While i don't care much for the new version, its for completely different reasons then why i didn't like the previous version. I'm not a great fan of the dark gods reimagined thing: Never have been, probably never will be. For some reason as a narrative point it just rubs me the wrong way: I think possibly because of what it says about the larger campaign universe at large. Its the same issue i had with the angel guy in JLA back in the day. But at least Az is trying to humanise her & that i can appreciate in theory, if not in execution.If that's the case, then i'm siding with Whedon.
New 52's imperfect WW has been great. I want to read/watch a story about a character, not an infallible idea walking around.
My guess is Whedon did exactly the same & then the WW fandom threw a bit of a tantrum about it... Which is suprising because that is totally unheard of for the WW fandom at large
Last edited by kelly_warrior_princess; 04-26-2012 at 05:29 AM.
Marvel's the only one with a complete film studio set up do do nothing but churn out superhero francise after franchise. And the only one in any legal position to do so. Except WB, but they just don't seem to be interested in sinking that much of their resources in just on genre.
'The marquis. Well, you know, to be honest, he seems a little bit dodgy to me.'
'Mm,' she agreed. 'He's a little bit dodgy in the same way that rats are a little bit covered in fur."
Personally i am happy that WB isn't directly competing with Marvel Studios to flood the market... Because i really don't want Superheroes to be our generations version of ninjas.
for those of you around in the late 80's & early 90's i'm sure you all remember with differing levels of fondness, then ninja period in movies.
People think when they see WW fans talks about Diana being perfect, that she is without flaw. Maybe some fans think that. But for me it is more the case that Diana strives for perfection. That is, or used to be, the Amazon ideal - the quest for excellence, be it physically, intellectually, spritiually or morally. Diana is perfect not in her ability to attain a flawless state but rather in her devotion to trying. This is what they were getting at [Hera help me] A League of One.
For Wonder Woman perfection is in the attempt, not in the achievement. Recognizing failings and flaws and confronting them constantly. This is what I think Etta was talking about when she told Genocide there is no way to defeat Diana. She is simply unwaveringly devoted to trying to do the right thing, to being the best person she can be. No matter how much you put on her, she will fight through. I think Azz is taking that approach as well but it is IMO incorrect to say he is the one who is finally doing it. Diana has been like that for a very long time.
Irene Adler: “I would have you right here on this desk until you begged for mercy twice.”
Sherlock: “I’ve never begged for mercy in my life.”
Its a case of being the personification of an ideal, versus just being a person. An thats been WW's biggest flaw in essentially any and all mediums, including comics. Because if your character is nothing but a very thinly veiled analogue for a political movement or an ideal, then anything negative that happens to that character is taken in the same way. Or to put it more clearly: Superman is killed & everyone was like "Oh my god, they can't do that to Superman... I must read more." If you did that to Wonder Woman the WW Fandom would be all "DC just killed Feminism. This is WiR to the max, because DC is sexist: Lets all burn Didio in effigy & write articles about how its all indicative of the patriachal standards at DC & how this is a rape on all women."
Thats what he means by making her imperfect. Possibly a poor choice of words, as its not that she's any more imperfect then before, its just that when she fails its not suddenly a national tradegy for 50% of the worlds population... Or so the fandom would have us believe. The character can move forward as a CHARACTER, rather then as a personification of an ideal. If the character has a romantic attatchment, thats not some sort of hidden message trying to co-opt female agency, it'd just be a writer writing an interesting narrative.
Thats what the difference is. Its not imperfections, its just the difference between being a fully realised character & being a thinly veiled stand in/personification of a pet ideal.
An since this is about the Avengers, i just watched it today. Black Widow is a great character, but i doubt she's a strong enough character to have her own solo movie either. I say bring on She-Hulk.
Last edited by kelly_warrior_princess; 04-26-2012 at 08:29 AM.