Wonder Woman Gets A Makeover

[Saya]

I had to go to Bust Magazine to figure it all out, but it makes more sense now:

http://bust.com/blog/2010/06/30/wond...-makeover.html

She's going to have a different costume because its an alternate time line thing where she was raised in a human city instead of raised in Themyscira. The costume makes a lot more sense knowing that.

So definitely once they go back she'll be back to the old costume.

[ape descendant]

Originally Posted by HumanePain

Wonder Woman asks "And what's wrong with the way I dress?":

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hebulwTWc94

ROFLMAO!!!! Totally! Standin' up for people who 'dress a little funny' everywhere!!

[Ben Lahnger]

Originally Posted by Saya

Saying "Its only satire!" Doesn't really make sense unless Miller is quite willing to admit that he's more than part of the problem. He's incapable of writing women as anything other that gratuitous, DK2 isn't funny, satire or any sort of social commentary, saying its satire is like slapping paint on a canvas and calling it art.

Many people didn't like The Dark Knight Strikes Again. But having an opinion that it's not satire doesn't mean it's not ... it just means you didn't see satire in it. The same thing applies to the "art" opinion. Not everyone agrees. That's okay.

Originally Posted by Despanan

Atop the Fourth Wall agrees.

That was pretty entertaining. Not completely accurate, and a bit whiny for my tastes. Criticizing the way Miller emphasizes words in his text balloons? Really? As if that never happens anywhere else. And the commentary about the "News in the Nude" program being ridiculous is wrong, because at the time Miller wrote this "Naked News" from Canada was becoming a sensation on cable TV and on the internet. It was not an excuse to draw naked chicks (we do know Frank knows how to do that) because if he wanted to show naked chicks he wouldn't have covered up every naughty bit with a text balloon. And complaining about when Batman is going to show up ... well, that sounded like someone much younger with no patience and no impulse control. It's true the story takes its time leading to Batman's appearance. Some see that as building to a grand entrance.

I could go on, but as I said, the guy was pretty entertaining and he expresses opinions shared by many. I favor this review for some balance:

Comics in Context #30: Knight After Knight

Finally, to return to the topic of this thread, it turns out it really doesn't matter quite so much what Gail Simone think of the new costume. J. Michael Straczynski is going to be helming the comic now.


Wonder Woman's New Era
New costume, new creators, new direction.
June 29, 2010

I love me some Babylon 5, but I'm quite concerned about what Straczynski says he is going to do the character and the mythos. This quote is telling:

"... for the last few years, the book has been in free-fall despite some really good storytelling from Gail."

And the story he's going to be telling is described in that interview ... and I don't think it's a good idea. Alternate timeline, alternate origin, urbanized setting ... realistic.

Hmph!!!

"Kids, these days. Can't tell the difference between just plain old and classic." - The Flash, from The Dark Night Strikes Again.

[Pooka]

I saw her new change off a comic site I'm on. I don't think its bad, but idk...changing a classic like that seems a bit dangerous.

[Joker_in_the_Pack]

Originally Posted by Ben Lahnger

Well, you know, there have been people who have been saying for a long time that Superman and Batman should ditch the capes, because they're not practical - they could get caught in something. If concerns about practicality and the rules/social norms that exist in real life drove what happened in comics, the heroes would seem a lot less super.

That's why I like Alex Mercer from the game Prototype. He's not in some idiotic costume that makes him stick out like a sore thumb. He's in jeans and wearing a leather jacket over a hoodie. You couldn't find him in a crowd if he wasn't military pressing cars and bludgeoning tanks with his mutated fists.

It may be because I was never a comic book fan (nothing against them, just never got into them), but I always thought most super heroes look like idiots. Superman's disguise is a pair of glasses for crying out loud. That's the only thing different between "Kent" and "Superman", glasses. Batman has a bit of a better idea (the new incarnations anyway) his suit is functional and at least he's hard to see at night. The newest batman movies even made the cape practical (somehow).

