• 64 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Edited by MPfly88 (118 posts) - - Show Bio

Anyone else starting to think that this thing is over with when Trinity War hits? I've been thinking lately that even though there's potential in a Superman/Wonder Woman relationship, it's been over half a year since the kiss and so far we haven't seen their relationship develop all that much. And now one of the elements that DC is building up with Trinity War is that it'll put Clark and Diana's relationship in jeopardy. I'm sorry but with what little relationship development we've been given over these two characters so far, are we suppose to care? This all just isn't adding up for me because I know if I was in charge with writing a love story between the two most iconic male and female superheroes, I would at least be putting in my 110% to make sure i'm coming up with an interesting and impressive story for the readers.


I don't want to come off as naive, because i'm sure when this whole thing started, a lot of people including myself have had the suspicion that this may only be nothing more than a plot device. But there was always that hope spot. That maybe DC may actually explore a relationship between these two for a few years. But recentely i've been having my doubts.

Would you be surprised if this relationship continues after Trinity War, and what do you think? Is this something DC might actually put some serious thought into, or has it been a fake out since day 1?

#2 Posted by JSH92 (414 posts) - - Show Bio

In the world of comic books, is there really a difference between the two? lol

#3 Edited by MPfly88 (118 posts) - - Show Bio

@jsh92: Yeah i'd say so, if one such as Diana and Clark for example is starting to come across as an obvious publicity stunt.

#4 Posted by Z3RO180 (6331 posts) - - Show Bio

I like the relationship its a welcomed change of pace. People just aren't giving it a try

#5 Edited by Akindoodle (979 posts) - - Show Bio

@jsh92 said:

In the world of comic books, is there really a difference between the two? lol

I agree. This is where you (jsh92) can stop reading. It's gonna get LONG

I was actually going to create a thread just like this but on comic relationships in general. How can you tell when it's genuine or a plot device? But in fiction, isn't everything a plot device? This relationship is meant to move the plot forward, isn't it? So isn't everything that happens in fiction by definition, a plot device? First, we must decide on what a real relationship is. Interactions between two people, be it good, bad, platonic, sexual etc. In this case, romantic. Is that agreeable? Has there been any interaction.... NO.... Okay, there has been but it's minimal. That's not a relationship; that's a kiss (Superman! The Rebound Guy!), a dinner out and likely super sex (could really be just a one night stand the way things are going). Oh and I forgot to mention - VIOLATING INTERNATIONAL LAW! They're adults; a journalist and a princess (hopefully, still a politician) to be exact. Both should have knowledge of this kind of thing. I blame the writing not the characters. Sheesh, they just come off as ridiculous sometimes

Well then, does the length of the relationship qualify it as a "plot device"? This looks like it may not last the year. I recall people naming Luke Cage's relationship and then marriage to Jessica Jones a plot device. Even their baby was branded as such. They're still together as far as I know, so are they still a plot device? If you say yes, doesn't that mean that any relationship, I mean ANY in fiction, or at least comics is a plot device? Bruce and Selina? Lois and Clark? MJ and Peter? Wolverine and the female population of the Marvel Universe? (Or maybe only romantic/sexual relationships are plot devices....??). Do genuine relationships have to do with character development?

END/LITERARY CRITICISM (....and copious amounts of rhetorical questions)

Now, for my opinion. I say this SM/WW relationship fiasco was a publicity stunt (which no one except comic nerds like us cared about) and plot device from the beginning. There's an entire universe of characters that either could have been sensibly paired with but DC decided to do this. Did it really have to be Superman and Wonder Woman? As the OP said, there were glimmers of someone writing an actual love (that's such an overused word. Let's say "really strong attraction") story here and there but they were minuscule and ultimately overshadowed by the threat of Trinity War which was why this happened anyway. I can feel the circles growing larger by the minute

At first I wanted to like it (thank you JL8), then could stomach the idea. But now, I'm sure almost no effort or thought was put into the build up or actual writing and the characterization of the participants is just.... *swears loudly into pillow*. It adds nothing to either. I'd almost go as far as saying it detracts from them. She's not some socially inept enabler and he's not some stupid, four eyed meat-head. AND BATMAN IS NEITHER'S DADDY! Does anyone really have an excuse for screwing up a relationship between 2 of comics' most iconic characters. You said it right @mpfly88. A 110% SHOULD have been put into this. I'd be shocked if they stayed together after Trinity War (but at least that heralds the end of such a badly written pair and even maybe, prayerfully this run of JL. AMEN). So much for superstar writing

#6 Edited by Press Oblivion (1643 posts) - - Show Bio

@akindoodle: Wow! . . . and breath! lol That was a lot of heart felt release there and I have to say that I agree with what you have to say.

Yes, this relationship, between DIana & Clark is a plot device, yes everything is a plot device, but we've only seen a few panels in a few pages of a few comics. This isn't enough to say what it really is yet and how long it's going to last. Expect that a majority of this paining is going to be explored in the JL title and because there is so much going on in that book we are only going to get bits and pieces each month in a very slow progression.

#7 Posted by davidgrantlloyd (336 posts) - - Show Bio

@mpfly88 said:

Anyone else starting to think that this thing is over with when Trinity War hits? I've been thinking lately that even though there's potential in a Superman/Wonder Woman relationship, it's been over half a year since the kiss and so far we haven't seen their relationship develop all that much. And now one of the elements that DC is building up with Trinity War is that it'll put Clark and Diana's relationship in jeopardy. I'm sorry but with what little relationship development we've been given over these two characters so far, are we suppose to care? This all just isn't adding up for me because I know if I was in charge with writing a love story between the two most iconic male and female superheroes, I would at least be putting in my 110% to make sure i'm coming up with an interesting and impressive story for the readers.

I don't want to come off as naive, because i'm sure when this whole thing started, a lot of people including myself have had the suspicion that this may only be nothing more than a plot device. But there was always that hope spot. That maybe DC may actually explore a relationship between these two for a few years. But recentely i've been having my doubts.

Would you be surprised if this relationship continues after Trinity War, and what do you think? Is this something DC might actually put some serious thought into, or has it been a fake out since day 1?

Anything's possible. It could go either way IMO at this stage, we probably won't know until the story comes out.

Will the relationship end during Trinity War? Maybe. Still, it's just as likely that the very development many of us seek will mostly occur during Trinity War ... (or in other words, DC may be saving the juicy details for the big event) maybe something in Trinity War will make Clark and Diana's bond stronger and deeper.

And keep in mind, I think it could be argued most concepts, relationships, etc in mainstream comics develop and evolve at a very slow pace (as a business, they obviously want to stretch all things out and get as much mileage out of it as they can) ... T'was ever thus ... An example of this is the SM/LL marriage which remained in continuity for 15-20 long years, and in the great scheme of things, I don't think there were too many MAJOR developments that occurred (ie there was the engagement, then there was the wedding, then ... it seemed to always just be there and that was all, nothing else)

#8 Posted by consolemaster001 (4979 posts) - - Show Bio

Plot device

#9 Posted by veronicacris (110 posts) - - Show Bio

The way they are handling the things it's only plot device

#10 Edited by Dark_Guyver (2295 posts) - - Show Bio

I'm enjoying thier relationship. Like Z3RO180 said, people aren't giving it a chance. They were against it before even giving it a try.

#11 Posted by deaditegonzo (3683 posts) - - Show Bio

Superman #19 had some sweet, endearing, and dare I say it 'cute' moments between the two, but even in that issue, Clark was clearly equally interested in Lois, maybe even "SETTLING" for WW. He is internally conflicted about the fact that seeing Diana may finally mean his chances with Lois are over.

YOU DONT "SETTLE" FOR WONDER WOMAN. Its offensive to a character who IS NOT a side character, who is an icon every bit as much as Superman. Thats why they were an exciting pairing, they are the most famous man and woman in comics! And the few times we've actually seen them together, this issue in particular, its no wonder theres chemistry. WW says, "Im the last person you'll ever have to apologize to for being late."

