cast as the foolishly arrogant mad scientist.
That would be true if Brother I had gone rogue of it's own volition, but that isn't what happened. Max stole it and reprogrammed it to be the commander of the OMAC army, and then he again reprogrammed it to go fully autonomous upon his death. Bruce never set it up that way. Max posthumously modified it from semi to fully.

[Guts/Batman]

ok what do those things mean anyway. That's the second time i seen something like that.

When you don't have enough characters in the post.

Kinda like when responding to something and your post doesn't have a minimum of 10 characters, you do *character limit dance* to fill out the requirement for characters...

[da noble savage]

What do you mean?

this
*character dance*
what does it mean man. :D

[da noble savage]

When you don't have enough characters in the post.

Kinda like when responding to something and your post doesn't have a minimum of 10 characters, you do *character limit dance* to fill out the requirement for characters...

man thanks gut's it like haveing my only lil fairy thinker bell on my shoulder to give me advice. Except ur a guy crap that suck why do hell do I have a guy with wings on my shoulder. :p

[metr0man]

Honestly I feel the whole "rift" between the trio to be rather contrived, and not feeling organic at all. After all this time only now they realized that the wonder woman, the warrior, might put down deadly enemies? I think another problem with that was that it was telegraphed very clearly early on in a Rucka Superman comic (that wasn't foreshadowing, it was a neon sign that said "Wonder WOman will kill an enemy and Superman and Batman will be upset with her and will cause a rift!!!" practically everybody commented on it at the time, it was one of the first Adventures of comics after identity crisis i think) and somehow it just felt contrived because of that.

[Chad G.]

Since when does Wonder Woman carry a sword around with her. When she and Supes and Batman are on the remains of the Watchtower, she shows up in cloak and sword. Am I the only one who finds this wierd???

[foxfire]

She has carried the sword before, but yeah you're right it was kind of strange she had it at that moment. I mean she didnt know the Watchtower was destroyed before she got there, right? I dont know what impeled her to randomly bring along a sword taht can cut Superman...

[Sean Whitmore]

She has carried the sword before, but yeah you're right it was kind of strange she had it at that moment. I mean she didnt know the Watchtower was destroyed before she got there, right? I dont know what impeled her to randomly bring along a sword taht can cut Superman...


I assumed she went to the Watchtower precisely because she knew it was destroyed, which would make the sword a good idea. Uncle Sam said you could see the explosion from Earth.


SEAN

[tk421atpost]

It is contrived, after all, how can Supes hold Wonder Womans actions against her when he has killed in the past himself. Remember Superman #22 when he executed three Kryptonians? Now he's pulling that whole "we don't cross that line" routine. He's a hypocrite, Batman's a jerk, and Diana's caught up in a big old mess.

[mohammedali]

Or maybe she couldn't be bothered twisting peoples heads, so she thought a beheading would be easier... Maybe not...
I don't know, if she didn't know the watch tower had exploded then perhaps she was just planning to return it, or use it for another mission straight afterwards.

Mohammed Ali

[Guts/Batman]

I assumed she went to the Watchtower precisely because she knew it was destroyed, which would make the sword a good idea. Uncle Sam said you could see the explosion from Earth.


SEAN

Agreed. When you don't know what happened, you tend to take what you think you may need.

Plus, it's good for cutting Mongul II's head in half the lengthwise... :D

[Sean Whitmore]

Plus, it's good for cutting Mongul II's head in half the lengthwise... :D


Yeah, you can't be decapitating folk with a punk-ass lasso. ;)


SEAN

[Guts/Batman]

Yeah, you can't be decapitating folk with a punk-ass lasso. ;)


SEAN

Yea.

That would be...lame. ;) :D

[Buried Alien]

It's not the first time. It seems to be a riff taken off of KINGDOM COME, when Wonder Woman also used a sword and without many reservations.

In fact, Wonder Woman as she's currently being portrayed is very similar to her KINGDOM COME incarnation...as is Superman to his KINGDOM COME incarnation.



Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

[Guts/Batman]

It's not the first time. It seems to be a riff taken off of KINGDOM COME, when Wonder Woman also used a sword and without many reservations.

In fact, Wonder Woman as she's currently being portrayed is very similar to her KINGDOM COME incarnation...as is Superman to his KINGDOM COME incarnation.



Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

Agreed totally.

Wonder Woman is cuurrently very similar to her KC incarnation.

[Buried Alien]

Agreed totally.

Wonder Woman is cuurrently very similar to her KC incarnation.

It seems almost as if the problem in the DCU right now is that something is accelerating the DC superheroes towards a KINGDOM COME-like catastrophe...except even worse because KINGDOM COME was limited to Earth. INFINITE CRISIS will affect the entire universe.

And the only hope are the forgotten heroes of the Pre-COIE Multiverse, returning one last time to put things right.


Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

[Guts/Batman]

It seems almost as if the problem in the DCU right now is that something is accelerating the DC superheroes towards a KINGDOM COME-like catastrophe...except even worse because KINGDOM COME was limited to Earth. INFINITE CRISIS will affect the entire universe.

And the only hope are the forgotten heroes of the Pre-COIE Multiverse, returning one last time to put things right.


Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

Haven't thought about it that way. Makes sense.

I wonder what could accelerate the heros to KC-esque catastrophe (in story).

Plus Batman seems to be like his KC counterpart as well (without the nexk brace and broken body).

Makes you wonder if Kingdom Come is going to be an Elseworld after IC is over...

[Rich L]

Yeah, you can't be decapitating folk with a punk-ass lasso. ;)


SEAN

I don't know - rope the neck and pull reeeaaallll hard.... ::POP!!:: :eek:

[mohammedali]

I don't know - rope the neck and pull reeeaaallll hard.... ::POP!!:: :eek:
He said decapitate, not head poping :P

Mohammed Ali

[DDM]

If you read Wonder Woman #1 (1987), Diana was given a sword, shield, & other weapons when she won the right to go to "Man's World." Mark Waid & Alex Ross Kingdom Come explains the properties of the sword, a gift from the Olympian Gods.

[Chad G.]

If you read Wonder Woman #1 (1987), Diana was given a sword, shield, & other weapons when she won the right to go to "Man's World." Mark Waid & Alex Ross Kingdom Come explains the properties of the sword, a gift from the Olympian Gods.

I know where the sword came from. It's just not part of her everyday attire, per se. Very rarely does she ever actually break it out.

[Chad G.]

It's not the first time. It seems to be a riff taken off of KINGDOM COME, when Wonder Woman also used a sword and without many reservations.

In fact, Wonder Woman as she's currently being portrayed is very similar to her KINGDOM COME incarnation...as is Superman to his KINGDOM COME incarnation.



Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

Very true about Wonder Woman. IMHO, not so much about Supes. THe current WW is very headstrong, and seemingly uncaring about the consequences.

[Buried Alien]

Very true about Wonder Woman. IMHO, not so much about Supes. THe current WW is very headstrong, and seemingly uncaring about the consequences.

Superman in KINGDOM COME was very uncertain about himself...as if he had lost his moral compass. That's more or less the way Superman is acting now in INFINITE CRISIS. His usual leadership aura and confidence is wavering, and he's not commanding the automatic respect that he normally does.


Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

[Tom]

I know where the sword came from. It's just not part of her everyday attire, per se. Very rarely does she ever actually break it out.
That's not true, actually. If I had to estimate, I'd say she wears the sword about a third of the time in her own book.

[AlterEgo]

It's not the first time. It seems to be a riff taken off of KINGDOM COME, when Wonder Woman also used a sword and without many reservations.

In fact, Wonder Woman as she's currently being portrayed is very similar to her KINGDOM COME incarnation...as is Superman to his KINGDOM COME incarnation.



Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

it's not a riff of KC. wonder woman has armor, shield, and sword which were created by the gods/amazons and which she breaks out in the big battles which she has advance warning of. since she always doesn't carry this stuff around with her, that is why you don't see it most of the time.

the armor, etc appears much more often in her own title...last used in her battle w/medusa and on her visit to hades

[Buried Alien]

Until now, however, Wonder Woman hasn't gone lethal with those weapons...which she also did in KINGDOM COME. Like her KINGDOM COME counterpart, the current Wonder Woman is shocking her comrades with her readiness to kill.


Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

[trickster]

Superman in KINGDOM COME was very uncertain about himself...as if he had lost his moral compass. That's more or less the way Superman is acting now in INFINITE CRISIS. His usual leadership aura and confidence is wavering, and he's not commanding the automatic respect that he normally does.


Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

What leadership aura? No wonder Lex became president in the DCU.
Batman's is the leader most of the time. Not even in the cartoon is Superman a leader. Batman was the leader of the League before Max came along, and I even though I'm not gonna make notes of what happens in every book DC ever put out, I don't recall too many events where he wasn't the leader and the man who had a backup plan. Remember Obsidian Age? He was the one who had a backup League ready. Just one example of the top of my head. Or "2000" where the League fought the JSA.

[AlterEgo]

Until now, however, Wonder Woman hasn't gone lethal with those weapons...which she also did in KINGDOM COME. Like her KINGDOM COME counterpart, the current Wonder Woman is shocking her comrades with her readiness to kill.


Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

but since KC is strictly elseworlds, i think you're making comparisions that perhaps you shouldn't be looking towards.

for years, ww has been haphazardly written. in the 220 issues of this current run, there's only been 1 or 2 writers (in my book, these two would be Perez and Rucka...Bryne did not) who really had a clear defining focus of the character and who have consistently translated that image into the printed page.

it's easy for many to forget that Diana is a product of her amazonian upbringing and Greek mythology. neither of these two cultures shied away from battle or death.

[Guts/Batman]

What leadership aura? No wonder Lex became president in the DCU.

When Batman tells Superman that he is who everyone follows, he inspires everyone else to act. That includes Bruce himself.

When Batman says Superman is the leader, Superman is the leader.

Superman and Batman's moral compass is off at the moment and neither can be said to be a leader. Hell, Diana isn't fit to be a leader either. They are all unwilling to admit mistakes to eachother.

[Guts/Batman]

but since KC is strictly elseworlds, i think you're making comparisions that perhaps you shouldn't be looking towards.

for years, ww has been haphazardly written. in the 220 issues of this current run, there's only been 1 or 2 writers (in my book, these two would be Perez and Rucka...Bryne did not) who really had a clear defining focus of the character and who have consistently translated that image into the printed page.

it's easy for many to forget that Diana is a product of her amazonian upbringing and Greek mythology. neither of these two cultures shied away from battle or death.

Actually, KC is canon via Hypertime.

And we won't know what is and Elseworld and what isn't until after Infinite Crisis.

I see lots of comparisons (at least in thought process) between current WW and KC WW.

[trickster]

When Batman tells Superman that he is who everyone follows, he inspires everyone else to act. That includes Bruce himself.

When Batman says Superman is the leader, Superman is the leader.

Superman and Batman's moral compass is off at the moment and neither can be said to be a leader. Hell, Diana isn't fit to be a leader either. They are all unwilling to admit mistakes to eachother.

If you think admitting mistakes is what makes you a leader, then I have a bridge to sell you.
And Batman didn't say Superman was a leader. But then again you probably read some different book. I can see Superman now in Batman Begins: "B-B-But I don't know what to do".
Superman isn't fit to lead anything. There is a reason he became the government's stooge in DKR. He's the perfect underling.

[AlterEgo]

Without Bruce's intense rage and need for control...no, mere control doesn't cover it.

what is this intense rage that you're talking about. :confused:

his need for control, i see. nada on the 'intense rage'.

[Guts/Batman]

If you think admitting mistakes is what makes you a leader, then I have a bridge to sell you.
And Batman didn't say Superman was a leader. But then again you probably read some different book. I can see Superman now in Batman Begins: "B-B-But I don't know what to do".
Superman isn't fit to lead anything. There is a reason he became the government's stooge in DKR. He's the perfect underling.

That's not the only thing that makes any of them unfit to be a leader right now.

And if we were talking about Infinite Crisis #1, then we were talking about the same one. Batman falt told Superman that Superman's role is to inspire everyone. Superman inspires people to fight.

In essence, to be THE leader. THE one that everyone follows. Even Batman.

Your hatred of Superman knows no bounds. It doesn't seem you understand the character in the least.

[Guts/Batman]

what is this intense rage that you're talking about. :confused:

his need for control, i see. nada on the 'intense rage'.

It is concealed as massive distrust and total disappointment. He hides his rage and turns it into a complete control complex.

