Common Wonder Woman excuses debunked

#1 Posted by jointron33 (1902 posts) - - Show Bio

1. Wonder Woman is unrelatable

An immigrant who basically feels that their whole life, they have been sheltered, and must now face an evil that they are unsure if they are ready for, is unrelatable?

2. Wonder Woman is too powerful

Fanboys: Lol look at how strong Hulk is Avengers. Isn't it cool how no one can stop him? Isn't it funny how how easily overpowers Thor and Loki, who are being terribly written and we're accepting because it's teh gaud ov geak JOsS WhEdOn?

3. She has no good stories

Take Gods and Mortals, update the U.S.S.R. to the Middle East, China, or North Korea, make Steve the love interest, and you literally have a movie written for you. I have NO clue how this has escaped the psyches of so-called "professional" screenwriters.

4. She has no good villains

Ares is literally the embodiment of War, and at the end of Gods and Mortals, she realizes that even with her training and powers, Ares is FAAAAAAR too powerful for her to take down. As opposed to, oh I don't know, that lame movie version of Loki who is sad that he is a tragic mulatto and could probably get beaten up by Happy Hogan because he is so weak and useless.

5. She is tied to WW2.

No she isn't. I guess Superman is tied to the Great Depression and the Hulk is tied to 50s monster movies. Yeah, you need new material. FAST.

6. She is perfect

A young, naive, fish out of water, and you're telling me that there is no writing potential? While you get new material, you should probably check into a creative writing class at a local college. You need it.

#2 Posted by Sinisteri (550 posts) - - Show Bio

@jointron33:

Very good.

There is no excuse for writers who have no ideas and drive to write about a unique and multifaceted character based on material aptly provided by the man who invented the lie detector test and had enough business sense to retain some ownership of his fictional creation. He gave her all she needed, and those responsible for her offer excuses instead of quality work or feel they need to change her more often than they change socks.

Everyone is not royalty or networking with gods, but her extraordinary elements should be metaphors to real life and a testament to human experience & growth.

#3 Posted by jointron33 (1902 posts) - - Show Bio

@sinisteri: Exactly. Some hacks in Hollywood and comics could learn a thing or two.

#4 Posted by dmessmer (367 posts) - - Show Bio

Yeah, none of the excuses are remotely valid. If they can make Thor work, they can make Wonder Woman work even more easily, and they don't need to radically alter the character to do it.

What really bothers me, though, is that for PR reasons the studios won't come out and say what is probably really holding them back: she's a woman. It's a terrible argument, but nevertheless is probably a bigger hurdle than anything else. After all, there is only one female Avenger, and she is the only one other than Hawkeye that didn't get her own film, instead settling for bit parts in everyone else's movies. WB seems like they might be following suit.

The rationale is that action films with female leads don't do very well. There are flops (Catwoman, Elektra) and there are those that did okay (Tomb Raider), but female action stars don't make money on the level of a Batman or Superman.

The flaw in this logic is twofold. First, it's a totally circular argument. The studios put out very few female led action films, then point to a lack of them as evidence. Second, when the do make a female led action film, they tend to not throw as much support behind it, thus leading to crappy movies and poor promotion.

Finally, in the case of Wonder Woman, the studios seem to be missing the great benefit of the character. Wonder Woman, more so than any other character, is associated with female strength and independence, and thus would draw a huge audience of women that characters like Lara Croft (best known for her giant breasts) and Catwoman (best known as the love interest for Batman) don't.

If they made a quality film that spoke to women and young girls without condescending to them (that's probably the "challenge" that the studio execs are really talking about), then marketed it well, they could make a fortune on a Wonder Woman film. But (and I'm totally prepared for the standard number of people jumping down my throat at this comment), the studio system is probably too sexist to realize any of this or to take the steps to overcome it.

#6 Posted by RulerOfThisUniverse (6360 posts) - - Show Bio

@lifeofvibe: What the hell are you talking about?

Anyway, I totally agree with all these points.

#7 Edited by akintoussaint (106 posts) - - Show Bio

@dmessmer said:

The rationale is that action films with female leads don't do very well. There are flops (Catwoman, Elektra) and there are those that did okay (Tomb Raider), but female action stars don't make money on the level of a Batman or Superman.

I think its more specific to Comic book female leads.Do to the long list of bad movies based on them(those you mearioned plus Supergirl,Tank girl,Bared wire.e.t.c).

Personally i think they should wait until someone come along who actually gives a crap about this character and give him/her a shot that making the movie.Instead form simply pushing it on someone who clearly doesn't know what they're doing.(With pretty much guarantees the movie will be crap when and if it comes out)

Just my two cents.

#8 Posted by Black_Claw (3009 posts) - - Show Bio

Nailed all of those points dude. And for the people at Hollywood who are still convinced that a WW movie can't work, they should really look at the animated film. Hell, I wouldn't mind if they would just remake that movie in live action and call it a day.

