Wonder Woman Thread Reborn! - - - - - - - - Part 17

[Thread Manager]

This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]469055[/split]

 

[Thread Manager]

This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]467293[/split]

 

[Lily Adler]

Wait my 'Way Back' machine is telling me that it was Kryptonian bacteria that mutated the Amazons into metahumans.

 

[jmc]

It's a terrible idea and it is very different origin. No one would read the comics and be like "Yeah this could be the interpreted as Kara's ship crash landing thousands of years ago and creating the Greek Gods by cross breading and then spawning the Amazons. It's so obvious!"

Who said it was combining origins? What it is doing is saying that the only way that WW can have power is by being an offshoot of a more popular male hero. How do you not get why people are offended or why it is something people are against?

Because frankly the offence is being blown up to ridiculous proportions and causing people to not look at the idea from a different perspective. How are you unable to see the difference between her powers being an offshoot of Superman and coming from ancient Kryptonians coming to Earth. Superman has nothing to do with her creation in this idea. If he himself was the reason for Diana's existence and her abilities then yes I too would be against the idea because that idea completely undermines her. The evolution of the Greek Mythology that we known can come from those ancient people, history tells us most myths and folklore have some element of truth to them and this concept is no different. Those ancient Kryptonian would be considered gods, they probably would be worshiped, and they probably would inspire countless tales that over the years are further exaggerated and expanded upon. Essentially all you're doing is changing the interpretation of who the 'Gods' were whilst at the same time providing a link with Superman and Wonder Woman's origins which is all this concept is doing - proving a link between the two characters. The same should be done with Superman and Batman, there should be something that links the two, I suggested that Joe Chill be connected to the Superman mythology in someway as being the easiest way forward. This also makes sense from a story telling perspective because it gives more gravitas to them coming together.

Look in contrast to Avengers, it really doesn't matter which superheroes or villains are in that movie because it's not really about any one of them, it's a celebration of superheroes that stands on its own against the previous MCU films. Each character is given a moment to shine but overall you could have easily replaced one with someone like Spider-Man or Wolverine because that movie is really only about a bunch of misfits having to come together to do something and not much else. Even Joss Whedon himself said he found it difficult to get these characters together and it's obvious why, other than easter eggs for us fans there was nothing that inherently linked each character together, the MCU in phase one was a very loose connection at best. Man of Steel 2 is a Superman sequel that's going to have Batman and Wonder Woman as supporting roles, the creative team is expanding from the previous movie not cobbling together 3 different movies, so it's important to have these layers because it gives the story far more weight.

 

[teagone]

How are you unable to see the difference between her powers being an offshoot of Superman and coming from ancient Kryptonians coming to Earth. Superman has nothing to do with her creation in this idea. If he himself was the reason for Diana's existence and her abilities then yes I too would be against the idea because that idea completely undermines her.

Superman is synonymous with Krypton. The issue (which isn't really being blown out of proportion in any way) is why should Wonder Woman have to borrow from or integrate with Superman's canon/mythos in order for her to work on in a live action, sci-fi fantasy film when she is a character that has a well established and diverse background. Why should her origin be reimagined/altered in a way that directly correlates her to Superman's heritage when the Greek Myth aspect works just fine in a sci-fi fantasy context?

 

[jmc]

Superman is synonymous with Krypton. The issue (which isn't really being blown out of proportion in any way) is why should Wonder Woman have to borrow from or integrate with Superman's canon/mythos in order for her to work on in a live action, sci-fi fantasy film when she is a character that has a well established and diverse background. Why should her origin be reimagined/altered in a way that directly correlates her to Superman's heritage when the Greek Myth aspect works just fine in a sci-fi fantasy context?

Did you read the rest of what I wrote above? I explained why.

 

[teagone]

Did you read the rest of what I wrote above? I explained why.

I did. I take time to read each and every post. I didn't address the rest of what you wrote because fusing Greek Myth with Krypton is dumb as hell. It's completely unnecessary. And are you actually suggesting/implying Joe Chill being an ex-Luthor employee would make the shared universe narrative better somehow? How contrived would that be. It makes much more sense to have each member of the trinity come from different walks of life as opposed to being interconnected in trivial ways. Ideally, I'd rather DC do something different than half-assedly ape what Marvel did.

[edit] Heroes being interchangeable or easily replaced, like in The Avengers, isn't really a positive thing by the way. Not when the characters are as iconic as Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman. There's a significant distinction between the three of them, and that should be one of the goals in depicting all three of them when they're on film together.

 

[Steamteck]

Did you read the rest of what I wrote above? I explained why.