Oh, there is rage there...

Who did "Anger" take over in Virtue and Vice?

[Buried Alien]

And if we were talking about Infinite Crisis #1, then we were talking about the same one. Batman falt told Superman that Superman's role is to inspire everyone. Superman inspires people to fight.

In essence, to be THE leader. THE one that everyone follows. Even Batman.


Indeed. It's immaterial whether Superman is or isn't an effective leader; Batman is criticizing him on that very point. Batman also recognizes that regardless, Superman is widely *perceived* as the leader among the superhero community, so if he's not being effective in that role, the repercussions will be felt throughout that community.

Additionally, it's no accident that Superman was elevated to that perceived leadership status, whether or not he's actually qualified for it. He is the one whom the others take their cues from, a theme that was emphasized in KINGDOM COME and is also coming to a head in INFINITE CRISIS.



Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

[DDM]

I know where the sword came from. It's just not part of her everyday attire, per se. Very rarely does she ever actually break it out.

Wonder Woman used her sword during "The Challenge of the Gods" early into the new Wonder Woman book. She uses it often when she needs it in battle.

http://image.milehighcomics.com/istore/images/fullsize/96913563818.10.FOLD-OUT.GIF

[trickster]

That's not the only thing that makes any of them unfit to be a leader right now.

And if we were talking about Infinite Crisis #1, then we were talking about the same one. Batman falt told Superman that Superman's role is to inspire everyone. Superman inspires people to fight.

In essence, to be THE leader. THE one that everyone follows. Even Batman.

Your hatred of Superman knows no bounds. It doesn't seem you understand the character in the least.

I do understand him. That's just why I don't like him.
Inspires people to fight? That's a good one. Batman inspired people to fight in War Games, when he rallied the police behind him (until it went to hell because he didn't know Orpheus was dead, but that's not what we're discussing). Heh, Luthor inspired people to fight when he broke the government's order and started rebuilding Gotham which really galvanized the public. True, he wasn't exactly altruistic, but the effect was there.
I would have rather expected Superman to do this. Something like going on TV and saying "This is an outrage! Is this the American Way? To abandon a part of America and throw it away like a rotten apple because it's gonna be hard and expensive to rebuild it?" Did he do that? No. So, no he isn't any "inspiration".

[Guts/Batman]

Indeed. It's immaterial whether Superman is or isn't an effective leader; Batman is criticizing him on that very point. Batman also recognizes that regardless, Superman is widely *perceived* as the leader among the superhero community, so if he's not being effective in that role, the repercussions will be felt throughout that community.

Additionally, it's no accident that Superman was elevated to that perceived leadership status, whether or not he's actually qualified for it. He is the one whom the others take their cues from, a theme that was emphasized in KINGDOM COME and is also coming to a head in INFINITE CRISIS.



Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

Whether he is fit to lead doesn't matter. Perception is reality. And perception is that Superman is the leader of the Superhero community.

There are some many valid comparisons between KC and IC...

[hangmanjury]

If you think admitting mistakes is what makes you a leader, then I have a bridge to sell you.
And Batman didn't say Superman was a leader. But then again you probably read some different book. I can see Superman now in Batman Begins: "B-B-But I don't know what to do".
Superman isn't fit to lead anything. There is a reason he became the government's stooge in DKR. He's the perfect underling.
You do know that even Frank Miller admitted that DKR Superman was NOT canon Superman, that he was out of character, and that he was only used for symbolic purposes, right?

[BonjourTragedy]

I'm pretty sure the only reason she brought it along was because when the watchtower explodes and is lying in rubble on the moon you know something big and powerful did it. My question is why the cape since it serves no purpose?

[AlterEgo]

I'm pretty sure the only reason she brought it along was because when the watchtower explodes and is lying in rubble on the moon you know something big and powerful did it. My question is why the cape since it serves no purpose?

the moon is quite cold. thin atmosphere==no heat retention. why not wear a cape? actually, capes (more accurately, large cloaks) were standard attire from the culture diana hails from.

rhetorical question: why does supes wear a cape? it serves even less purpose on him.

[Buried Alien]

the moon is quite cold. thin atmosphere==no heat retention. why not wear a cape? actually, capes (more accurately, large cloaks) were standard attire from the culture diana hails from.

rhetorical question: why does supes wear a cape? it serves even less purpose on him.

