This has to do with the Wonder Woman movie, but it's more about the source material, so I posted here rather than the movie forum.
I've always thought that, if you didn't like the status quo of the Wonder Woman books, just wait ten issues and it would change completely. And a result, I've never felt there was much about WW that was a "necessary" part of her world.
Superman, on the other hand, has trappings to his character and stories that are, in a way, non-negotiable. I don't mean subjective, quibbling stuff like "he came to Earth as a baby, not a fetus", or "he has to be able to move planets" or "Luthor is a criminal, not a businessman". I mean, there are things that 99.9% of fans will agree HAVE to be there. Metropolis. The Daily Planet. Lois, and to a lesser extent Jimmy and Perry.
Batman's the same way. Gotham. Alfred. Wayne Manor. Gordon. The cave. That's it, end of discussion, you ain't leaving ANY of those things out and still claiming you're true to the source material. Not all of those elements were there from the beginning, but they're here to stay now.
Does Wonder Woman have anything like that, really? Is there anything about her that "has" to be included in any good adaptation? Not just a movie; this question could just as easily lend itself to an Ultimate Wonder Woman type of book.
Can she fly or does she have an invisible plane? Does she have to have a secret identity? Does she operate out of Boston or Gateway City...could it just as easily be Boise, Idaho? Does she have any necessary supporting cast? Mindy Meyers? Helen and Cassie Sansmark? Vanessa Kapatellis? Steve Trevor - as an old man or a suitor?
All I can think of are four things: She comes from Themyscira, her mother is Hippolyta, she has bullet-deflecting bracelets, and she has a golden lasso. As far as I can tell, every other aspect about her is negotiable.