Page 2 of 11 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 157
  1. #16

    Default

    To me it boils down to simply this: Wonder Woman is supposed to be an iconic superhero in her own right independent from the others, part of the Trinity of the other two iconic superheroes in Superman and Batman. And while admittedly her franchise is not nearly as big as the other two, she does have her own mythology and supporting characters. By having her be in a romance with Superman, you've essentially turned Wonder Woman, who again is supposed to be an icon superhero in her own right, into a supporting character for Superman. She becomes part of Superman's story instead of her own story. It's essentially DC all but admitting that Wonder Woman is incapable of making it on her own steam. And for those who say "Well, why wouldn't it be the other way around?" the answer to that is "Take a look at which of the two has more comics, movies, tv shows, cartoons, video games, books, toys, and merchandise."
    --Mike McNulty, aka Stillanerd

    Blog: Yes, I Am STILL a Nerd!

    Don't ever take a fence down until you know the reason why it was put up.--G.K. Chesterton

  2. #17
    Senior Member ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,536

    Default

    Okay, thanks. That helps clear it up.

    Several posters mentioned (or at least alluded to) the fact that, in the end, we all know it's going to be Lois and Clark. Always has, and we assume always will. And that knowledge takes us out of the moment. I have to say its been hard trying to ignore that little voice telling me that logically, this is temporary. I've tried to bear in mind that "temporary" in this case could mean (in theory) twenty to thirty years. And by then, Didio and co. will be gone, most of the current creators will be too, the industry itself will be completely different, and that "temporary" could become a real challenge to the normal pairing. But even as I write that, I know its almost certainly a fool's empty hope.

    As for those saying that the Superman franchise will basically eat Wonder Woman, I have to disagree. I think Johns is spending a little too much time having Diana explore Clark's world and setting up the Diana Prince identity. We need to see him meet some of her support cast for a change. But Lobdell is writing the relationship, honestly, as well as he writes anything. Its a Superman book, but she's held her own (I have not read the Supergirl battle, admittedly) But I dont see her becoming best known for being Clark's toy. Maybe if this was some other heroine, like Black Canary or Hawkgirl, or (Ms) Captain Marvel, but I give Diana more credit than that. Yes, Superman is the biggest thing out there in the DCU (other than the Bat) but Diana is the one closest to his level. Diana might be many things, and all of them less popular than Superman, but I dont think she will ever be known mainly for being Superman's girlfriend. She'll be known for being the biggest, baddest female in spandex there is, and one of the biggest, baddest people in spandex generally, who happens to allow Superman the pleasure of her company.

    By the way, best post of the day right here: Who breaks up with Superman without an event to reset the universe?

    For that matter, who breaks up with Wonder Woman?

    All I know is, years from now, when this is all said and done and Clark is dating Lois and Diana is allowing Steve the pleasure of her company, I want them to double date and I want it to be really, really awkward.

  3. #18
    Senior Member ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,536

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stillanerd View Post
    To me it boils down to simply this: Wonder Woman is supposed to be an iconic superhero in her own right independent from the others, part of the Trinity of the other two iconic superheroes in Superman and Batman. And while admittedly her franchise is not nearly as big as the other two, she does have her own mythology and supporting characters. By having her be in a romance with Superman, you've essentially turned Wonder Woman, who again is supposed to be an icon superhero in her own right, into a supporting character for Superman. She becomes part of Superman's story instead of her own story. It's essentially DC all but admitting that Wonder Woman is incapable of making it on her own steam. And for those who say "Well, why wouldn't it be the other way around?" the answer to that is "Take a look at which of the two has more comics, movies, tv shows, cartoons, video games, books, toys, and merchandise."
    Why would her dating Superman make her stand on her own any less?

    See, this is what I was talking about. I just dont see it. Not a perfect example here, but Kyle Rayner dated Donna Troy for years, they almost got married (twice). But that never meant that Donna was any less a Titan or a member of Wonder Woman's franchise, or her own character. She had (if memory serves) her role in the Titans and WW titles, and never felt like any "less" of a character for having a famous boyfriend. Her dating Kyle had a minimal impact outside of Green Lantern.

    Granted, Superman is a much, much bigger thing than Green Lantern was at the time, but Diana is also a much bigger thing than Donna. I just dont see how her entire franchise would implode from this relationship lasting any length of time. They'd guest star in each other's books more, but Diana would still do her thing in her own title, with her own supporting cast and rogues, and also get to show up in Clark's, and vice versa.

    She still stands on her own right now, she just gets to mack on the most powerful man alive and one of the very, very few true equals she has.