Spiderman at least can't be recognized as Parker, mostly because nobody would suspect effete momma's boy to be a super hero (looking at you, Toby)

I've always thought the costumes were asinine. I know they're supposed to be a symbol, and I know it's just fiction, but just because it's not real doesn't mean it should be ridiculous.
Besides, how hard is it to see Spiderman in your peripherals? He's red and fucking blue. If there was a vigilante who could bench press tanks running around beating up criminals and he looked just like anyone else, I wouldn't even dare jay-walk out of fear.


Why does being a super hero mean you have to look like a ponce?

[Ben Lahnger]

First, Superman changes from wearing a flaming red and blue costume to wearing a dapper suit, slacks, dress shoes AND glasses. So the change is dramatic. You really weren't talking about the costume at all were you? You were referring to the fact that he doesn't disguise his face.

Also, everyone keeps commenting on the fact that they think superhero costumes are outlandish and they make the character stand out. That is exactly the point. First, the essential superhero DOES want to stand out. Like wearing a brightly colored bulls-eye on their backs, a superhero's costume dares criminals to notice them ... and to either be frightened by them or be impelled to attack by them. Either is a desirable goal for the superhero. It also gives them instant credibility with civilians, much like a firefighter or police uniform. If they dressed in casual civilian clothes, then realistically we'd have a whole lot of scenes where our heroes would have to explain who they were before they could get cooperation from crowds and authority figures.

Everyone seems to think in the very restrictive terms "If I dressed like that I'd look like an idiot." In the comic universe, that perception applies until they perform their first or second heroic act. Then the costume becomes a symbol to the people of what the character can do. In point of fact, no one goes to a Superman or Batman or X-men or Spiderman movie expecting the crowd exiting the theater to say things like "Well, the story was okay but those costumes made them look gay."

It's a fantasy mythology and these are mythological creatures. It's all supposed to be outlandish. I would not say that Captain Jack Sparrow is dressed ridiculously and the producers should make his outfit look more mainstream in upcoming films. Nobody thinks Gandalf shouldn't have worn that outrageous glowing white robe. It's supposed to make them stand out for good reason. The current fad of wanting to walk superheroes all back to ordinary, mundane existences (see the current Superman "walks" across America" plot-line, among others) disgusts me.

If you want tales of people dressed in ordinary, grimy clothing ... read a detective story or watch Law & Order. Me, I want my superheros to be as they were invented ... larger than life.

[Hearts_Purple]

Fuck dressing WW in civvies! I hate all this anti-superhero-costume bullshit!

[Despanan]

Originally Posted by Ben Lahnger

That was pretty entertaining. Not completely accurate, and a bit whiny for my tastes. Criticizing the way Miller emphasizes words in his text balloons? Really? As if that never happens anywhere else. And the commentary about the "News in the Nude" program being ridiculous is wrong, because at the time Miller wrote this "Naked News" from Canada was becoming a sensation on cable TV and on the internet. It was not an excuse to draw naked chicks (we do know Frank knows how to do that) because if he wanted to show naked chicks he wouldn't have covered up every naughty bit with a text balloon. And complaining about when Batman is going to show up ... well, that sounded like someone much younger with no patience and no impulse control. It's true the story takes its time leading to Batman's appearance. Some see that as building to a grand entrance.

I could go on, but as I said, the guy was pretty entertaining and he expresses opinions shared by many. I favor this review for some balance:

Comics in Context #30: Knight After Knight

Glad you enjoyed it. Linkara is funny as hell.

Since this thread has allready been rezzed. I figured I'd point out that ATFW did the Dark night review in 3 parts, the other two being Here and Here.

He addresses the fact that News in the nude is real in those.

I checked out the comics in context review, it's not bad, but I think the guy who wrote it is marking the same mistake I did when I first picked up frank Miller, ie: excusing weak writing as an artistic choice because it's frank friggin' Miller.

I enjoyed the Hell out of Sin City and 300, but technically speaking Frank Miller is not a very good writer. He tends to fill up his comics with his own "Darker and Edgier" purple prose, and he wastes time re-empasizing scene's and dialogue again and again. He also has a real attraction to SUPER corny moments (Spartans! Formation Delta!) and seems physically incapable of writing a woman who isn't a whore.

Plus the art in DK2 is just straight up lazy.

It's not that I don't like Miller, but I see this alot in the arts: someone who's not particularly gifted, but who's work is quirky enough to garner attention manages to churn out a huge hit and develop a following. They're lauded as a master, and thus the later obvious mistakes are chalked up to "artistic choices". When people don't get what he's trying to say, they assume it's more complex than it really is and heap more praise on it. Essentially it's an Emperor's New Clothes sort of situation.

Frank Miller's writing is to comics what Christopher Walken is to acting: Not particularly good, but Bizzare enough to be immensely enjoyable.

Oh and as to the "frank just wanted to draw naked women" bit...yeah I'm pretty sure he did. He covered them up because this was a batman comic and thus not published under vertigo. The editors probably wouldn't let him, as the book needs to appeal to a wider demographic than Sin City. As you can see from the script he wrote for All-Star Batman and Robin guy is really all up-ons using sex for no other reason than to titilate the reader. (plus he admitted in his notes on Sin City, that he really likes to draw naked women.

[gothicusmaximus]

Frank Miller is possibly the biggest fuck up of all living artists. Even Roman Polanski, who ***** a tween, will be remembered primarily for Chinatown and Rosemary's Baby, but I have no doubt that, once Frank Miller is gone, any question as to who he was or what he accomplished will receive the answer "ARE YOU DENSE? ARE YOU RETARDED OR SOMETHING?"

[Hearts_Purple]

There is nothing in this universe that can excuse a disgusting pig like Polanski. I'd rather be a miller fangirl than ever watch a shitty Polanski movie! Child molesters are far worse than people who simply write bad comics.

[JCC]

Originally Posted by Hearts_Purple

There is nothing in this universe that can excuse a disgusting pig like Polanski. I'd rather be a miller fangirl than ever watch a shitty Polanski movie! Child molesters are far worse than people who simply write bad comics.

Not when the child molester made Chinatown and the person who simply writes bad comics made All Star Batman and Robin the Boy Wonder.

[Hearts_Purple]

Originally Posted by JCC

Not when the child molester made Chinatown and the person who simply writes bad comics made All Star Batman and Robin the Boy Wonder.

You are a dumbass.

[JCC]

No, you are a humourless old cat lady.

[Ben Lahnger]

Despanan, I actually agree with most of what you said. I acknowledge my enjoyment of Frank Miller is a guilty pleasure, and if he worked as a novelist nothing he's produced would be considered good writing. I think there's something about working in this media that makes a difference. And the fact that his dark knight inspired others to create things like Batman Returns and Batman Begins means his work has more value than some give credit.

For the thread-jacking record, I like Chinatown a lot (and I love the campy fun of The Fearless Vampire Killers), but Rosemary's Baby is over-rated IMO. And while I can usually separate an artist from their art, I have a hard time doing that with Polanski.

But to put this in perspective - if you walk into most large comic shops, they will have a special Frank Miller section. I've never seen a Roman Polanski section in any of the dozens and dozens of video stores I've been to in my life.

(Yes, I've been in A LOT of video stores over the last 20+ years. Man, I miss Suncoast Pictures - haven't been to one since they got bought out by FYE.)

[Hearts_Purple]

Originally Posted by JCC

No, you are a humourless old cat lady.

You are projecting again, tsk. Just because I don't think you are funny doesn't make me humorless. ^_^

[JCC]

What the fuck? I, a sixteen year old male, am projecting my own insecurities about being a humourless old cat lady on to you? The fuck you think I am, someone suffering from Multiple Personality Disorder?

[Apathy's_Child]

Originally Posted by Ben Lahnger

For the thread-jacking record, I like Chinatown a lot (and I love the campy fun of The Fearless Vampire Killers), but Rosemary's Baby is over-rated IMO.

This. It's an okay movie, but I don't really get why everyone creams over it.