Probably purely aesthetical reasons. He just looks more authoratative with the cape than without it.

As for Diana, it might be ceremonial reasons: usually, when she puts the cape on, it means that it's WAR and no holds are barred.


Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

[GabrielleWP]

I'm telling ya the folks at DC, Rucka included have been watching too many Xena episodes on Oxygen. Cassie in the Gabrielle haircut, a handsome Ares, Diana with sword, throwing her tiara like a chakram and slicing Supes throat then catching it.

Whats next? the 'pinch' ?

GWP

[mswood]

Yeah, when things get serious Diana brings out the weapons.

Weitehr its her challenge from the Gods (where she used her sword to kill mosters, but hell diana is basically a monster), to War of the Gods, to Warworld, ect. Its when she feels lethal force really might be needed.

And seeing as the worlds going to hell, and the watchtowers been destroyed I think Diana's taking the situation quite seriously.

While I think they really didn't get her character right in attacking Mongul in that manner. Now if they were showing him almost killing Bats and she went after him, that would have made sense with her established character.

[mswood]

Hell I want to see her break out the guantlet of Atlas. If I was her and things get really, really bad. I wouldn't waste a minute in increasing my strength and denisty by a factor of 10.

[Tom]

My question is why the cape since it serves no purpose?
You could say the same about 99.99999% of the capes worn by superheroes.

[Tom]

I'm telling ya the folks at DC, Rucka included have been watching too many Xena episodes on Oxygen. Cassie in the Gabrielle haircut, a handsome Ares, Diana with sword, throwing her tiara like a chakram and slicing Supes throat then catching it.

Whats next? the 'pinch' ?

GWP
The sword and the tiara trick pre-date Xena by decades.

[Michael P]

Actually, KC is canon via Hypertime.

Would this be the same Hypertime that Dan Didio says no longer exists?

[Guts/Batman]

Would this be the same Hypertime that Dan Didio says no longer exists?

Probably.

But you how that goes...

Someone said (I realize that second hand knowledge is bad) that all stories DC has done is canon via Hypertime...

[Just_A_Rat]

I do understand him. That's just why I don't like him.
Inspires people to fight? That's a good one. Batman inspired people to fight in War Games, when he rallied the police behind him (until it went to hell because he didn't know Orpheus was dead, but that's not what we're discussing). Heh, Luthor inspired people to fight when he broke the government's order and started rebuilding Gotham which really galvanized the public. True, he wasn't exactly altruistic, but the effect was there.
I would have rather expected Superman to do this. Something like going on TV and saying "This is an outrage! Is this the American Way? To abandon a part of America and throw it away like a rotten apple because it's gonna be hard and expensive to rebuild it?" Did he do that? No. So, no he isn't any "inspiration".

You are ignoring the stories, like Our World At War, or the story where the JLA fights the angels where he does serve as an inspiration. You are ignoring the characters who are shown to look up to him, and who see him as an inspiration. The fact is that the man is an inspiration to many, whether you like the character or not.

Yes, Batman also leads in his own way - the scene in Titans where they are discussing who will be leader (pre-Graduation Day titans) and they realize they don't need to name a leader after each of them has a different answer for the question of who is the leader of the JLA.

Also, if you want to see leadership in battle, look no further than DC One Million, where the heroes are losing until J'onn shows up back on the scene. Even Batman recognizes him as the tactician of the team.

[Guts/Batman]

Also, if you want to see leadership in battle, look no further than DC One Million, where the heroes are losing until J'onn shows up back on the scene. Even Batman recognizes him as the tactician of the team.

Agreed.

MM is the heart and soul of the JLA.

Without him, the JLA doesn't exist.

[Guts/Batman]

I do understand him. That's just why I don't like him.

What exactly about Superman do you not like about him?

The fact that he is very optimistic and doesn't have a God complex (like Batman)? That he expects other heroes to be heroes (instead of going the easy route and bringing themselves down to the villains level)?

In essensce, if we take away Superman's personality and his humanity we end up with just another insignificant super powered alien who does not deserve 1 panel of recognition.

Superman is special because of his optimism, his never ending quest for truth, justice and the American way.

If you don't like that, then you must not like this style of character.

We can do the same thing to Batman. If we strip Batman of his humanity (which some writers have actually managed to pull off) and turn him into a man who kills his opponents when unnecessary, Batman becomes just becomes another killer anti-hero that doesn't derseve 1 panel of recognition.

Batman is special because of his humanity. His holding of human life sacred. Even the lives of his most dangerous villains.

If we take away the characteristics that make these two who they are, they become characters that don't deserve to written...

[Gingold]

Agreed.

MM is the heart and soul of the JLA.

Without him, the JLA doesn't exist.

Except for most of the 70s and 80s when it did.

I love J'onny and I love his post-Crisis role as the center of the League, but I do think the JLA can exist without him. I'd actually like to see him on his own, in a solo detective series for a while and see the League function without him.

[Guts/Batman]

Except for most of the 70s and 80s when it did.

I love J'onny and I love his post-Crisis role as the center of the League, but I do think the JLA can exist without him. I'd actually like to see him on his own, in a solo detective series for a while and see the League function without him.

I knew that would happen. I walked right into that one... :p

That would be cool too. But if he doesn't have a solo book, he will have to be in the JLA, though.

[AlterEgo]

distrust and disappointment...sure. it does not translate to intense rage and i don't get any of that from any of the pages in IC #1.

actually, of the big three in omac, sacrifice and the events leading up to IC, the one that has been most true to their character is wonder woman. both superman and batman are behaving out of character and acting like d*cks.


>>Who did "Anger" take over in Virtue and Vice

it proves nothing and it means nothing. what other JLA'er could come close to fitting that bill? just one of those PIS strategems because it happens to be convenient and makes for a pretty storyline.

[Guts/Batman]

distrust and disappointment...sure. it does not translate to intense rage and i don't get any of that from any of the pages in IC #1.

actually, of the big three in omac, sacrifice and the events leading up to IC, the one that has been most true to their character is wonder woman. both superman and batman are behaving out of character and acting like d*cks.

If anyone is out of character in Infinite Crisis it is Wonder Woman. Batman and Superman are being who they really are, people who don't understand her need to kill Mongul II or Max...

More of the rage comes from JLA 120. The rage is just pulpable...The rage he feels toward the JLA is the rage I'm getting at.

[AlterEgo]

If anyone is out of character in Infinite Crisis it is Wonder Woman. Batman and Superman are being who they really are, people who don't understand her need to kill Mongul II or Max...

More of the rage comes from JLA 120. The rage is just pulpable...The rage he feels toward the JLA is the rage I'm getting at.

then you haven't read very much WW or understand her character.

she's an amazon and while they preach peace, the arts of war are no strangers to their culture. this 'ferocity' has caught everyone by surprise because all the lame writers in her past have castrated this aspect from her personality but it's there nonetheless.

WW had plenty of reasons to kill Max. she makes a clear and justifiable case for why she killed him in sacrifice. bruce & clark's upringing make it difficult for them to understand why she did it. diana's rationale for her actions comes from her warrior upbringing. it's about making the choice to take lives in order to save lives...any soldier who's gone to war has that sort of condiitoning hammered into them.

bruce & clark's behavior in IC 1 is contrived and out-of-character with the express purpose of making sure they distance themselves from each other.

[Guts/Batman]

then you haven't read very much WW or understand her character.

she's an amazon and while they preach peace, the arts of war are no strangers to their culture. this 'ferocity' has caught everyone by surprise because all the lame writers in her past have castrated this aspect from her personality but it's there nonetheless.

WW had plenty of reasons to kill Max. she makes a clear and justifiable case for why she killed him in sacrifice. bruce & clark's behavior in IC 1 is contrived and out-of-character with the express purpose of making sure they distance themselves from each other.

That "castration" of that part of her character is may be castration but that is what makes her a hero and not a soldier...

Sure Batman and Superman were being dicks. But they have been working at that level for the last few months at least. They were being their dick selves.

She gave her reasons. Batman and Superman just didn't accept them. That's who Batman and Superman are. They will not let anyone else willingly die, without them able to anything about it. And they felt that, they could have done something about it.

That's who Batman and Superman are.