    Or is this more of a fear of a Black Panther/Storm sort of thing? Is that what it is? Cause that was terrible. If that's the case, people making this assumption makes a lot more sense.

  4. #19
    They LAUGHED at my theory SteveGus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    2,410

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ascended View Post
    Or is this more of a fear of a Black Panther/Storm sort of thing? Is that what it is? Cause that was terrible. If that's the case, people making this assumption makes a lot more sense.
    That's a lot of it, I think. Except as Superman's girlfriend and a member of the Justice League, Wonder Woman's been pretty much erased from the DC universe, as has her home base and means of independence. For all practical purposes, in several ways, she does not really have a solo title in the DCU any more. And DC's general direction right now does not inspire a great deal of confidence that the current editorial staff can handle either character well. She will be Superman's girlfriend because she has nothing else left.
    Superhero comic books only become art to the extent that their banal, unrealistic fantasy and garish styles go too far and become interesting. Attempts to ground them in reality can only ruin them.

  5. #20
    Senior Member hellacre's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,793

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ShaunN View Post
    I think that the WW/Superman pairing is absolutely fine and is, indeed, quite logical. They are both superhumanly powerful, they are both isolated in the world, they have similar ideals, they are heroes, they admire each other. An awful lot in common here, much more than Supes has with Lois.

    My one objection to Diana's appearance in the recent "Superman": she is far, far too scrawny. Moreover, she should be taller than Perry by a substantial margin. I think that she is even wearing heels - she should be towering over him. Beyond that, it really makes you wonder why no one has recognized her as WW. Everyone obviously recognizes her as a stunningly gorgeous woman - how much of a leap to WW? And don't people in the New 52 know that WW is also Princess Diana? Isn't the link to Diana Prince glaringly obvious? I assume that how preposterous this all is is being played as a joke.
    Like Superman would be a stunningly gorgeous man without glasses? It is suspension of disbelief as well as it should be that how can she strut around London, gorgeous as she is and quite stylish too I might add and no one not know her? Goes both ways I think.
    http://superman-wonderwoman.deviantart.com/ (featuring some of the best superman/wonder woman art )

  6. #21
    Silly beyond belief Sillia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    355

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SteveGus View Post
    That's a lot of it, I think. Except as Superman's girlfriend and a member of the Justice League, Wonder Woman's been pretty much erased from the DC universe, as has her home base and means of independence. For all practical purposes, in several ways, she does not really have a solo title in the DCU any more. And DC's general direction right now does not inspire a great deal of confidence that the current editorial staff can handle either character well. She will be Superman's girlfriend because she has nothing else left.
    To be fair, her home base and means of independence were gone in her own book before she got together with Superman. They were gone with the reboot. WW's solo title has been in this weird pseudo-continuity-limbo since the beginning, because Azzarello doesn't mix toys for some reason. None of the stuff that happened outside of her book has been mentioned in her solo, and none of the stuff in her solo has been mentioned in JL or any other book she's guested in. It's getting to be a little confusing, because it seems like the new 52 WW solo title is in its own bizarre continuity bubble.

  7. #22
    Senior Member dreyga2000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Atlanta
    Posts
    3,223

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sillia View Post
    To be fair, her home base and means of independence were gone in her own book before she got together with Superman. They were gone with the reboot. WW's solo title has been in this weird pseudo-continuity-limbo since the beginning, because Azzarello doesn't mix toys for some reason. None of the stuff that happened outside of her book has been mentioned in her solo, and none of the stuff in her solo has been mentioned in JL or any other book she's guested in. It's getting to be a little confusing, because it seems like the new 52 WW solo title is in its own bizarre continuity bubble.
    Isn't the fact that she's not crossing with the rest of the DCU a sign of independence???

    Flash has been doing his own thing for months and the Batman titles are more or less in their own corner of the DCU... How is Wondie any different???
    All stories are imaginary, so you get to decide what's important and what isn't. Continuity is fluid.

    -Jeff Brady

    Quoted for truth....