I expect a greater focus on their romance from here on out, and I want both characters to be fully committed (right now, neither is), and I hope it lasts through the Trinity War, but I doubt it.

Basically, its a plot device, and right now a bad one, and its transparent AS ALL GET OUT. Its clear that Supes and Lois will be together with a couple years at the most.

*Unrelated Note* Lois looked great with Rocaforts art in a Wonder Woman costume, I almost feel the artist intentionally made her more attractive than Diana when they were side by side.

#12 Posted by Akindoodle (979 posts) - - Show Bio
#13 Posted by Deranged Midget (17599 posts) - - Show Bio

I'll be honest, I was completely against the relationship at the beginning, but at this point, I actually don't mind and feel that it's been underappreciated, even by the writers. I'd like to see them advance the relationship further as it's still in it's infancy with only Bruce and Booster Gold knowing.

Moderator
#14 Posted by sinestro_GL (3066 posts) - - Show Bio

From the last issue of the last Superman title pre-52, it's revealed that Clark and Lois would always be together...

That should answer your question.

#15 Posted by Lvenger (18445 posts) - - Show Bio

This relationship has felt so forced from the get go. Pointless moments engineered to generate shock value have fallen flat in DC's face. Only Waid has ever got me to buy into the relationship. In other interpretations, it just doesn't work.

#16 Posted by Deranged Midget (17599 posts) - - Show Bio

@lvenger: You know that I've been against this from the start, but at this point, it looks like it's sticking around. I'd rather have them just progress it further than keep it stewing pointlessly with no signs of picking up the pace.

Moderator
#17 Posted by Lvenger (18445 posts) - - Show Bio

@deranged_midget: But from the looks of the Trinity War, it seems like Superman and Wonder Woman's relationship is coming under pressure. Probably to add shock value when they break up the power couple. And then there's the handling of it by other writers. Azzarello doesn't touch on it as he's adding chemistry with Orion, Lobdell writes a confusing message particularly in his latest issue and Snyder and Diggle preferred Lois by their writing and tweets from what I've seen.

#18 Posted by Deranged Midget (17599 posts) - - Show Bio

@lvenger said:

@deranged_midget: But from the looks of the Trinity War, it seems like Superman and Wonder Woman's relationship is coming under pressure. Probably to add shock value when they break up the power couple. And then there's the handling of it by other writers. Azzarello doesn't touch on it as he's adding chemistry with Orion, Lobdell writes a confusing message particularly in his latest issue and Snyder and Diggle preferred Lois by their writing and tweets from what I've seen.

EVERY writer save for Johns prefers Lois over Diana in terms as a mate for Clark. Diggle said that flat out in an interview last year, Snyder continued to praise about writing her, and Lobdell just doesn't really mind. Azzarello on the other hand... that guy doesn't give an arse about anything going on in the DCU outside of Wonder Woman's title :P

Moderator
#19 Posted by Lvenger (18445 posts) - - Show Bio

EVERY writer save for Johns prefers Lois over Diana in terms as a mate for Clark. Diggle said that flat out in an interview last year, Snyder continued to praise about writing her, and Lobdell just doesn't really mind. Azzarello on the other hand... that guy doesn't give an arse about anything going on in the DCU outside of Wonder Woman's title :P

Heh perhaps that's why I read and love that title so much. It's got a lot of good things going for it. One of my keepsakes on the pull list for when I go to university and have to drop several titles. That is if I get the grades to get a place.

#20 Posted by akbogert (3200 posts) - - Show Bio

I'm really confused, as I've been ever since I started reading comics and found out (shocking to a non-comics reader) that Clark wasn't with Lois. I haven't looked into it, so I don't know what reasons were given for that breakup, but when you have a couple which is so iconic as a couple, anything messing with that status quo strikes me as pure attention-seeking publicity stunt. Forgetting for a moment how you feel about Diana and Clark's compatibility -- why should people want him to be with someone else? Was their relationship actually broken?

Lois Lane is part of who Superman is. She's part of his identity, she's near the top of what any guy off the street will say when you do word association with Superman. Anything which tries to remove her from that picture cannot last -- and if it does, that's a sign that DC has lost all sense of what it's doing.

#21 Edited by Nerx (15088 posts) - - Show Bio

Relationship

keep it that way , nu52 is supposed to be about change

I miss his briefs and MManhunter on the team but that is the way it goes

#22 Posted by FadeToBlackBolt (23334 posts) - - Show Bio

Terrible relationship idea. Terribly executed. Terrible for both characters. Jarring to look at, like watching Quicksilver and Wanda make out.

#23 Posted by Deranged Midget (17599 posts) - - Show Bio

@akbogert said:

I haven't looked into it, so I don't know what reasons were given for that breakup, but when you have a couple which is so iconic as a couple, anything messing with that status quo strikes me as pure attention-seeking publicity stunt.

That's exactly what it originally was mate and probably still is. The cover to JL 12 showcased Clark and Diana kissing and DC fans went ballistic. Regardless of how they felt towards it, they had to get the issue to find out what happens, hence the massive increase in sales. Don't get me wrong, I fully respect Diana as a character but there has honestly been no attraction between the two characters outside of them smiling at each other and an odd stare here and there.

@lvenger: I've been on and off with Azzarello's run. Not that I don't think it's good, just that I'm limited on cash and I had to drop something so I chose that title :P

Moderator
#24 Posted by Lvenger (18445 posts) - - Show Bio

@fadetoblackbolt: You mean like this? :P

I take it Waid is the only one who managed to write a good depiction of the Clark/Diana romance? He is for me anyway.

#25 Edited by Lvenger (18445 posts) - - Show Bio

@deranged_midget: It's been the same with me for other titles. University and other circumstances in life might push the number of comics I read even lower.

#26 Posted by logy5000 (5655 posts) - - Show Bio

I think they could have a good relationship.

#27 Edited by FadeToBlackBolt (23334 posts) - - Show Bio

@lvenger said:

@fadetoblackbolt: You mean like this? :P

I take it Waid is the only one who managed to write a good depiction of the Clark/Diana romance? He is for me anyway.

You mean Kingdom Come right? I agree with you because it's totally different circumstances.

In any timeline or story where Superman is supposed to be detached from his humanity and regard himself as a kind of godlike entity that rules over humans, then Wonder Woman is a good partner for him. It worked in Dark Knight Strikes Again, it worked in Injustice.

HOWEVER, the good hearted Superman who would never place himself about the law or above people, should not be with Wonder Woman. He should be with a human woman, the most human woman. He should love someone who keeps him grounded, who reminds him of all that's good about our crappy race. When he's with Diana, they're just there floating above humanity wondering why they bother protecting the insects that scuttle about.

It's why Bruce/Diana was never a problem. Bruce kept Diana grounded in the same way that Lois keeps Clark grounded.

#28 Posted by Deranged Midget (17599 posts) - - Show Bio

@lvenger: Ugh, tell me about it mate... I'm having trouble paying off my tuition and that's still disregarding my textbooks! O_O

Moderator
#29 Edited by Lvenger (18445 posts) - - Show Bio

@lvenger said:

@fadetoblackbolt: You mean like this? :P

I take it Waid is the only one who managed to write a good depiction of the Clark/Diana romance? He is for me anyway.

You mean Kingdom Come right? I agree with you because it's totally different circumstances.

In any timeline or story where Superman is supposed to be detached from his humanity and regard himself as a kind of godlike entity that rules over humans, then Wonder Woman is a good partner for him. It worked in Dark Knight Strikes Again, it worked in Injustice.

HOWEVER, the good hearted Superman who would never place himself about the law or above people, should not be with Wonder Woman. He should be with a human woman, the most human woman. He should love someone who keeps him grounded, who reminds him of all that's good about our crappy race. When he's with Diana, they're just there floating above humanity wondering why they bother protecting the insects that scuttle about.

It's why Bruce/Diana was never a problem. Bruce kept Diana grounded in the same way that Lois keeps Clark grounded.

Uh huh should have said Kingdom Come but I couldn't agree more. The circumstances were right in bringing about a connection between Superman and Wonder Woman. In the normal context, Superman should be with a human woman. Since the New 52 erased the Lois marriage, I was hoping Clark would get a new compelling love interest to pad out his relationships until we get Clois again but we have this instead. And what you said about Clark and Diana floating above humanity is sort of coming to pass thanks to Justice League 19 where Diana suggests to Superman that they play God over the world. Ugh so distressing...

#30 Posted by Lvenger (18445 posts) - - Show Bio

@deranged_midget: How's college working out for you by the way? Things going well for you?

#31 Edited by FadeToBlackBolt (23334 posts) - - Show Bio

@lvenger said:

Uh huh should have said Kingdom Come but I couldn't agree more. The circumstances were right in bringing about a connection between Superman and Wonder Woman. In the normal context, Superman should be with a human woman. Since the New 52 erased the Lois marriage, I was hoping Clark would get a new compelling love interest to pad out his relationships until we get Clois again but we have this instead. And what you said about Clark and Diana floating above humanity is sort of coming to pass thanks to Justice League 19 where Diana suggests to Superman that they play God over the world. Ugh so distressing...

Johns. I hate you Johns. So much.

JMS' missed a good chance with a fun new love interest for Clark with his Earth 1 stories too. Lois was barely in Volume 1 and Volume 2 had the most ridiculously random "revelation" one could think of.

Poor Supes, doomed to only have decent love interests with the initials LL.

#32 Posted by Deranged Midget (17599 posts) - - Show Bio

@lvenger: Just finished my last exam on Wednesday! BRUTAL! Now I relax for about three weeks before my summer courses start! :D How about you mate?

Moderator
#33 Posted by Lvenger (18445 posts) - - Show Bio

@lvenger said:

Uh huh should have said Kingdom Come but I couldn't agree more. The circumstances were right in bringing about a connection between Superman and Wonder Woman. In the normal context, Superman should be with a human woman. Since the New 52 erased the Lois marriage, I was hoping Clark would get a new compelling love interest to pad out his relationships until we get Clois again but we have this instead. And what you said about Clark and Diana floating above humanity is sort of coming to pass thanks to Justice League 19 where Diana suggests to Superman that they play God over the world. Ugh so distressing...

Johns. I hate you Johns. So much.

JMS' missed a good chance with a fun new love interest for Clark with his Earth 1 stories too. Lois was barely in Volume 1 and Volume 2 had the most ridiculously random "revelation" one could think of.

Poor Supes, doomed to only have decent love interests with the initials LL.

That was one of the few things I actually liked about Volume 2 of Earth One. That Lisa Lasalle character. It's a shame JMS won't do anything with her now.

#34 Posted by Lvenger (18445 posts) - - Show Bio

@deranged_midget: Just finished my mock exams and have to endure nearly 2 months of revision and real exams before I'm done.

#35 Posted by FadeToBlackBolt (23334 posts) - - Show Bio

@lvenger: I really enjoyed her until the I hook line. That was just so unnecessary.

#36 Posted by Deranged Midget (17599 posts) - - Show Bio

Yeah... that wasn't exactly the best line Johns has ever written... Sounds like someone was playing a little too much Injustice :P That's my main problem with Johns, the way he writes the characters is so... out of character. Diana would never say something like nor suggest it, but at least Clark didn't agree to it in any way.

Moderator
#37 Posted by Lvenger (18445 posts) - - Show Bio
#38 Posted by Deranged Midget (17599 posts) - - Show Bio

@lvenger said:

@deranged_midget: Just finished my mock exams and have to endure nearly 2 months of revision and real exams before I'm done.

Oh geez, I feel for you mate :( Best of luck though!

Moderator
#39 Posted by Lvenger (18445 posts) - - Show Bio
#40 Posted by darkman61288 (722 posts) - - Show Bio

@nerx: But change is not always good. Part of why we love these characters is because they are more or less same as the were when they debuted. If things are to be changed why not just completely remake Superman and other characters into something completely different? If DC did that then many of us might be upset.

#41 Posted by Nerx (15088 posts) - - Show Bio

@darkman61288:

Fans have to bear with it, even though I want quesada dead for OMD and loeb shot for Ultimatum I tolerate anyways. I love MM's run on JLA, I love briefs on the outside, I like fat momma waller (not that halle berry crap), I love cassandra cain being batgirl and babs being oracle. Its just writers bending over for new fans, but I do like what they did to aquaman and how they try to respect WS characters.

#42 Posted by akbogert (3200 posts) - - Show Bio

@nerx: The thing is, when you take away a major part of what a character is, what remains may not be the same thing someone was a "fan" of in the first place. In other words (and I'm not saying that's definitely the case here, but in general), some changes are so dramatic that it may as well not be the same person.

If I had been reading Spider-Man comics I think it's fair to say I'd have ceased to do so after OMD. I'd still consider myself a fan of the "real" Spider-Man and his mythos, but what proceeded from that event would be a thing I wanted no part of. It'd be like asking me to "bear with" a corpse -- as far as I'm concerned, the thing I loved, the thing I was a fan of, no longer exists.

So if Lois being part of Superman -- not just narratively, but (as has been pointed out) intrinsically because of the grounding/humanizing (not to mention competition, job-wise) aspects -- was a big part of the "fanhood," then I think it's fair to say that a change on that level can very rightly be protested and not just shrugged off.

#43 Edited by Nerx (15088 posts) - - Show Bio

@akbogert:

I think WW and superman is a logical conclusion to all the 'motions; that are rubbed against them as inside jokes and rumors. It binds the big three together, since most (but not all) DCgoers are glued on that batcrack. I am one of the fans tht hate nerfing for sake of story, but this new superman seems 'competent' which I like. Siegel's superman is clever, swift and direct.

As a fan of spiderman I stick in the faint hope that he will return to his rightful place.

To me lois had always been an integral part but like lana lang and in capt marve/shazam's case the lovable billy batson who is a good kid is now replaced with a typical punk ass runt that somehow did not get aborted.

It it fits

it sits

#44 Posted by akbogert (3200 posts) - - Show Bio

@nerx: Well I'm glad you're happy. But using OMD as an example, you've been holding onto that "hope" for six years, and no dice. I don't have that kind of emotional currency, I'm afraid. A company's willing to rip my heart out, I don't give them the benefit of assuming they may eventually see fit to return it.

#45 Posted by Nerx (15088 posts) - - Show Bio

@akbogert: Sometimes I wonder why comic fans don't do what religious people do, taking appropriate action when their heroes are humiliated or scorned.

#46 Posted by akbogert (3200 posts) - - Show Bio

@nerx: "Appropriate action?"

#47 Posted by Nerx (15088 posts) - - Show Bio

@akbogert: Oh my bad, got emotional there for a while.

I meant 'corrective' action

#48 Posted by akbogert (3200 posts) - - Show Bio

@nerx: Fair enough, though I'm a fairly "religious" person and I still have no idea what you mean.

#49 Posted by Nerx (15088 posts) - - Show Bio
#50 Posted by akbogert (3200 posts) - - Show Bio

@nerx: Right. Because nothing says "I want you to respect my God's teachings on peace, humility, and forgiveness" than violence. >_>

Superman's a paragon of virtue.

Spider-Man's about handling power with responsibility.

Perhaps the reason people don't get up in arms when their heroes are mistreated is because they actually learned something from those heroes in spite of the mishandling.