Comic Vine News

89 Comments

Interview: Charles Soule and Tony Daniel Talk SUPERMAN/WONDER WOMAN

What can we expect from the comic? There's going to be a great mix of "gigantic superhero action."

In the New 52, we're seeing many changes. It's a time to explore new possibilities and new legends are forged. One new possibility is seeing Superman and Wonder Woman together. So far in the pages of JUSTICE LEAGUE, we've seen them make a connection as they both feel separated from others due to their powers and abilities. They've also shown that they make a great team in defeating the bad guys.

Next month DC is prepared to unleash a brand new series starring the two iconic heroes. Charles Soule will be writing while Tony Daniel will provide the art. We had the chance to speak with both of them to get an idea what exactly we can expect from the series and if it's just going to be about the two going on dates (spoiler: it's not just about dating).

Comic Vine: What will be the tone of the series?

Charles Soule: It's a great mix. It's not just one thing. I would say that it's really a mix of being really gigantic scale superhero action, which is appropriate when you have Superman and Wonder Woman playing on the same playing field. Beyond that, there are some really fantastic character moments, not just between the two of them but between their expanded casts, both respectively from their individual books. You also have the main characters in the book in a relationship with one another. So that enables us to play some deeper emotional beats that maybe not every other types would be able to access in the same way. When Superman and Wonder Woman, the icons, are together, it has sort of a spark, an electricity to it. That's just really really fun to write. There's something interesting on every single page, obviously with Tony's art on the book. There's a lot of ways we'll try to keep the readers interested it's a gigantic superhero punching or it is a really beautiful character moment between them.

Tony Daniel: I'd say it's a combination of badass meets sexy meets character drama. From the artist talking, that's what I'm envisioning in my head.

CV: The cover displays many of supporting characters and villains of both, is that something we can expect in the series?

TD: I drew that cover to basically show both worlds coming together, Superman's world and Wonder Woman's world. We may see some of those guys or we may not, during the course of our run. Those characters embody each of their worlds. They're not really making a new world together. These are two established icons bringing their deep rich histories together. That's what I wanted to try to get across on that very first piece of art. It was huge, larger than life and something that spans both worlds.

CV: What will be the balance between romance and action?

CS: Every issue is different. It's not a…I think you're focusing too much on it. The book is everything. In Empire Strikes Back, I use this comparison all the time, in that film you had a fantastic actor story, you had the great story with Luke learning from Yoda, you had the father/son stuff with Luke and Darth Vader (I guess that's a spoiler if no one's seen it) and you also happened to have a romance between Han and Leia. The movie would have probably still been great without that romance but adding the romance made it just a little bit better. As far as balance, there is no balance. We'll just play it as it makes sense in the story. You make a good story, that's all there is. There's no sort of percentage allocation to one or the other.

CV: Will we see much of the two in their civilian identities?

CS: When it makes sense. There are certainly scenes with Clark and Diana. There are also plenty of scenes with Superman and Wonder Woman. It's all about what makes sense in the story.

CV: Will this series be tied to the main series or have more of a separate feel focusing on the Superman and Wonder Woman and their adventures together?

CS: My feeling is that, well first of all, it's absolutely locked into the DC New 52. The things that happen in this series will have a dramatic and significant effect on the rest of the DCU. In terms of how those affects spreads out, it'll happen over time. We'll see things that start to resonate in other titles as they develop. But that's really true for any issue or any book in the DCU. Everything sort of affects everything else given enough time.

CV: Will we see more reaction from people like Amanda Waller and the government or Lois and Steve Trevor?

CS: There will be the entire sort of supporting cast of both titles that will be available for us to use. As far as which ones we'll use and when we'll use them, I think it'll be more fun to find out when reading the story, personally. They're all there. We're aware of all of them. We're using them as it makes sense.

CV: Will we see any follow up from events in Trinity War or build up to what we saw will eventually happen in FOREVER EVIL?

CS: Those stories are absolutely something were taking into account with our story. It sort of ties back to the answer I gave earlier, which is that the things that happen in SUPERMAN/WONDER WOMAN are tied into the larger DCU. As for how they tie in, that's going to be one of those things you'll have to wait and see when you read the book.

CV: Besides the two of you together, how will this series be different from other Superman or WW titles?

CS: Well obviously you have Superman and Wonder Woman together, which is not something we see often. We see the Justice League but Wonder Woman doesn't really pop up in the Superman titles and Superman doesn't really pop up in Wonder Woman's book. The idea that you can see them having adventures together is one of the things that absolutely makes it unique. There just isn't much else around like it.