  8. #23
    Senior Member hellacre's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,793

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stillanerd View Post
    To me it boils down to simply this: Wonder Woman is supposed to be an iconic superhero in her own right independent from the others, part of the Trinity of the other two iconic superheroes in Superman and Batman. And while admittedly her franchise is not nearly as big as the other two, she does have her own mythology and supporting characters. By having her be in a romance with Superman, you've essentially turned Wonder Woman, who again is supposed to be an icon superhero in her own right, into a supporting character for Superman. She becomes part of Superman's story instead of her own story. It's essentially DC all but admitting that Wonder Woman is incapable of making it on her own steam. And for those who say "Well, why wouldn't it be the other way around?" the answer to that is "Take a look at which of the two has more comics, movies, tv shows, cartoons, video games, books, toys, and merchandise."
    She is in a book driven by her own narrative and not reliant on any lovey dovey soap opera romance. Give Azz some props for that even if it is kind of one sided and only about Gods and if Diana is great writing her with a strong male presence should be a challenge and something to grab, not avoid. Avoiding it means you are saying that she is weak and has to avoid being near them for fear being cast in the shade. A good writer would embrace that. But end of the day comics are not going to do what you say because like most female characters, the market that reads comics are is very much male and WW has not had any sort of exposure in multi media but to be honest that did not help Superman in sales before the reboot. Bringing people into comics is important. You don't cut your nose to spite your face if you are suffering to get people reading. People have talked about making WW with a formula to appeal to new readers. Girls and guys I have found do like romance. It does not have to be sickening and can enhance a story. DC want to try to push it as a relationship of equals but writing is what it boils down to. I keep hearing she will become SM's supporting character but so far there is little evidence of that. I think the jury is still very much out. People who have made up their mind from the start will hardly ever change their stance.
    Last edited by hellacre; 04-25-2013 at 07:23 PM.
    http://superman-wonderwoman.deviantart.com/ (featuring some of the best superman/wonder woman art )

  9. #24
    Silly beyond belief Sillia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    355

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dreyga2000 View Post
    Isn't the fact that she's not crossing with the rest of the DCU a sign of independence???

    Flash has been doing his own thing for months and the Batman titles are more or less in their own corner of the DCU... How is Wondie any different???
    I honestly don't know. I don't really think she is very different, and I do think she's still as independent as the Flash or Batman. SteveGus was the one who mentioned the loss of independence. I've not thought of WW as being dependent on anyone (Superman included) in the months they've been together, but maybe he meant something different.
    Last edited by Sillia; 04-25-2013 at 08:14 PM.

  10. #25
    They LAUGHED at my theory SteveGus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    2,410

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sillia View Post
    I honestly don't know. I don't really think she is very different, and I do think she's still as independent as the Flash or Batman. SteveGus was the one who mentioned the loss of independence. I've not thought of WW as being dependent on anyone (Superman included) in the months they've been together, but maybe he meant something different.
    Wonder Woman used to have a corner of the DC universe that was hers, in the same way that Batman has Gotham and Superman, Metropolis. She no longer does. Olympus is hostile and not a home for her. Paradise Island is destroyed. Wonder Woman is Superman's girlfriend because she has nothing else left to be, and no place left to be from. And when that inevitably ends, it will be one more thing for her to lose.
    Superhero comic books only become art to the extent that their banal, unrealistic fantasy and garish styles go too far and become interesting. Attempts to ground them in reality can only ruin them.

  11. #26
    Silly beyond belief Sillia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    355

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SteveGus View Post
    Wonder Woman used to have a corner of the DC universe that was hers, in the same way that Batman has Gotham and Superman, Metropolis. She no longer does. Olympus is hostile and not a home for her. Paradise Island is destroyed. Wonder Woman is Superman's girlfriend because she has nothing else left to be, and no place left to be from. And when that inevitably ends, it will be one more thing for her to lose.
    What does that have to do with independence? I can understand not having a home base (which I do mostly blame on Azzarello), but where does the independence come in?

  12. #27
    Senior Member Blacksun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    4,947

    Default

    DC promote the relationship so badly.Superman and Lois divorced and they went to say that SM and WW will date, seemed like WW ended the relationship (for no comic readers). and my fear is easy to stigmatize WW as only Superman's Girlfriend, the writing is not helping

    It's not being bad for Superman: beautiful girlfriend, he teached her about distiguise and the "normal" life. He is the GUY.

  13. #28
    They LAUGHED at my theory SteveGus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    2,410

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sillia View Post
    What does that have to do with independence? I can understand not having a home base (which I do mostly blame on Azzarello), but where does the independence come in?
    What was it that Virginia Woolf wanted? A room of her own.
    Superhero comic books only become art to the extent that their banal, unrealistic fantasy and garish styles go too far and become interesting. Attempts to ground them in reality can only ruin them.

  14. #29
    Silly beyond belief Sillia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    355

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SteveGus View Post
    What was it that Virginia Woolf wanted? A room of her own.
    I still don't understand why independence is dependent on having a particular setting, and I suspect I'm not going to. I don't agree with your overall assessment, but you're free to your own opinion.

  15. #30
    Senior Member DochaDocha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    2,690

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blacksun View Post
    Superman and Lois divorced
    This is factually incorrect.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •