Page 5 of 11 FirstFirst 123456789 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 157
  1. #61
    The Smart One Sardorim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    3,349

    Default

    I just don't like the thought that only the most perfect and super powered man is good enough for her. The God couplings thing.

    Would be far more interesting for her to date someone that isn't a super boyscout and practically immortal/invincible.

    I also like Lois and Clark better.

  2. #62
    Senior Member ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,519

    Default

    Well, I look at it like this. DC has teased this concept for a very long time, but never actually explored it within standard continuity. And personally, while Clark and Diana have a lot in common I dont think they're "right" for each other in the end. But thats not to say they couldnt date for a while. In real life you dont marry the first chick you go out with, and comics should feel free to do the same. Sure, Clark and Lois "belong" together but nothing says we have to get there immediately or that Clark cant date other people in the meantime. So screw it, lets see where this leads.

    As for the God couple thing, thats sort of the point of what's happening in Justice League right now. These two together is setting off a lot of alarms around the globe.

    I really dont think this relationship is meant to last any real length of time. Couple years maybe, which by current standards might amount to three or four story arcs. Not that long, in the end.

    And its not that Clark isnt "over" Lois, or that he's somehow stuck on her. He has had feelings for her for years, but never acted on those feelings because Lois would become a target, and he's too damned busy. This is not one of those horrible "Without Lois Superman goes insane!" things.

    As for the thing about Diana needing a perfect, super powered man thing, that's not true. Steve seems plenty worthy to me. And I can think of several other characters who I would deem "good enough". But you have to admit, the list of people who can say they are truly her equal is pretty short.

  3. #63
    Senior Member lariatofhestia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1,264

    Default

    It is using Diana imo because Lois and Clark seem to need some spicing up so who better but to use WW...if WW can't make Clark forget Lois no one can't. That is disrespectful imo. The SM book could find it's own if they can't write something without that triangle nonsense and just needed some meta as the dispensable love interest drama. Also the idea Diana spells doom and gloom for Clark ( power should have zero to do with this) or any meta...I mean some are shipping her with Orion...who could arguably cause more than enough trouble if that ever came to pass...but her with Clark spells the end of the world. Yeah thanks for that, DC. Thanks for making WW look great in all this. I wish she dumps Clark now. I really do. Yeah am a little peeved and inclined to think DC is only send out negative vibes more about Diana than anything.

  4. #64
    U dont need my user title brettc1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Beyond the Dune Sea.
    Posts
    11,553

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thepenguin View Post
    What a very odd thing to say. Diana did not look out of place or acted as one of of place when she met Clark friends. Clark was not even with her when she worked that room.I have no notion where you are drawing this conclusion.
    14 months worth of Justice League stories.

    Quote Originally Posted by thepenguin View Post
    You seem to be stuck in one part of the narrative, Brett or at least not reading the book.You seem happy to make judgements based on what you don't see than what you see re say Steve. Diana is far from a slow learner in the Super book. In fact she's a really smart, funny and witty woman who is quite able to handle herself. I think you're really wanting this to be the case that being with him is bad but proven wrong by what is in say Superman #19.
    I have read the issue you mentioned, and Diana does indeed act more at ease in our world than she has in over a year of the Justice League. Of course, I note that this is after she has been educated by Clark...
    Last edited by brettc1; 04-30-2013 at 01:14 AM.
    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.”
    Irene: “Twice.”


  5. #65
    Senior Member ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,519

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lariatofhestia View Post
    It is using Diana imo because Lois and Clark seem to need some spicing up so who better but to use WW...if WW can't make Clark forget Lois no one can't. That is disrespectful imo. The SM book could find it's own if they can't write something without that triangle nonsense and just needed some meta as the dispensable love interest drama. Also the idea Diana spells doom and gloom for Clark ( power should have zero to do with this) or any meta...I mean some are shipping her with Orion...who could arguably cause more than enough trouble if that ever came to pass...but her with Clark spells the end of the world. Yeah thanks for that, DC. Thanks for making WW look great in all this. I wish she dumps Clark now. I really do. Yeah am a little peeved and inclined to think DC is only send out negative vibes more about Diana than anything.
    I think its less that Diana spells the end of the world for Clark, I think its that the two of them together (inadvertently) change things drastically for the worse. Equal responsibility, not DC saying that Diana is such a brutal bitch she destroys entire timelines when she dates someone.

    I dont think DC felt that Lois and Clark needed spicing up in the New52. Perez set up a really cool "Does Lois know?" thing and writers since have played with the standard troupes of sexual tension and Clark being responsible and not dragging her into his violent world any more than she already is. There's plenty there to work with, if they wanted to dive right back into that triangle. Which clearly they have no interest in getting to *just* yet, as they're working hard to do everything else first (the fellow reporter Heather, Lois' sister Lucy, Diana, and possibly even Dr. Veritas so far and Lois has her own man). I really suspect that Johns saw a chance to tell a story using a relationship that DC has never, in all the decades of stolen kisses and mild flirtation, fully realized. But because this is Superman and he's the king of the mountain, people are assuming its just to make him look cooler by putting the world's most recognizable female on his arm.

    Honestly, I think its rather telling that Diana's fans are seeing this as playing up Clark, rather than seeing it as Diana dating the Alpha of Alpha males. Does this do nothing to make Diana look better? Is her character so weak and flawed that she will simply be swallowed by the larger Superman franchise? Will she cease being who she is and simply become some simpering girl toy? Clark has been practically monogamous for decades, with very few love interests outside of Lois, and Diana just might be one of the few characters to give that a real run for its money (theoretically). Does that say nothing about her strength of character?

  6. #66
    CBR Mod/WW Section Mom Gaelforce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Southern New Jersey
    Posts
    3,360

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ascended View Post
    I think its less that Diana spells the end of the world for Clark, I think its that the two of them together (inadvertently) change things drastically for the worse. Equal responsibility, not DC saying that Diana is such a brutal bitch she destroys entire timelines when she dates someone.

    I dont think DC felt that Lois and Clark needed spicing up in the New52. Perez set up a really cool "Does Lois know?" thing and writers since have played with the standard troupes of sexual tension and Clark being responsible and not dragging her into his violent world any more than she already is. There's plenty there to work with, if they wanted to dive right back into that triangle. Which clearly they have no interest in getting to *just* yet, as they're working hard to do everything else first (the fellow reporter Heather, Lois' sister Lucy, Diana, and possibly even Dr. Veritas so far and Lois has her own man). I really suspect that Johns saw a chance to tell a story using a relationship that DC has never, in all the decades of stolen kisses and mild flirtation, fully realized. But because this is Superman and he's the king of the mountain, people are assuming its just to make him look cooler by putting the world's most recognizable female on his arm.

    Honestly, I think its rather telling that Diana's fans are seeing this as playing up Clark, rather than seeing it as Diana dating the Alpha of Alpha males. Does this do nothing to make Diana look better? Is her character so weak and flawed that she will simply be swallowed by the larger Superman franchise? Will she cease being who she is and simply become some simpering girl toy? Clark has been practically monogamous for decades, with very few love interests outside of Lois, and Diana just might be one of the few characters to give that a real run for its money (theoretically). Does that say nothing about her strength of character?
    Normally I'd say 'no, she wouldn't be swallowed by the Superman franchise,' but since none of this relationship is being addressed in her own book by her own writers who just *might* be able to give her a leg up, so to speak, then that leaves us with a one-sided (one and a half including JL) story. Superman is the hero of Superman titles. He's the one in his books who is supposed to 'get the girl', so that's the way the stories will be told.

    JL is only showing us how clueless Diana is (contrary to how she's written in her own book) and how she needs Superman to help her but is not giving us anything in reverse. Quite the contrary, Diana is the one leading Superman down the path of 'we're so powerful we can do anything we want.'

    So yeah, she's in great danger of being 'swallowed up' because Azzarello is ignoring it, leaving us with the Superman perspective for the better part of the story.

  7. #67
    They LAUGHED at my theory SteveGus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    2,402

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ascended View Post
    Honestly, I think its rather telling that Diana's fans are seeing this as playing up Clark, rather than seeing it as Diana dating the Alpha of Alpha males. Does this do nothing to make Diana look better? Is her character so weak and flawed that she will simply be swallowed by the larger Superman franchise? Will she cease being who she is and simply become some simpering girl toy? Clark has been practically monogamous for decades, with very few love interests outside of Lois, and Diana just might be one of the few characters to give that a real run for its money (theoretically). Does that say nothing about her strength of character?
    If Wonder Woman were still being treated like an A-list character, with a real home base and durable supporting cast, it might be less of a concern. Of course, she has no life of her own in "her" title and the romance with Superman plays no part in her side of the equation, if you imagine she still even has one.

    But the Wonder Woman title is only about breaking her down and wrecking her world. It has no time for romance with Superman or anybody. She just doesn't have enough of a base to stand on at this point. That, and the Justice League and Superman books, are the only places she appears.
    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.

  8. #68
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    6,193

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gaelforce View Post
    Normally I'd say 'no, she wouldn't be swallowed by the Superman franchise,' but since none of this relationship is being addressed in her own book by her own writers who just *might* be able to give her a leg up, so to speak, then that leaves us with a one-sided (one and a half including JL) story.
    Of course, if Superman was appearing in Wonder Woman's book, some would fear that book becoming "Wonder Woman starring Superman." And if the one book bearing Wonder Woman's name will have nothing to do with Superman, then it would appear that no, Wonder Woman has not been swallowed up by the Superman franchise; no matter how one-sidedely the story of the romance may be told, her book will stand well apart from his franchise.

    If anything, Wonder Woman has invaded the Superman franchise, where she has been even seen besting Supergirl. And when Superman and Wonder Woman appeared on what might have been "neutral ground," in Young Romance, they were actually in Wonder Woman's "corner of the universe"--DC's version of Greek mythology--and Wonder Woman used her lasso to save Eros and allow him to save Superman from the Sirens. (Think about that symbolism--Wonder Woman frees true eros and thereby saves Superman from being captivated by false temptation.)

    Quote Originally Posted by Ascended
    I think its less that Diana spells the end of the world for Clark, I think its that the two of them together (inadvertently) change things drastically for the worse. Equal responsibility, not DC saying that Diana is such a brutal bitch she destroys entire timelines when she dates someone.
    And whether it would, in the end, necessarily be for the worse remains in question, right? In Superboy, the timeline in which Lois and Supeman get together and have a son was an apocalyptic nightmare of metahuman domination. Would the Diana/Clark timeline necessarily be worse than that.
    Last edited by slvn; 04-30-2013 at 10:20 AM.

  9. #69
    Senior Member misslane38's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    4,512

    Default

    See, I don't understand how Superman appearing in Wonder Woman could be a bad thing. As it stands now, the relationship has yet to be developed in a title that boasts Wonder Woman in the starring role. By bringing Superman into Wonder Woman's world, which Azzarello is avoiding, he actually has to play second fiddle to her. It would be nice to know Superman could appear in a Wonder Woman story in her own book without it being interpreted as taking away from her independence. Not bringing Superman into Wonder Woman's book, in other words, could be seen as an admission that handling that romance there is too difficult. I'm not saying that's the reason, of course, but it's one possible explanation.
    "I love that she’s human. You need that juxtaposed to the perfection of Superman. [Lois] has this absolute loyalty for what is good and just, and it parallels what Superman is." – Erica Durance

  10. #70
    Senior Member Blacksun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    4,846

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ascended View Post
    I think its less that Diana spells the end of the world for Clark, I think its that the two of them together (inadvertently) change things drastically for the worse. Equal responsibility, not DC saying that Diana is such a brutal bitch she destroys entire timelines when she dates someone.

    I dont think DC felt that Lois and Clark needed spicing up in the New52. Perez set up a really cool "Does Lois know?" thing and writers since have played with the standard troupes of sexual tension and Clark being responsible and not dragging her into his violent world any more than she already is. There's plenty there to work with, if they wanted to dive right back into that triangle. Which clearly they have no interest in getting to *just* yet, as they're working hard to do everything else first (the fellow reporter Heather, Lois' sister Lucy, Diana, and possibly even Dr. Veritas so far and Lois has her own man). I really suspect that Johns saw a chance to tell a story using a relationship that DC has never, in all the decades of stolen kisses and mild flirtation, fully realized. But because this is Superman and he's the king of the mountain, people are assuming its just to make him look cooler by putting the world's most recognizable female on his arm.

    Honestly, I think its rather telling that Diana's fans are seeing this as playing up Clark, rather than seeing it as Diana dating the Alpha of Alpha males. Does this do nothing to make Diana look better? Is her character so weak and flawed that she will simply be swallowed by the larger Superman franchise? Will she cease being who she is and simply become some simpering girl toy? Clark has been practically monogamous for decades, with very few love interests outside of Lois, and Diana just might be one of the few characters to give that a real run for its money (theoretically). Does that say nothing about her strength of character?
    Like people say "Hell is full of people with good intentions". He need the relationship for his plot trinity war ok, but at least make it good for the two characters. We are only seeing Superman contribute for the relationship and only his point of view. Azzarello doesn't wanna deal with the relationship, better never had happened.

  11. #71
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    6,193

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by misslane38 View Post
    See, I don't understand how Superman appearing in Wonder Woman could be a bad thing.
    Some of Wonder Woman's fans think she's not getting enough of the spotlight in her own book. I don't agree with them, but I imagine that if Superman were to appear in the book, they would worry that he might draw even more of the spotlight from her. A lot of this has to do with a long history of Wonder Woman being overshadowed by other heroes, even in her own book, before this run--for example, in one run she got her secret identity and even her invisible plane from Batman.So, if you're wondering whether Wonder Woman fans are insecure about her independence--well, yeah, I think some are, and not without reason.

    Personally, I wouldn't worry about Wonder Woman being overshadowed in Azz's run, but I wouldn't want Superman inserted there if he doesn't fit well into the story being told there.

    And, again, for those who are worried about WW being annexed to the Superman franchise, his absence from her book should calm their fears. As long as the book that bears her name has nothing to do with Superman, she can't be considered part of his franchise.

    Not bringing Superman into Wonder Woman's book, in other words, could be seen as an admission that handling that romance there is too difficult. I'm not saying that's the reason, of course, but it's one possible explanation.
    I think that the most obvious explanation, which Azz patrially confirmed in an interview, is that Azz just isn't into it. He doesn't see Wonder Woman as a conventional superhero book, and he doesn't think Superman belongs in the mythological story he's telling.

  12. #72
    Senior Member ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,519

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by slvn View Post
    Some of Wonder Woman's fans think she's not getting enough of the spotlight in her own book. I don't agree with them, but I imagine that if Superman were to appear in the book, they would worry that he might draw even more of the spotlight from her. A lot of this has to do with a long history of Wonder Woman being overshadowed by other heroes, even in her own book, before this run--for example, in one run she got her secret identity and even her invisible plane from Batman.So, if you're wondering whether Wonder Woman fans are insecure about her independence--well, yeah, I think some are, and not without reason.

    Personally, I wouldn't worry about Wonder Woman being overshadowed in Azz's run, but I wouldn't want Superman inserted there if he doesn't fit well into the story being told there.

    And, again, for those who are worried about WW being annexed to the Superman franchise, his absence from her book should calm their fears. As long as the book that bears her name has nothing to do with Superman, she can't be considered part of his franchise.



    I think that the most obvious explanation, which Azz patrially confirmed in an interview, is that Azz just isn't into it. He doesn't see Wonder Woman as a conventional superhero book, and he doesn't think Superman belongs in the mythological story he's telling.
    Well said and co-signed.

    I think if Azzarello was willing to derail his story in order to squeeze Clark into things it would hamper the quality of his work, the storyline/s he's telling, and some fans would just complain that Clark was edging her out of her own book.

    Fact is, a good chunk of page time in Superman is about Diana, Clark's feelings for her and their interactions. And Lobdell has written her as well as he writes anything, she's smart, confident, and all around classy. And in the pages of Justice League, all of Clark's appearances there are now tied into Diana too. But Diana's own title is completely ignoring the relationship, keeping on with the exploration of her own story and mythology. I dont see her falling into a supporting role. She's not Power Girl or anything.

    Its true that the exploration of this relationship has been one sided so far. Lobdell cant be blamed for writing Superman centric stories in the pages of Superman, and Johns has never had a good grasp on Diana's character. And this is a shame because I'd love to see it seen from her viewpoint more. I hope that Johns fixes this in future issues but dont really expect it.

    But none of that excuses these odd assumptions that somehow the entire Wonder Woman franchise will explode because she's dating one of the few characters more famous than her. I dont mean to name names, but SteveGus is an example of what I've been talking about. Im not trying to offend or insult or anything, Steve you seem like a nice enough person and Im not calling your intelligence or taste into question. I just fail to see how this amounts to anything more than a potentially poor storyline for her. Maybe these posters are using the argument of extremes to sell their point? I dont know.

    I do maintain though, that her lack of a central city means nothing. Iron Man does not have a central base of operations. Diana travelling doesnt seem to be impacting the quality of her tales or the strength of her franchise in any way. And which city would you have be hers? Washington DC? Boston? Gateway? Unlike many classic characters, she has never stuck to one city or one supporting cast.

  13. #73
    Senior Member misslane38's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    4,512

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ascended View Post
    But Diana's own title is completely ignoring the relationship, keeping on with the exploration of her own story and mythology. I dont see her falling into a supporting role. She's not Power Girl or anything.
    I'm just not sure why it's okay for Azzarello to ignore something significant about Wonder Woman's life under the guise of "keeping on with the exploration of her own story and mythology," since the best way to show that having Superman as a boyfriend doesn't interfere with those things is to include him in her book while maintaining focus on her story and mythology. If Superman has to be ignored to keep Wonder Woman's book focused on her, then isn't that a problem? Shouldn't her character and her book be able to feature her love interest without suffering any negative consequences or feedback? I'm not saying it can't be done or it won't be done in the future, but it seems strange that avoiding the relationship in Wonder Woman's own title is perceived as a plus for her.
    "I love that she’s human. You need that juxtaposed to the perfection of Superman. [Lois] has this absolute loyalty for what is good and just, and it parallels what Superman is." – Erica Durance

  14. #74
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    6,193

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by misslane38 View Post
    I'm just not sure why it's okay for Azzarello to ignore something significant about Wonder Woman's life under the guise of "keeping on with the exploration of her own story and mythology," since the best way to show that having Superman as a boyfriend doesn't interfere with those things is to include him in her book while maintaining focus on her story and mythology.
    I guess Azzarello doesn't see it as his job to show that the relationship doesn't interfere with those things; the relationship isn't part of the extended story that he signed on to tell. It's just a matter of personal preference, but for me, a book doesn't have to to include everything significant about a character's life, like a comprehensive biography would. I'm happy to get a a good, focused story and be left to wonder about other aspects of the character's life. I think it would be possible to include Superman in Azzerello's version of Wonder Woman's world; Diggle showed that in Young Romance. But if it's not what Azz is interested in doing, I'm glad no one is making him; that kind of editorial interference often goes bad.

  15. #75
    Senior Member misslane38's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    4,512

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by slvn View Post
    I guess Azzarello doesn't see it as his job to show that the relationship doesn't interfere with those things; the relationship isn't part of the extended story that he signed on to tell. It's just a matter of personal preference, but for me, a book doesn't have to to include everything significant about a character's life, like a comprehensive biography would. I'm happy to get a a good, focused story and be left to wonder about other aspects of the character's life. I think it would be possible to include Superman in Azzerello's version of Wonder Woman's world; Diggle showed that in Young Romance. But if it's not what Azz is interested in doing, I'm glad no one is making him; that kind of editorial interference often goes bad.
    I'm not asking for editorial to interfere. What I'm wondering is why Azzarello's version of Wonder Woman doesn't seem to care to explore all facets of her. I don't think Superman has to appear in multiple issues or even several pages of one issue, but shouldn't there be some sort of indication that there's more to Diana going on outside of the story Azzarello is writing? It gives the impression that Wonder Woman is a different character outside of her own story.
    "I love that she’s human. You need that juxtaposed to the perfection of Superman. [Lois] has this absolute loyalty for what is good and just, and it parallels what Superman is." – Erica Durance

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
  •