Your reason are inadequate and frankly they do just the opposite of what you think. By stripping characters of their uniqueness the story becomes more bland and has less weight

I'm actually not really worried about this much because Snyder and Goyer are smarter than this. The only way this might happen is if some idiot executive pushed it through.

You're just not going to get any of us to find it valid even if it is monkey logic.

 

[jmc]

I did. I take time to read each and every post. I didn't address the rest of what you wrote because fusing Greek Myth with Krypton is dumb as hell. It's completely unnecessary. And are you actually suggesting/implying Joe Chill being an ex-Luthor employee would make the shared universe narrative better somehow? How contrived would that be. It makes much more sense to have each member of the trinity come from different walks of life as opposed to being being interconnected in trivial ways. Ideally, I'd rather DC do something different than half-assedly ape what Marvel did.

You haven't given reasons why it's dumb as hell, all you're doing is saying is saying that's it's unnecessary without taking into account what such alterations actually can bring to the story. The thing is you keep talking as if Batman and Wonder Woman's world have already been established in this film series - they haven't.

 

[jaymes_e06]

You haven't given reasons why it's dumb as hell, all you're doing is saying is saying that's it's unnecessary without taking into account what such alterations actually can bring to the story. The thing is you keep talking as if Batman and Wonder Woman's world have already been established in this film series - they haven't.

Im going to say what I said before and I'll say it agian:
What this theory is doing is saying that the only way that WW can have power is by being an offshoot of a more popular male hero. How do you not get why people are offended or why it is something people are against?

 

[teagone]

You haven't given reasons why it's dumb as hell, all you're doing is saying is saying that's it's unnecessary without taking into account what such alterations actually can bring to the story. The thing is you keep talking as if Batman and Wonder Woman's world have already been established in this film series - they haven't.

It being completely unnecessary is a reason. And I have taken into account what the alteration would do, otherwise why the hell would I be arguing against it? I keep coming back to it being dumb as hell because it's not hard to reason that Greek Myth can properly fit into a sci-fi fantasy context. I, and several others, have also been stating how such an alteration completely undermines the character of Wonder Woman in a horrible way. That's one of the bigger reasons. It also pretty much copies what Marvel did with Thor, which works fine for Marvel because Thor isn't connected to say...Tony Stark in such a way where Tony Stark is descended from a familial lineage of Norse Starks who were conceived by Odin or whatever Asgardian messing around on Earth. That's why Tony and Howard Stark are so smart. See how dumb, contrived, and completely unnecessary that would have been? Marvel was smart enough to not go that route. This rumor does go that route, which is another reason why it's dumb. And I thought Batman is already an established veteran in this sequel? Was that not confirmed? Wonder Woman's mythos is up in the air for this film (which is why we're discussing it), but whether she has an established foundation in the film or not isn't really relevant to the argument I and others have been making.

 

[jmc]

Im going to say what I said before and I'll say it agian:
What this theory is doing is saying that the only way that WW can have power is by being an offshoot of a more popular male hero. How do you not get why people are offended or why it is something people are against?

Because it's such an oversimplification of the concept it borders on parody. Of course you can do the WW origin the 'regular' way for lack of better word, what matters is how that concept works in the context of an already established movie. All the alteration does is make make the origin story fit better into place and connect the two characters. That is all. Everything else about who WW is stays exactly the same. She's not an offshoot of Superman, she'd not even be Kryptonian if several generations of cross breading have passed. Yeah, I don't get why people are offended because nothing gigantic as changed.

 

[jmc]

It being completely unnecessary is a reason. And I have taken into account what the alteration would do, otherwise why the hell would I be arguing against it? I keep coming back to it being dumb as hell because it's not hard to reason that Greek Myth can properly fit into a sci-fi fantasy context. I, and several others, have also been stating how such an alteration completely undermines the character of Wonder Woman in a horrible way. That's one of the bigger reasons. It also pretty much copies what Marvel did with Thor, which works fine for Marvel because Thor isn't connected to say...Tony Stark in such a way where Tony Stark is descended from a familial lineage of Norse Starks who were conceived by Odin or whatever Asgardian messing around on Earth. That's why Tony and Howard Stark are so smart. See how dumb, contrived, and completely unnecessary that would have been? Marvel was smart enough to not go that route. This rumor does go that route, which is another reason why it's dumb. And I thought Batman is already an established veteran in this sequel? Was that not confirmed? Wonder Woman's mythos is up in the air for this film (which is why we're discussing it), but whether she has an established foundation in the film or not isn't really relevant to the argument I and others have been making.

You could be very well be right, that alteration could be completely useless if it's thrown in for no good reason, or, conversely it could be a great idea if implemented right that gives greater meaning to the relationship between the two characters which is exactly what Marvel didn't do in their team up film. There's more that can be gain from character perspective by linking those two (as well as Batman if a link is found).

 

[FeedOnATreeFrog]

I buy the argument that they'd want a sci-fi angle on the fantasy in an attempt to sell people on a character that the GAs view as a silly joke. I personally think GA's would accept fantasy just fine if Snyder made it badass, but I get the argument from the studio's POV.

I also buy the argument that it'd be simple just to make that sci-fi explanation the previous sci-fi thing set up in the last movie (an advanced alien race which came to Earth, had dealings with genetic manipulation, artificial births, etc).

but I don't buy the argument that since MOS had sci-fi, this movie has to be solely sci-fi as well, and that's the reason for the change. If a Wonder Woman movie came first before MOS, I could still see WB wanting to take her in a slightly more sci-fi route for reasons stated above, regardless of MOS.

I don't think they would do this for every 'magical' character. Only the ones with a preexisting negative stigma of not being taken seriously (Wonder Woman, Aquaman).

 

[jmc]

The question is really what do WB plan to do with WW. I still maintain casting Gal Gadot indicates there isn't a real desire to give her her own movie unless she completely knocks it out of the park - and even then I'm not sure that's a guarantee.

 

[Loki882]

You could be very well be right, that alteration could be completely useless if it's thrown in for no good reason, or, conversely it could be a great idea if implemented right that gives greater meaning to the relationship between the two characters which is exactly what Marvel didn't do in their team up film. There's more that can be gain from character perspective by linking those two (as well as Batman if a link is found).

The characters DON'T NEED to be connected in that way. Part of the whole appeal of these superhero teams is that you have radically different people, with radically different origins and backgrounds, with very different views on the world, coming together to battle common foes. Trying to force a connection like this would be only makes the DCCU less diverse and destroys part of what makes it interesting in the first place. And why is it only WW? Why not Batman, or Flash, or Aquaman, or MM, get everyone in on the action.

 

[Loki882]

Because it's such an oversimplification of the concept it borders on parody. Of course you can do the WW origin the 'regular' way for lack of better word, what matters is how that concept works in the context of an already established movie. All the alteration does is make make the origin story fit better into place and connect the two characters. That is all. Everything else about who WW is stays exactly the same. She's not an offshoot of Superman, she'd not even be Kryptonian if several generations of cross breading have passed. Yeah, I don't get why people are offended because nothing gigantic as changed.

If this is true, then the Amazons WOULD NOT EXIST if a Kryptonian didn't come to Earth to start the cross-breeding. I'm sorry, but that is a massive change, and an unnecessary one. WW WOULD NOT EXIST without her Kryptoninan "ancestor, which DOES make her an off shoot of Superman since the only reason that her race exists in the first place is BECAUSE of a Kryptonian. Wow does that sound really uninteresting, especially compared to her actual origin.

 

[jmc]

I suggested Batman be linked a well. I'm seriously struggling to understand how some of you are coming to the conclusion that who WW is as a character changes fundamentally with said concept. There is some seriously deluded logic for one very minor alteration in order to simplify her explanation in the MoS world. You all want the gods/magic - fine, you are entitled to want that. But be reasonable in evaluating the idea for crying out loud and stop making hyperbolic the sky is falling statements.

 

[FeedOnATreeFrog]

The question is really what do WB plan to do with WW. I still maintain casting Gal Gadot indicates there isn't a real desire to give her her own movie unless she completely knocks it out of the park - and even then I'm not sure that's a guarantee.

I think that's somewhat irrelevant. Just because she's a side character in a Superman movie, it doesn't mean that she can't be exactly the way she would be if she debuted in a WW movie.

If Thor debuted in Iron Man 2, would he have to be different? (especially considering that Iron Man joins Thor anyways in The Avengers?)

There's no reason that Iron Man 2 couldn't have been the movie to blow the doors open on sci-fi/fantasy, and for Iron Man to be thrust into a world that now has Norse Gods.

If this is true, then the Amazons WOULD NOT EXIST if a Kryptonian didn't come to Earth to start the cross-breeding. I'm sorry, but that is a massive change, and an unnecessary one. WW WOULD NOT EXIST without her Kryptoninan "ancestor, which DOES make her an off shoot of Superman since the only reason that her race exists in the first place is BECAUSE of a Kryptonian. Wow does that sound really uninteresting, especially compared to her actual origin.

Lets say it's revealed that millions of years ago, the Kryptonians (and maybe all humanoid life) are the descendents of the Old Gods, so thus Superman would not exist without the Old Gods. Does this make Superman an offshoot of Wonder Woman? Does this destroy all the uniqueness of Superman? He's basically Wonder-Man?

 

[jmc]

I think that's somewhat irrelevant. Just because she's a side character in a Superman movie, it doesn't mean that she can't be exactly the way she would be if she debuted in a WW movie.

If Thor debuted in Iron Man 2, would he have to be different? (especially considering that Iron Man joins Thor anyways in The Avengers?)

There's no reason that Iron Man 2 couldn't have been the movie to blow the doors open on sci-fi/fantasy, and for Iron Man to be thrust into a world that now has Norse Gods.

If Marvel's plan was to have each solo film be genuinely interconnected and have a continuing storyline throughout all films leading up to Avengers then there's a strong chance things would have been vastly different because you're dealing with a very different beast.

 

[FeedOnATreeFrog]

If Marvel's plan was to have each solo film be genuinely interconnected and have a continuing storyline throughout all films leading up to Avengers then there's a strong chance things would have been vastly different because you're dealing with a very different beast.

But you could also argue that there's a strong chance that Thor would be the same.

Another example: Scarlet Witch is debuting in Avengers 2 without a solo movie to set up 'sorcery' and inherent powers. The Avengers 2 movie itself is doing that. (well...maybe it will. For all we know she'll be an Asgardian descendent).

 

[jmc]

But you could also argue that there's a strong chance that Thor would be the same.

Another example: Scarlet Witch is debuting in Avengers 2 without a solo movie to set up 'sorcery' and inherent powers. The Avengers 2 movie itself is doing that. (well...maybe it will. For all we know she'll be an Asgardian descendent).

Well actually no I can't argue there's a strong case he or his backstory would be exactly the same because again you're dealing with a completely different circumstance. It's not simply a matter of picking the Thor presented to us in his solo movie that has no connection to the other films and plonking him in a different set up. That change in story telling approach means a complete overhaul of everything involved. Yes he could come out very similar, but it's more than likely some alterations would have to have be made had each solo film represented multiple parts to the Avengers story. But they are individual movies. The thing is in the MCU there have been inconsistencies with defining Thor and his people as to what exactly they are, one film he's a god, then another a demigod, then another not a god at all. It's this blurred line that's never really truly been given a proper answer.

 

[Airwings]

The evolution of the Greek Mythology that we known can come from those ancient people, history tells us most myths and folklore have some element of truth to them and this concept is no different. Those ancient Kryptonian would be considered gods, they probably would be worshiped, and they probably would inspire countless tales that over the years are further exaggerated and expanded upon. Essentially all you're doing is changing the interpretation of who the 'Gods' were

But why must the greek gods be kryptonians? Why not real gods?
I find your suggestion very bland and a "watered down" idea.

Because it's such an oversimplification of the concept it borders on parody. Of course you can do the WW origin the 'regular' way for lack of better word, what matters is how that concept works in the context of an already established movie. All the alteration does is make make the origin story fit better into place and connect the two characters.

Why is it so important for you that WW and Supes have a connection through Krypton?

You all want the gods/magic - fine, you are entitled to want that. But be reasonable in evaluating the idea for crying out loud and stop making hyperbolic the sky is falling statements.

Why we want the magic? Because that's WW's actual origin.

Would you be as willing to change Superman? What if kryptonians were atlanteans at first, pretty much the oposite of what you want.
Or Krypton could be a future Earth.

Would you still accept the changes with joy?

I suggested Batman be linked a well.

What?????? Then how???
I have never heard such a far-fetched wish. It just can't work unless everything about Bruce Wayne is changed.
I think you should calm down for a while, and take a break from this topic.
Try discussing the soundtrack for some time

 

[FeedOnATreeFrog]

The thing is in the MCU there have been inconsistencies with defining Thor and his people as to what exactly they are, one film he's a god, then another a demigod, then another not a god at all. It's this blurred line that's never really truly been given a proper answer.

Hmm. I guess I don't attribute the inconsistencies to the fact that he's featured in solo movies and teamups.

It just seems like a confusion the MCU has about the character in general.

 

[jaymes_e06]

I suggested Batman be linked a well. I'm seriously struggling to understand how some of you are coming to the conclusion that who WW is as a character changes fundamentally with said concept. There is some seriously deluded logic for one very minor alteration in order to simplify her explanation in the MoS world. You all want the gods/magic - fine, you are entitled to want that. But be reasonable in evaluating the idea for crying out loud and stop making hyperbolic the sky is falling statements.

There is some arrogance in your delusional thought that we must think like you to be logical. Get your head out of your own ass please.

Since when do you decide what quantifies as a larger or small change? Why does Batman need to be linked to superman now? Your logic is the one that is nonsensical.