I agree the whole thing is contrived. Afterall, Infinite Crisis as a whole is contrived. Diana went after a kill shot after Mongul went down (him getting up is immaterial). That seems to be out of character for her...

Now if you wanna argue that she was just testing Superman's trust in her, that's different...

Yes, I am a recent Wonder Woman reader but I feel I have a grasp on the character...

[Sk8maven]

It's becoming glaringly obvious that the majority of fans really DO want "WonderXena" - as long as she is Diana and ONLY Diana.

When Hippolyta tried playing "WonderXena", the fans screamed blue murder that "That's not what Wonder Woman is all about", and Polly wound up deep-fried.

Maven

[Sk8maven]

This really belongs here....

It's becoming glaringly obvious that the majority of fans really DO want "WonderXena" - as long as she is Diana and ONLY Diana.

When Hippolyta tried playing "WonderXena", the fans screamed blue murder that "That's not what Wonder Woman is all about", and Polly wound up deep-fried.

Maven

[Chad G.]

When Batman tells Superman that he is who everyone follows, he inspires everyone else to act. That includes Bruce himself.


Not right now. Maybe in the past. But right now, Jesus Christ himself couldn't inspire Bruce right now.

What leadership aura? No wonder Lex became president in the DCU.
Batman's is the leader most of the time. Not even in the cartoon is Superman a leader. Batman was the leader of the League before Max came along, and I even though I'm not gonna make notes of what happens in every book DC ever put out, I don't recall too many events where he wasn't the leader and the man who had a backup plan. Remember Obsidian Age? He was the one who had a backup League ready. Just one example of the top of my head. Or "2000" where the League fought the JSA.


Trickster, normally you and I run along the same lines as far as defending Batman, but on this one we disgree. I used to despise Supes myself, until I actually started reading the character. Superman has the same issues as the rest of us. Self-doubt, etc... But without any doubt, and this is coming from a huge Batman fan, Clark IS the leader of the league, and in gerneal the one that the heroes look to for guidance. They come to Bruce when there is a problem, but they turn to J'onn for a sounding board, and Superman for inspiration. Even I tought Bats was out of line with his death crack in IC. But seriously man, you cannot let your hatred of a character bilind you to his true greatness. If Clark ran for President, he would be elected in a landslide in the DCU(although after folks watching WW open Max up like a soda pop....)

Agreed.

MM is the heart and soul of the JLA.

Without him, the JLA doesn't exist.

Good point. If I'm not mistaken, didn't Superman say that MM had been part of every incarnation of the league for a reason?

[Guts/Batman]

Not right now. Maybe in the past. But right now, Jesus Christ himself couldn't inspire Bruce right now.

But it is still perceived by Bruce that he is the leader of everyone. Superman's role is to be the leader of Earth's hero.

Whether or not he is doing that right now is immaterial, I think.

But you are right, Jesus couldn't inspre Bruce right now.

[trickster]

Not right now. Maybe in the past. But right now, Jesus Christ himself couldn't inspire Bruce right now.

[...]



You know, inspiration is kind of an empty notion to me. What do you mean by inspire, anyway?

[Guts/Batman]

You know, inspiration is kind of an empty notion to me. What do you mean by inspire, anyway?

Inspire you as in to get you do something...

Positive...in this case, because Batman is talking about how Superman's role is to inspire positive action.

[Chad G.]

You know, inspiration is kind of an empty notion to me. What do you mean by inspire, anyway?

No offense, but if you have to ask me what it means, I could never explain it to you. I can't imagine not being inspired by something. :confused:

[foxfire]

Someone on another board had this quote on their sig:

Batman: The last time you inspired someone was when Paul Jenkins created the Sentry.

:D :D :D

[trickster]

then you haven't read very much WW or understand her character.

she's an amazon and while they preach peace, the arts of war are no strangers to their culture. this 'ferocity' has caught everyone by surprise because all the lame writers in her past have castrated this aspect from her personality but it's there nonetheless.

WW had plenty of reasons to kill Max. she makes a clear and justifiable case for why she killed him in sacrifice. bruce & clark's upringing make it difficult for them to understand why she did it. diana's rationale for her actions comes from her warrior upbringing. it's about making the choice to take lives in order to save lives...any soldier who's gone to war has that sort of condiitoning