As far as our work together, this is the largest scale superhero stuff I've ever done. I've never been able to work on Superman or Wonder Woman to this level. If you know my work from, say, SWAMP THING or RED LANTERNS, this is an entirely different type of storytelling for me. Which I'm having a really good time with. I think Tony can speak a little with the way he's approaching his art on this story a little bit differently than he might have done previously.

TD: Definitely. It's much bigger in scope and larger in scale. This is like drawing…gods, for the most part. And we do in issue #2. [laughs] The whole feel of the book is just so big and larger than life. I think that's what really great superhero comic books should read and look like.

CV: Tony, what are you most excited about in working on this title?

TD: I'm most excited about seeing the characters develop and grow as two individuals who are romantically involved in each other's lives. Watching what happens to them, as a fan of Superman and Wonder Woman, I care what happens with them. I care how everything is going to affect them and the people around them. It gives kind of a more real life scope to what is otherwise very fantasy-oriented. That's one of the things I look forward to the most. Aside from that, just drawing the world's mightiest heroes is inspiration enough for me to wake up everyday and try to do my best work.

SUPERMAN/WONDER WOMAN #1 is on sale October 9.

93 Comments
  • 93 results
  • 1
  • 2
Edited by veronicacris

@maccyd said:

Now when is Batman/Wonder woman? That's a team-up that'd be fun to see!

could be really fun, but DC knows that people will ending shipping these two, so I think we won't see this book soon

Posted by saoakden

I'm buying this book. Art looks nice. I like the idea. Should be interesting to read.

Posted by Herokiller12344

Okay, wait. In addition to Clark having 3 books already. He's also going to get a new one that's basically going to amount to him and Diana playing lovey dovey all day.

What the f*ck is wrong with DC right now?

Edited by johnqestion

@lvenger said:

@johnni_kun: Exactly my problem with the Wonder Woman/Superman romance. They're too alike personality and thematically wise. The Pre Flashpoint universe showed why they would be good friends but never romantic partners. The Superman/Wonder Woman date issue laughed off any notion of them being romantically linked.

There have also been many teased scenes that they dug each other throughout the decades, even last canon, just never got it on because Clark got hitched to Lois because of the tv series. In 2000 DC wanted to even undo the marriage. Also earth 22...part of the current multiverse says you are wrong.

Plus what do you mean thematically same? They both have similar ideals but have differences in backgrounds and personalities. Have you read a WW book? It's sci-fi and mythology bridging each other in this team up. Least Superman won't have to act like he's brainless as he does when near Batman.

Posted by Jayc1324

@johnqestion: Maybe he means they're thematically similar in the sense that they are these two massively powerful and majestic and godlike characters. Not that they have similar backgrounds. I see where you are coming from but it isn't exactly wrong to say they are thematically similar.

Posted by ptigrusmagus

People really think this comic will only be Clark and Diana dating? What a pathetically quick jump to judgment, would expect nothing less of comic readers.

Posted by toptom

@reactor said:

Comic book fans are hilarious. Up till now, everyone's been crying bloody murder and going on about how this series will suck and how nobody wants this and crap like that. Now suddenly everyone has open arms. Not pointing at anyone here, just strange seeing the overall atmosphere around a Superman/Wonder Woman article be positive for a change.

That said, this is on my pull list. And proud to say, it always has been.

This.

Posted by Deranged Midget

My goodness that art is gorgeous.

I know right. I'm kind of warming up to the duo at this point but Daniel's art sells the book by it's lonesome.

Moderator
Posted by Mia26

Okay, wait. In addition to Clark having 3 books already. He's also going to get a new one that's basically going to amount to him and Diana playing lovey dovey all day.

What the f*ck is wrong with DC right now?

*Facepalm* opposed to Batman's 6 books, plus this is a book for Wonder Woman as well.

Edited by DonJack
@johnqestion said:

@jointron33 said:

@johnqestion: Of she doesn't end and begin with Azzarello, which is why Perez MOST INTELLIGENTLY GOT RID OF THAT STUPID ALTER EGO!!!!!!!

She had it in Heinberg's run. Gail Simone's run, Picoult's run...in the classic TV show, the DTV movie, it was as much apart of her history as anything else. A good writer does not throw out the baby with the bathwater. WW can have an ID if the writers wants it and makes it work. It's about the writing. WW is doing what apart from playing with Gods in her book? At least Perez had her doing something with real people and a life outside of that involved interacting with regular folks as an Ambassador. So while he did not use the ID ...he respected her background and showed a positive spin on the Amazons. You can't talk Perez and Azz's take as one at all.

She didn't have in Messner-Loebs' run, John Byrne's run, Phil Jimenez' run, Greg Rucka's run, (and she didn't have it in most part of Gail's run). She didn't have it in the JL cartoon, and on the animated movie it's only at the very end. It's been established for many years that she doesn't have an alter-ego anymore. When some writers took it back, it was a "saudosist" thing, not the standard. Your hate towards Azzarello's run is blinding you. As a matter of fact, what does everything you said about Azz' run have to do with the Superman/Wonder Woman book, the interview or some other comment here? A poster says he doesn't like Diana prince alter-ego, and it's automatically because of Azzarello? Also, I don't see Batman using guns like his "almighty" and "godly" creator Bob Kane wrote him.

And look, I like the Diana Prince alter-ego. Get a life.

Posted by addikhabbo

I love it! Keep up the good work Dc. They keep this up and they'll have tons of fans. Me and my buds recently got more into this because Dc's way more daring now. Fabulous!

Posted by davidgrantlloyd

TAKE MY MONEY!!!!!!!!!

Edited by Johnni_Kun

@johnqestion said:

There have also been many teased scenes that they dug each other throughout the decades, even last canon, just never got it on because Clark got hitched to Lois because of the tv series. In 2000 DC wanted to even undo the marriage. Also earth 22...part of the current multiverse says you are wrong.

The problem of the relationship isn't that it doesn't make sense. I'm pretty sure if this was real life, Clark and Diana would probably be interested into each other. It's the concept of Wonder Woman's character, that is the problem. She was created to be DC's number 1 Independent female icon. Having her tie to another icon(Supes or Bats) hurts her character. Having her in "this" type of relationship, goes against the essence of her character. It would be on the equivalence of Batman and Batwoman being together. Batwoman concept is that she DC's lesbian character. Someone that girls, who are in the same boat can look to. I'm pretty sure if DC even did try that, it would insult anyone that is a fan of Batwoman.(and maybe some that are not even.) Just because something makes sense, doesn't mean that it's a good idea. I don't care if people like this paring, I don't care even if it is written well.(like kingdom comes) But, as a comicbook fan if some "story" element comes at the expense of a character...... Then I do care.

Posted by toplel
I don't care even if it is written well.(like kingdom comes) But, as a comicbook fan if some "story" element comes at the expense of a character...... Then I do care.

Funny, because Waid apologized for his characterization of Diana in KC. It was yet another example of WW being written OOC to contrast with Superman. Ive yet to read a version of this ship where Diana doesn't get screwed over.

Posted by Johnni_Kun
Edited by johnqestion

@donjack said:
@johnqestion said:

@jointron33 said:

@johnqestion: Of she doesn't end and begin with Azzarello, which is why Perez MOST INTELLIGENTLY GOT RID OF THAT STUPID ALTER EGO!!!!!!!

She had it in Heinberg's run. Gail Simone's run, Picoult's run...in the classic TV show, the DTV movie, it was as much apart of her history as anything else. A good writer does not throw out the baby with the bathwater. WW can have an ID if the writers wants it and makes it work. It's about the writing. WW is doing what apart from playing with Gods in her book? At least Perez had her doing something with real people and a life outside of that involved interacting with regular folks as an Ambassador. So while he did not use the ID ...he respected her background and showed a positive spin on the Amazons. You can't talk Perez and Azz's take as one at all.

She didn't have in Messner-Loebs' run, John Byrne's run, Phil Jimenez' run, Greg Rucka's run, (and she didn't have it in most part of Gail's run). She didn't have it in the JL cartoon, and on the animated movie it's only at the very end. It's been established for many years that she doesn't have an alter-ego anymore. When some writers took it back, it was a "saudosist" thing, not the standard. Your hate towards Azzarello's run is blinding you. As a matter of fact, what does everything you said about Azz' run have to do with the Superman/Wonder Woman book, the interview or some other comment here? A poster says he doesn't like Diana prince alter-ego, and it's automatically because of Azzarello? Also, I don't see Batman using guns like his "almighty" and "godly" creator Bob Kane wrote him.

And look, I like the Diana Prince alter-ego. Get a life.

Stop putting words in anyone's mouth. You don't know what anyone is reading. Plus the poster is ranting like a typical idiot about IDs when the freaking interview did not even utter a word about Diana Prince.

Edited by johnqestion

@johnni_kun said:

@johnqestion said:

There have also been many teased scenes that they dug each other throughout the decades, even last canon, just never got it on because Clark got hitched to Lois because of the tv series. In 2000 DC wanted to even undo the marriage. Also earth 22...part of the current multiverse says you are wrong.

The problem of the relationship isn't that it doesn't make sense. I'm pretty sure if this was real life, Clark and Diana would probably be interested into each other. It's the concept of Wonder Woman's character, that is the problem. She was created to be DC's number 1 Independent female icon. Having her tie to another icon(Supes or Bats) hurts her character. Having her in "this" type of relationship, goes against the essence of her character. It would be on the equivalence of Batman and Batwoman being together. Batwoman concept is that she DC's lesbian character. Someone that girls, who are in the same boat can look to. I'm pretty sure if DC even did try that, it would insult anyone that is a fan of Batwoman.(and maybe some that are not even.) Just because something makes sense, doesn't mean that it's a good idea. I don't care if people like this paring, I don't care even if it is written well.(like kingdom comes) But, as a comicbook fan if some "story" element comes at the expense of a character...... Then I do care.

In your head it might not. In many other fans heads it does. You know for the life of me, I'll never get this ridiculous soap boxing on comics. Hurt what? If a character is strong then nothing can undo that. The mere fact you saying they shouldn't is you saying WW can't stand along side a strong male and hold her own. But it's okay for males to go shop around I bet. Weird logic and sounds medieval to me. The only character she shouldn't be hooked up with is one who limits her. She's doing pretty much in those pages what she does in her books even if she's dating Clark ( flying, going off to investigate the cause of a storm). Actually it is not like Batwoman and Batman...(WW's appearance in Batwoman btw way was a as meh as could be) This would be it's more like Catwoman and Batman who are a power couple concept. They both operate on darkness, similar power sets, suited to the street level setting. No one can argue they don't work. You know might be nice for some females and many of us who want something fresh to read a couple who are on equal terms, where the guy doesn't have to fly the girl around all the time, or worry to death for her, to turn evil or goes nuts if something happens to her and the girl can kick the ass of an enemy while watching his back. Might teach some fanboys something too.

Posted by Extremis

(the following is read in a movie trailer man's voice):

First it was Superman/Batman BADUMDUM

Then DC did a team up we never saw coming: Superman/Wonder Woman BADUMDUM

But this winter, get ready for... Superman/Vibe!!! BADUMDUM

And then, just when you thought the cold of winter was over... join us this spring for Superman and the CocaCola Polar Bear in: Where is Santa Claus? BADUMDUM

That's right DC fans. These four new titles will reach their head in this summer's new crossover: "Christmas 2012 Revisited"

Something has happened in the multiverse that has had rippling effects throughout all Christmases, past and future, and all things point to Christmas 2012. Join Superman and his new allies as they must find Santa Claus and return him back to Christmas 2012 before the world as we know it loses Christmas! The effects of this crossover will shake through the DC Universe for years to come! All those who wish to partake in this momentous event need only to ask themselves one question: will you be naughty this year, or will you be nice? BADUMDUM!

Edited by Canderia718

Another book with Wonder Woman is usually a good thing to me. Cant wait for it to come out.

Posted by SanoHibiki

@johnni_kun: It's the concept of Wonder Woman's character, that is the problem. She was created to be DC's number 1 Independent female icon. Having her tie to another icon(Supes or Bats) hurts her character. Having her in "this" type of relationship, goes against the essence of her character.

It seems to me like you somehow missed a little part of New-52 relaunch.

I am aware that Diana was created, as you put it, “to be DC's number 1 Independent female icon”. Just that was part of her original, first creation. She was not even born, but made from clay – to eradicate male participating in her creation. Even then, DC many times hinted on mutual attraction between her and Clark, sometimes – between her and Bruce, she somewhat dated Steve Trevor, I think there were attempt at Nemesis romance. So, if following your reasoning, then we see that core part of character was methodically damaged over many years.

Now Diana not made from clay, she born as usual child, just her parent weren’t usual. Hyppolita and Zeus. Now her strength comes from her father blood, but to me she still looks like DC's number 1 Independent female icon. Why she couldn’t be in relationship with a man and be the main DC female hero in the same time – beyond my understanding. Or being independent for Diana means being forever alone (or maybe lesbian)?

