WW in Kingdom Come

[Red Mask]

I don't know why some people find that so hard to understand. There are bad cops and misused military forces in real life, but that's not the issue. Cops and armies exist for the expressed purpose of maintaining the peace, with force if necessary. Most people have no problem with that reasoning.

Yet WW, in KC and on Internet forums, is frequently singled out for supposedly being inconsistent if not hypocritical. Even though other superheroes do the same thing.

Yep, it's the Big Lie that superhero comics like these work with. They're supposed to be absolutely right although NOBODY officially appointed them to police the world.

[JimRaynor55]

I don't blame you. stk called this bait thread back a page ago.

"Bait thread?" Excuse me?

If you want to talk about the character or the story, then contribute an actual comment of substance. If you claim to have "no interest," then the simple solution for everyone is for you to not post. Obviously you were interested enough to post.

Don't know what drew that kind of behavior from you and a couple others. If anything, your behavior constitutes "bait."

Other people here were obviously interested enough to talk about the actual story, or post information about the writer's perspective. You know, actual contributions.

[JimRaynor55]

Maybe it's because unlike most superheroes Wonder Woman is explicitly suppose to bring about peace in Man's world. Other superheroes just do their superheroics, save the day, and peace just happens to come as a result of their actions; they're not as in-your-face about bringing about peace.

So is every cop with a gun who serves to "keep the peace" a hypocrite?

Almost everyone is able to understand that, because it's really quite simple.

Are you saying that in fact other superheroes are just as two-faced and inconsistent as WW, but just aren't verbally as honest about their motivations?

I don't expect much of an answer from you, Boon. You seem to be someone with a bone to pick against the character, who's peeved about people seeing things differently. Which is why you take part in the discussion while trying to undermine it with labels like "bait."

[kylesgirl]

Apples and oranges. I saw a woman who stood up to both Batman and Superman. In extreme circumstances. Also when she killed that nazi...yeah! All of them are far from perfect but this shows that fighting battles for years which they all have been doing in a changing world is hard. hese guys seemed more human to me. Not treated as precious. Heroes make mistakes. They reddem themselves. You missed the point of the story I guess.

[kylesgirl]

So is every cop with a gun who serves to "keep the peace" a hypocrite?

Almost everyone is able to understand that, because it's really quite simple.

Are you saying that in fact other superheroes are just as two-faced and inconsistent as WW, but just aren't verbally as honest about their motivations?

I don't expect much of an answer from you, Boon. You seem to be someone with a bone to pick against the character, who's peeved about people seeing things differently. Which is why you take part in the discussion while trying to undermine it with labels like "bait."

WW was raised is a warrior. This character has shown when the time comes...least to modern readers...she does what needs to be done. You taking a woman rasied in an ancient society and trying to apply your 21 century rules to her. She was a soldier in this story ... and she was at times the one I was nodding with at times.

[JimRaynor55]

I don't have a problem with the "warrior" characterization, or justified killing. My problem is that the story itself showed Diana in a negative light for doing those things, casting her as someone tempting Clark to go over the edge. All of the heroes were portrayed as flawed, but some were more flawed than others. Both Superman and Batman remain resolute about sticking to their "no killing" code, and are portrayed positively for doing that and talking Diana down from her violent ways.

[thepenguin]

WW was portrayed even more "violent" in Cooke's New Frontier. Kingdom Come she is very very restrained I would say comparing the two books and only takes action in the extreme and in a time of war in KC. And she is lauded in that as a real strong portrayal and her pragmatism works well against Superman's idealistic stance. And so what if Superman and batman don't kill? Selina as far as I know doesn't hold the same sentiments as batman and I don't judge her for it any more than I do Diana. It's two different perspectives.

If we juxtapose it to real world and situations where people go to war etc. To judge the KC WW as the same fresh faced doe eyed one is really weird. Didn't Diana kill Nazis in the second WW? Did she not kill max lord? People die in war and they die when you pussy foot around waiting and talking. Those are the lessons we have all learned in history. Superman was too idealistic to see it but does not make either of them entirely right or wrong.

[Volkditty]

I think Alex Ross has illustrated one of the more realistic takes of the Justice League. They don't have too much muscle and the fabric they were looks more realistic because it doesn't look like a second skin or body paint. The physique heights are more accurate. He doesn't do a large variety of faces anymore, but at least it's not trying to give us the GQ look.

It's off-topic (but so is everyone else), but I think Alex Ross is extremely good at a style of art I have no interest in. Comics and animation by their very nature allow for such fantastical depictions and imaginative, evocative imagery that intentionally trying to create photo-realistic artwork is the exact opposite of what I'm looking for.

[FIFTY-TWO (52)]

I don't have a problem with the "warrior" characterization, or justified killing. My problem is that the story itself showed Diana in a negative light for doing those things, casting her as someone tempting Clark to go over the edge. All of the heroes were portrayed as flawed, but some were more flawed than others. Both Superman and Batman remain resolute about sticking to their "no killing" code, and are portrayed positively for doing that and talking Diana down from her violent ways.

Well, we can also accept the fact that Superman and Batman are pretentious assholes, and really can't be anything but. Their psyches can't handle the hard decisions that have to be made.

[The Man From Room X]

Also I am the only person in the world who doesn't like Alex Ross' art. Everyone he paints looks like an out of shape forty year old man in a cheap Halloween costume.

That's because he got his buddies to play superhero dress-up and then used them as models for his art.

[brettc1]

I don't have a problem with the "warrior" characterization, or justified killing. My problem is that the story itself showed Diana in a negative light for doing those things, casting her as someone tempting Clark to go over the edge. All of the heroes were portrayed as flawed, but some were more flawed than others. Both Superman and Batman remain resolute about sticking to their "no killing" code, and are portrayed positively for doing that and talking Diana down from her violent ways.

I think this is true.

[brettc1]

Well, we can also accept the fact that Superman and Batman are pretentious assholes, and really can't be anything but. Their psyches can't handle the hard decisions that have to be made.

On the contrary, they act with rare wisdom.

The thing with superheroes is that there is only one way they can operate. It requires one thing from the greater humanity they share the planet with, but that thing is absolutely vital and without it everything falls apart.

That thing is trust.

And nothing erodes trust like people putting themselve flagrantly above the law. Wheter it be politicians or superheroes, as soon as folks see you acting beyond the rules eventually they are going to turn on you.

We have see this story dozens of times. Justice League Animated did it well - the heroes of an alternative universe begin making the 'hard decisions' and before you know it they are running the planet as tyrants and trying to take over our world as well. But the dominos keep falling. People begin questioning - what if the heroes did go bad? What if they use that big space gun they have built in orbit on us? Things quickly begin to fall apart.

Kingdom Come has the same thing. The United Nations makes a decision to NUKE the heroes and villains becuase their war is out of contral and threatens to consume the planet.

Heroes have to operate inside the rules. They cant kill villains because they want to - not even if they deserve it. It is a hard decision, because we have seen in the DCU it means villains do escape and they do kill, a situation I personally am not very happy with. But the alternative, with heroes executing villains, always leads to far worse.

[kylesgirl]

On the contrary, they act with rare wisdom.

The thing with superheroes is that there is only one way they can operate. It requires one thing from the greater humanity they share the planet with, but that thing is absolutely vital and without it everything falls apart.

That thing is trust.

And nothing erodes trust like people putting themselve flagrantly above the law. Wheter it be politicians or superheroes, as soon as folks see you acting beyond the rules eventually they are going to turn on you.

We have see this story dozens of times. Justice League Animated did it well - the heroes of an alternative universe begin making the 'hard decisions' and before you know it they are running the planet as tyrants and trying to take over our world as well. But the dominos keep falling. People begin questioning - what if the heroes did go bad? What if they use that big space gun they have built in orbit on us? Things quickly begin to fall apart.

Kingdom Come has the same thing. The United Nations makes a decision to NUKE the heroes and villains becuase their war is out of contral and threatens to consume the planet.

Heroes have to operate inside the rules. They cant kill villains because they want to - not even if they deserve it. It is a hard decision, because we have seen in the DCU it means villains do escape and they do kill, a situation I personally am not very happy with. But the alternative, with heroes executing villains, always leads to far worse.

Rich coming from someone with a jedi avatar. Like they never killed in war or battle. And don't justify to me he is somehow better than Diana. He killed dozens of sentient beings as a Jedi. Who gives him the right to decide they needed to die? From your logic couldn't he lob off a leg and then send them to rehabiltiate them? That you bring up trust is a funny thing too. Trust what? The heroes to protect me or constantly let villians get the hell away to kill more?. The law sometimes is an ass as you well know. You applying black and white rules in a story that clearly shows nothing is black and white where people, different povs eptiomized by the generation gap and law and order and war is concerned. Again its this precious way of looking at everything imo.

[brettc1]

Rich coming from someone with a jedi avatar. Like they never killed in war or battle. And don't justify to me he is somehow better than Diana. He killed dozens of sentient beings as a Jedi. Who gives him the right to decide they needed to die? From your logic couldn't he lob off a leg and then send them to rehabiltiate them? That you bring up trust is a funny thing too. Trust what? The heroes to protect me or constantly let villians get the hell away to kill more?. The law sometimes is an ass as you well know. You applying black and white rules in a story that clearly shows nothing is black and white where people, different povs eptiomized by the generation gap and law and order and war is concerned. Again its this precious way of looking at everything imo.

Please keep it impersonal.

The Jedi do kill, but then they are also answerable to the Senate and are official members of the Republic government. They are peacekeepers, a type of police force. Also, while Obi-Wan is awesome he is not godlike in the way Wonder Woman is. He can no more avoid killing than a soldier on the battlefields of Earth. But those soldiers cant also hurl mountains through the air and destroy and entire army singlehanded. And with enormous power comes enormous temptation.

This is the fact - that the Jedi could not seize control of the Republic in the way that the Justice League could. If the superheroes combine Earth has no chance.

But even if you argue that is the case, again it comes back to trust. The Sith outmaneuvere the Jedi by making them seem like the ones initiating rebellion. With that trust in their integrity gone, the Jedi become the enemy and are all but wiped out. Meanwhile, the ones you want to deal with the criminals more harshly are secretly building the Death Star.

What you call precious, I call considered. The black and white response here is to assume that going lethal force on the villains will provide an easy fix. History has shown us that even in KC that is not the case, and ultimately causes far worse problems. It should be noted that in the story Luthor and co. came pretty close to ruling the world by simply letting the heroes self destruct.

[FIFTY-TWO (52)]

Heroes have to operate inside the rules. They cant kill villains because they want to - not even if they deserve it. It is a hard decision, because we have seen in the DCU it means villains do escape and they do kill, a situation I personally am not very happy with. But the alternative, with heroes executing villains, always leads to far worse.

Funny, but I don't have a problem with a warrior from a martial culture killing a Nazi that not only killed her comrade but also sought to kill a young man in his path. Diana putting him down for the final count is not a betrayal of trust.

Tucking the Joker away so that he can come out (again) and commit mass murder in broad daylight outside of his normal stomping grounds is a betrayal of trust.