#9 Posted by Fallschirmjager (18424 posts) - - Show Bio

Agreed. Wonder Women deserves a movie to do her justice. Its been long over due. Update her costume, find yourself a good lucking actress who can also kick some ass, change/alter her equipment (no invisible jets please...) to make her slightly more realistic and do the damn movie all ready!

Good thread.

#10 Posted by Lvenger (20757 posts) - - Show Bio

It's the same thing with Superman. If the writer can't come up with a good story for a character like Wonder Woman, they have only themselves to blame.

#11 Posted by Pokeysteve (8421 posts) - - Show Bio

I only disagree with number 2. A love interest isn't a good idea. Pre 52 she had one or two and neither of those were good stories. Devote that screen time to her character and the story. A love subplot is unnecessary.

Other than that I say bravo to your rant lol we've all thought it.

#12 Posted by batpala (339 posts) - - Show Bio

Yes, exactly this. I'm still bitter that the CW is now working on a Flash tv show and shelving Amazon, which was to be about Wonder Woman, which also means none of her characters or characters that are closely affiliated [for example Donna who could be a friend of Roy's] can appear on Arrow.

#13 Edited by Lvenger (20757 posts) - - Show Bio

I only disagree with number 2. A love interest isn't a good idea. Pre 52 she had one or two and neither of those were good stories. Devote that screen time to her character and the story. A love subplot is unnecessary.

Other than that I say bravo to your rant lol we've all thought it.


The problem with this is that most superhero films have some kind of romance subplot. It brings the romantics into the action packed plot if they pay attention to the chemistry of the romance. Sometimes the romance works like Steve and Peggy in First Avenger and at other times, it really doesn't work. Like with most superhero movies actually now I think about it.

#14 Posted by lilben42 (2556 posts) - - Show Bio

@lvenger: They should hint at it in the first movie. Like Orion and WW or Pepper and Tony. Without doing anything with that.

#15 Posted by Lvenger (20757 posts) - - Show Bio

@lilben42: Thor got criticism for doing that with Jane and Thor's relationship though. That's why the Dark World looks set to expand on their relationship.

#16 Posted by Pokeysteve (8421 posts) - - Show Bio

@lvenger said:
@pokeysteve said:

I only disagree with number 2. A love interest isn't a good idea. Pre 52 she had one or two and neither of those were good stories. Devote that screen time to her character and the story. A love subplot is unnecessary.

Other than that I say bravo to your rant lol we've all thought it.

The problem with this is that most superhero films have some kind of romance subplot. It brings the romantics into the action packed plot if they pay attention to the chemistry of the romance. Sometimes the romance works like Steve and Peggy in First Avenger and at other times, it really doesn't work. Like with most superhero movies actually now I think about it.

I understand that. I like the way Man of Steel did it. It was hidden and not even a sub plot but it was there. The thing is though most characters HAVE romantic interests in their books. Clark/Lois, Peter/MJ, Tony/Pepper, but she hasn't had a significant love interest since Steve and that was before the first crisis. Why give her one now if it works without it. She still needs a supporting cast so I say bring in the Kapatelis'. Vanessa and Julia.

#17 Posted by dmessmer (367 posts) - - Show Bio

@lvenger said:
@pokeysteve said:

I only disagree with number 2. A love interest isn't a good idea. Pre 52 she had one or two and neither of those were good stories. Devote that screen time to her character and the story. A love subplot is unnecessary.

Other than that I say bravo to your rant lol we've all thought it.

The problem with this is that most superhero films have some kind of romance subplot. It brings the romantics into the action packed plot if they pay attention to the chemistry of the romance. Sometimes the romance works like Steve and Peggy in First Avenger and at other times, it really doesn't work. Like with most superhero movies actually now I think about it.

I understand that. I like the way Man of Steel did it. It was hidden and not even a sub plot but it was there. The thing is though most characters HAVE romantic interests in their books. Clark/Lois, Peter/MJ, Tony/Pepper, but she hasn't had a significant love interest since Steve and that was before the first crisis. Why give her one now if it works without it. She still needs a supporting cast so I say bring in the Kapatelis'. Vanessa and Julia.

As much as I'd like to see Vanessa and Julia, I seriously doubt they'll be in the movie (if there ever is one). I would almost guarantee they'll include Steve Trevor (as a love interest or not), and probably Etta Candy. Vanessa and Julia are just too obscure in the grand scheme of things, and they'll likely be looking for ways to include more men than women (not saying that's how it should be, but that's probably how it will be).

#18 Posted by Pokeysteve (8421 posts) - - Show Bio

@dmessmer said:

@pokeysteve said:

I understand that. I like the way Man of Steel did it. It was hidden and not even a sub plot but it was there. The thing is though most characters HAVE romantic interests in their books. Clark/Lois, Peter/MJ, Tony/Pepper, but she hasn't had a significant love interest since Steve and that was before the first crisis. Why give her one now if it works without it. She still needs a supporting cast so I say bring in the Kapatelis'. Vanessa and Julia.