People really think this comic will only be Clark and Diana dating? What a pathetically quick jump to judgment, would expect nothing less of comic readers.

This.

Edited by toplel

@johnni_kun: Neither do I expect to. Its a fundamentally flawed concept.

@johnqestion said:

(WW's appearance in Batwoman btw way was a as meh as could be)

Oh god. Please tell me how Wonder Woman was so awesome in Trinity War.

Why am I surprised SMWW shippers have bad taste not only in relationships but also when it comes to stories?

Edited by Lvenger

There have also been many teased scenes that they dug each other throughout the decades, even last canon, just never got it on because Clark got hitched to Lois because of the tv series. In 2000 DC wanted to even undo the marriage. Also earth 22...part of the current multiverse says you are wrong.

Plus what do you mean thematically same? They both have similar ideals but have differences in backgrounds and personalities. Have you read a WW book? It's sci-fi and mythology bridging each other in this team up. Least Superman won't have to act like he's brainless as he does when near Batman.

What I meant about them being thematically similar wasn't the sci fi and mythological fantasy link. What I was saying was both are the premier male and female superheroes for DC if not comic books in general and putting two characters that are so similar doesn't make for the most exciting relationship. Also I knew you'd bring up Kingdom Come as an argument for them working. That's the only Superman/Wonder Woman interpretation I like. And the ONLY reason it works is because Mark Waid knew to only put these two together in an entirely different set of circumstances. All their loved ones are dead, both have been isolated from the world for some time and are finding their place in it. That's what made the Kingdom Come relationship work. But in canon history, Superman and Wonder Woman together does not work. It only serves to alienate both characters from the people they protect. Look at how Johns and Lobdell have badly portrayed how Wonder Woman acts in the relationship. Trying to persuade Superman to end his enemies and take authoritarian reins in the world isn't how a relationship should be portrayed IMO.

Edited by Johnni_Kun

@johnqestion:

In your head it might not. In many other fans heads it does. You know for the life of me, I'll never get this ridiculous soap boxing on comics. Hurt what? If a character is strong then nothing can undo that. The mere fact you saying they shouldn't is you saying WW can't stand along side a strong male and hold her own.

Not true. I'm saying that they are changing one of the main aspects(and important one at that.) of her character. Think of it like if they gave Batman a superpower it hurts his concept. Which is one of the most important reason why he was created. The same goes for Diana.

But it's okay for males to go shop around I bet. Weird logic and sounds medieval to me.The only character she shouldn't be hooked up with is one who limits her. She's doing pretty much in those pages what she does in her books even if she's dating Clark ( flying, going off to investigate the cause of a storm).

Not once did I say it was okay for iconic male characters to hook up with others icons. The assumption on your part has proved that you clearly miss the point I was making, with your desperation to shame me. Wonder woman can have a love interest, just not one on the same status as she is suppose to be held. She shouldn't be consider one of the trinity's "girl". And to think that people won't think of her as "Superman's girl", because of this..... is just being naive.

Actually it is not like Batwoman and Batman...(WW's appearance in Batwoman btw way was a as meh as could be) This would be it's more like Catwoman and Batman who are a power couple concept.

They both operate on darkness, similar power sets, suited to the street level setting. No one can argue they don't work.

Again you miss my point. The example wasn't on the status of the characters, or there capably as a couple. It was on the concept of why that character was created. A lesbian being pair with a man is against Batwoman's concept. Wonder Woman was created into comics to be a representative of the independent female Superhero. And, now that she is being pair with a fellow icon, it goes against her very creation. Diana can't still be her independent self if people are going to associate her with someone on the likes of Superman's status.

You know might be nice for some females and many of us who want something fresh to read a couple who are on equal terms, where the guy doesn't have to fly the girl around all the time, or worry to death for her, to turn evil or goes nuts if something happens to her and the girl can kick the ass of an enemy while watching his back. Might teach some fanboys something too.

Although a fair statement, it hardy means anything in terms of the current argument. My point still stand regardless of how you feel about the nature of certain gender roles.

@sanohibiki:

It seems to me like you somehow missed a little part of New-52 relaunch.

I am aware that Diana was created, as you put it, “to be DC's number 1 Independent female icon”. Just that was part of her original, first creation. She was not even born, but made from clay – to eradicate male participating in her creation. Even then, DC many times hinted on mutual attraction between her and Clark, sometimes – between her and Bruce, she somewhat dated Steve Trevor, I think there were attempt at Nemesis romance. So, if following your reasoning, then we see that core part of character was methodically damaged over many years.

Yes, in a sense. However, because they never fully went out with it, it was more of annoyance. If the golden, silver, and modern age were annoyances, New 52 is a problem. Now, it's a problem because it's in the main continuity of DC books. Her with Superman is the first time ever, that they have completely supported her with someone held in the same regard as herself.

Now Diana not made from clay, she born as usual child, just her parent weren’t usual. Hyppolita and Zeus. Now her strength comes from her father blood, but to me she still looks like DC's number 1 Independent female icon. Why she couldn’t be in relationship with a man and be the main DC female hero in the same time – beyond my understanding. Or being independent for Diana means being forever alone (or maybe lesbian)?

Not once did I say that she couldn't be with a man. She can't still hold this "title", if she is in a relationship with someone that is on her level of status. Her and Steve are okay because characters like him are below her. Not many are going to think "Hey, it's Wonder Woman, that's Steve's girl" But, putting her with someone on the likes Superman, or Batman will.

Edited by SanoHibiki

@johnni_kun:

I think you divided my post too early. I wanted to say basically next: there exist bunch of stereotypes, like Diana – powerful Amazon Princess, untouched by influence of Patriarchal World and ideal of all feminists, Superman – flying around and doo-gooding Big Blue Boyscout in red cape, Batman – outsmarting all and everyone Caped Crusader with 1000 gadgets in his belt. But that just set of stereotypes. We really shouldn’t limit our characters just to that set behavior, there more to them. Regardless of their birthplaces, their gender, their power levels, first of all, there are persons with rich inner world, their emotions and dreams. They can make mistakes, they can be wrong, they can become better, they can be awe-inspiring – they change with years (and DC’s Crisises).

This New-52 Wonder Woman - daughter of man (god-like man, but man nevertheless), I think that most part of her solo run she dealing with fallout from family of her father. She is TIED to both Matriarchal and Patriarchal world. Still, she is number 1 female hero in DC, powerful and strong-willed.

Sorry in advance, maybe I misunderstand you, but I pretty irked by because characters like him are below her. What that supposed to mean? Power, fame and gender aside, how anyone, one of them (or people in general) can be below than other one. Analogy: Clark and Lois were married and that was okay because Lois was below him? Even if characters value not equal ( not that I agree), it’s even sounds logical that SM and WW now together – why limiting him(her)self in relationships with characters below them, when they could be with someone equal. Maybe you wanted to say that heroes should be in relationships with common people (not drift too much apart from people they protecting) and likes of that.

She can't still hold this "title", if she is in a relationship with someone that is on her level of status.

That must be some weak "title", if it holds only in relationship with men not famous or powerful as her.

Not many are going to think "Hey, it's Wonder Woman, that's Steve's girl" But, putting her with someone on the likes Superman, or Batman will.

Vice versa true too. “Look, up in sky! It’s a bird! It’s a plane! No, it’s a Wonder Woman’s boyfriend, Superman!” IMO they actually on equal ground (unlike before).

Mainly, I think I understand your reasoning about SM/WW as official pair. Not going to agree with you, but still understand.

@lvenger:

Just to play devil’s advocate.

Look at how Johns and Lobdell have badly portrayed how Wonder Woman acts in the relationship.

Maybe that because Lobdell and Johns simply bad in portraying characters?

Trying to persuade Superman to end his enemies and take authoritarian reins in the world isn't how a relationship should be portrayed IMO.

Didn’t Superman have his own opinion and word in relationship? Maybe he can persuade Diana to calm down. Or he always obeys his girlfriend’s whims?

Edited by Lvenger

@sanohibiki: He did but it was a bad portrayal of Diana that was more worrying than anything else. Since when does Diana start demanding to do more in the grand scheme of things? That's not what she's in Man's World for.

Posted by SanoHibiki

@lvenger:

Maybe it’s just that – bad writing on Lobdell and Johns parts. Gonna admit that I am pretty sold on Soule and Daniel approach.

I wanted to ask for quite some time, but constantly got distracted. I with interest was reading your critics on MoS, your reviews on some comics and so on. With some points I agree, with others - not so much. Think that that because you judge from position of your personal opinion what values should represent Superman, what is his personality. Can you in several sentences describe your ideal Superman to me?

Posted by Lvenger

@sanohibiki: The ideal Superman for me is someone who represents the best values of humanity rolled into one character, He's compassionate, principled, charming, charismatic, kind, noble and more whilst possessing enough humanity to not be wholly perfect. He's still an ideal to strive towards though, someone we can aspire to be and to follow his example to make ourselves better people. Does that suffice for my view on Superman?

Posted by SanoHibiki

@lvenger:

Curios about one detail. Think we both agree that Superman don’t have bad human habits (smoking, gambling and so on), add to that set of best human values you mentioned above – so what do you leave to possessing enough humanity to not be wholly perfect?

Your Superman has such large-than-life feeling about him (my prof sometimes called such personality type “Paragon of his/her kind”). Anyway, thanks for sharing your opinion.

Posted by Saint_Wildcard

Im more exited for this book then I am for JL3000.

Posted by HuiZe

Dat art.

Edited by Lvenger

@sanohibiki: Well he can still make mistakes and he can still have trouble doing the right thing when a lot of people wouldn't like the kind of right decisions to be made. Humanity has strived to do things such as find cures for diseases and send men to the moon but there have been pitfalls on the way. Similarly, Superman is still human enough in personality to have human doubts and emotions about what he does.

Posted by Johnni_Kun

@sanohibiki:

I think you divided my post too early. I wanted to say basically next: there exist bunch of stereotypes, like Diana – powerful Amazon Princess, untouched by influence of Patriarchal World and ideal of all feminists, Superman – flying around and doo-gooding Big Blue Boyscout in red cape, Batman – outsmarting all and everyone Caped Crusader with 1000 gadgets in his belt. But that just set of stereotypes. We really shouldn’t limit our characters just to that set behavior, there more to them. Regardless of their birthplaces, their gender, their power levels, first of all, there are persons with rich inner world, their emotions and dreams. They can make mistakes, they can be wrong, they can become better, they can be awe-inspiring – they change with years (and DC’s Crisises).

I agree. I'm all for modernize these character. I don't have a problem in seeing these characters become something more, then what they were intended to be. However, not when it's at the expense of the very reason why these characters were created.

This New-52 Wonder Woman - daughter of man (god-like man, but man nevertheless), I think that most part of her solo run she dealing with fallout from family of her father. She is TIED to both Matriarchal and Patriarchal world. Still, she is number 1 female hero in DC, powerful and strong-willed.

Again, I agree. But, this stems only to Wonder Woman in her solo book. Whether or not you agree on the Brian Azzarello's Wonder Woman. He does have the right approach on the character. He understands her. Which is why and is very unwilling to ever incorporated something that is so out of character.(WW/SM)

Sorry in advance, maybe I misunderstand you, but I pretty irked by because characters like him are below her. What that supposed to mean? Power, fame and gender aside, how anyone, one of them (or people in general) can be below than other one.

A misunderstanding on your part. But, perhaps is my failure to explain myself. I meant on the stance that he holds in the DC comic world. As well among the mainstream audience. Characters like Steve, are not held in such high regards, as characters of Wonder Woman's status. Kids don't want to be him. Adults never learned lessons from him, etc. As appose of others, likes Superman. These character mean much more that just a form entertainment. They are truly inspiring heroes.

Analogy: Clark and Lois were married and that was okay because Lois was below him? Even if characters value not equal ( not that I agree), it’s even sounds logical that SM and WW now together -- why limiting him(her)self in relationships with characters below them, when they could be with someone equal. Maybe you wanted to say that heroes should be in relationships with common people (not drift too much apart from people they protecting) and likes of that.

No. In the case of Lois Lane, she is just as much as a part of Superman's character as him being the last son of krypton. God level characters lack a real relatable feature, for the reader. What they lack is called humanity. That why characters like Batman always tend to more popular. Lois is Superman's Humanity. She part of Superman, meaning that she is just as important. And not below him.

Now, for the other question. It has nothing to do with them dating common people. It about them dating Characters that should stand alone with their own worlds.(books) Here, let me say it this way. It can't be someone that can steal the focus or interest of that character. They can't out shine, showed up or damage, said character. Wonder Woman with Superman does that, at the expense of mostly her character.

That must be some weak "title", if it holds only in relationship with men not famous or powerful as her.

Her title holds important values, however since we are speaking about the relationship of Superman and Wonder Woman, I only applied it to this current argument.

Vice versa true too. “Look, up in sky! It’s a bird! It’s a plane! No, it’s a Wonder Woman’s boyfriend, Superman!” IMO they actually on equal ground (unlike before).

I disagree, Superman is quite universally known, on a colossal scale. He is far more known a loved. If DC ties Woman Woman with him, then years down the road, especially considering most conic readers are men, people could very much think Wonder Woman as Superman's girl. And not the other way around.

Mainly, I think I understand your reasoning about SM/WW as official pair. Not going to agree with you, but still understand.

That is fine, I never set out to have people agree with me. I only felt the need to voice my opinion.

Edited by SanoHibiki

@lvenger:

Similarly, Superman is still human enough in personality to have human doubts and emotions about what he does.

Personally, I prefer to think that ability to have doubts (and emotions as well) should be considered as one of best human values as well. Having doubts means being unsure in your own rightness, perfectness, its basis for further improvement of yourself, for making yourself better than you were before. Think that should be applied to Superman too. People who absolutely sure that their set of values, their outlook on world is right, often further develop that concept and start think that their opinion is only one right. Then they can start pushing that outlook to other people, regardless of their own position, set of values. People with such personality, ideology make good candidates in terrorists, tyrannies and cult leaders.

Anyway, thanks for describing your take on Superman as a person.

@johnni_kun:

Which is why and is very unwilling to ever incorporated something that is so out of character.

Admittedly, I didn’t read entire Azzarello run on New-52 Wonder Woman, only 5-6 issues. But anyway, I got the feeling that he hardly incorporated anything at all in his run outside Diana’s very own personal legacy (like her comics can be perfectly read as separate from all New-52 continuity).

A misunderstanding on your part. But, perhaps is my failure to explain myself. I meant on the stance that he holds in the DC comic world. As well among the mainstream audience.

Thank you for clarifying this. It was quite a sore point for me.

What they lack is called humanity. That why characters like Batman always tend to more popular.

To tell the truth, my cynical mind (after several courses in sociology) has opinion that Batman popularity and need that so many people feel in their desire to pair Superman with Lois Lane in not so little part can be explained by much more … unpleasant subconscious stereotypes.

In the case of Lois Lane, she is just as much as a part of Superman's character as him being the last son of krypton. Lois is Superman's Humanity.

Gonna say first, I have utmost respect for Lois as a strong woman and character. But that idea that Lois is source of Superman’s humanity always bothered me (another big sore point for me). He was infant when he got adopted by kind and loving couple. He grow up with human children, he went to school with them, he had friends (Lana Lang, Pete Ross), he walks among us every day - he grow up among us, with human way of thinking. It all of that wasn’t enough to make Clark part of humanity, to make him understand human motives and actions, then this is lost cause. How relationship with Lois can help him in that case? I think – it can’t.

It can't be someone that can steal the focus or interest of that character. They can't out shine, showed up or damage, said character. Wonder Woman with Superman does that, at the expense of mostly her character.

Say, lets imagine that Clark and Diana not in relationship. They close friends and comrades (like in Pre-52). Superman/Wonder Woman title centered just on their shared exploits, heroics and stopping various villainies. In many regards just like such titles as Superman/Batman and Batman/Superman. In this situation can Superman outshine Diana’s character?

If DC ties Woman Woman with him, then years down the road, especially considering most conic readers are men, people could very much think Wonder Woman as Superman's girl.

Well, if you put it like that… Maybe. That depends how profitable would be SM/WW title and how long DC going to keep this relationship.

If we for a minute would forget that we talking about Wonder Woman, then you IMO just perfectly described situation with Lois. After nearly 75 years of Clois readers just think about her as Superman’s girlfriend.

Posted by Lvenger

@sanohibiki: My pleasure and I agree on the ability to doubt being a useful virtue in itself. If such views were more widespread, we'd be worse the wear for it.

Posted by Primebonnick

oh lord can't wait to buy this. Hope they have sex yes i said it

Posted by RedheadedAtrocitus

Part of me is going to give this a chance, but the other half of me still sees this as a stunning example of everything wrong with New 52. Clark needs to be with Lois, not his equal. It is a plus that Soule/Daniel is the creative team though at least.

Edited by ssj4jw

I looking forward to this series. New 52 is trying something different not redoing the same exact thing all over again. No Clark does not need to be with Lois. She is in a relationship with a good guy already. I find it hypocritical that Batman can be with other women from other comic titles but Superman can only be with one woman from his own title.

Posted by darkman61288

@ssj4jw What other women from other titles?

Posted by TommyJones1945

Cant wait for this comic

CIN

Posted by ssj4jw
Posted by darkman61288

@ssj4jw: That was in a single one shot. But you make it sound like He has been with several.

Posted by ShowboatingPenguin

I just want to read this because of how many superman villains they're going to use.