As much as I'd like to see Vanessa and Julia, I seriously doubt they'll be in the movie (if there ever is one). I would almost guarantee they'll include Steve Trevor (as a love interest or not), and probably Etta Candy. Vanessa and Julia are just too obscure in the grand scheme of things, and they'll likely be looking for ways to include more men than women (not saying that's how it should be, but that's probably how it will be).

I doubt it too but a fanboy can dream right haha. They'll do it exactly as we think they will. Steve and the love sub plot. Booo.

#19 Posted by dmessmer (367 posts) - - Show Bio

@pokeysteve: Yeah, that's what's so sad about comic movies at this point. We already know how they'll suck before they even come out. It's like watching the Mets.

#20 Posted by tigerkaya (1262 posts) - - Show Bio

I sense large resentment on The Avengers. As to Hulk being OP I disagree Thor had some great showing of strength against Hulk. But I'm sidetracking I agree with the list but knowing WB if it isn't Batman they'll screw it up just look at Man of Steel. Such a disappointment.

#21 Posted by Pokeysteve (8421 posts) - - Show Bio

@dmessmer said:

@pokeysteve: Yeah, that's what's so sad about comic movies at this point. We already know how they'll suck before they even come out. It's like watching the Mets.

........I hate how accurate that is.

#22 Edited by jphulk26 (1332 posts) - - Show Bio

@jointron33: Thank you so much for this. I´m writing a WW script and I´m not the greatest writer, but alot of it writes itself. In fact for me the easiest part was her origin, it was where I had to start coming up with what she does post entering Mans world that I found slightly challenging. WW origin for me is one of the best in comics and no it isn´t stuck in WW2 at all. It can be written for any time. DC writers have got to be the stupidest most maladjusted, "I didn´t get laid at college, so now I´m a misogynist, who doesn´t get female heroes or characters, who aren´t part of my perverse prepubescent hero fantasies" dicks in the world. thats why Azzerello, can only write, idiotic, big boob women, who may as well just be strippers confidently. His WW is woefully missing the point, cause female heroes or protagonists are just beyond his scope of imagination. He tries to write a strong, conflicted woman, but can only do so by literally destroying everything unique about her and basically making her a niave, bimbo, who has a little bit of compassion, so of course that is WW. Cause compassion is all that defines the character. What about her great wisdom? her intelligence? her integrity and warrior spirit? what about her ability as a strategist and diplomat? All the things that separated WW as a character from any other comic invention and made her special.

But to be fair to Azzerrelo, he´s just one in a long list of DC writers who just hasn´t got it.

Its sad because this generation is redefining and fixing shit that just wasn´t broke. Its terrible cause future generations are just not gonna get why Wonder Woman so captured the hearts and spirits of previous generations.

Same with Man Of Steel and the awful retcons they made to supermans mythos. Luckily I think he has enough media that that travesty of a film will not affect the future perception of the character.

Anyway sorry I´m rambling on. But everything you said is true. My WW script is based a bit off Perez Gods and Mortals and of Gail Simones the Circle. Those are my two major influences. I took a bit of a break, but I´ll start writing again today.

#23 Posted by jointron33 (1902 posts) - - Show Bio
#24 Posted by jphulk26 (1332 posts) - - Show Bio

@jphulk26: What awful mos retcons

I guess retcon maybe too strong for MOS. Its more that Zack and co just couldn´t deal with the subtleties and playfulness of Supermans origin.

The biggest problem for me

1. Lois knowing Clark´s identity.

2. Pa Kent just teaching Clark fear, no sense that he teaches him the value of human life.

3. No kryptonite (although I wouldn´t have minded that so much if these guys looked like they knew what they were doing. Cause in a real world that would be hard to get your hands on)

4. Superman seemingly just not caring about human life, but it makes sense with a dad like that, and when all your life everybody just picked on you, so your walking around with a permanent fucking moppy looking expression.

I mean your right it wasn´t a retcon, apart from the Lois thing, but again its that sense of just don´t fix shit that isn´t broken. Expand on what you have, don´t subtract elements of a story that are perfectly fine.

As a separate point, I think personally its CGI that is the problem. We´ve just become lazier story tellers because of it. We really have.

#25 Posted by dmessmer (367 posts) - - Show Bio

@jphulk26 said:

As a separate point, I think personally its CGI that is the problem. We´ve just become lazier story tellers because of it. We really have.

It's not the only problem - there have been lazy storytellers in film long before CGI, and there have been some really excellent movies that use CGI. Still, I take your point. Storytelling should be a process of discovery for the teller as much as the viewer, but when CGI can make a director's ideas come to life immediately there's nothing forcing further thought and new ideas. Basically, we what we end up getting on screen is a first draft of a film that often needed a LOT of revision.

#26 Posted by 4_color_image (220 posts) - - Show Bio

I think what people mean when they say Wonder Woman is not unrelatable that that Wonder Woman is not Batman.

#27 Posted by jointron33 (1902 posts) - - Show Bio

Also, STOP GETTING CAUGHT IN THE HYPE!!!!!! I could care less if you hate guy's run on ww, but one thing that you CAN NOT accuse Azzarello of is getting caught on the icon status of the character, which many past writers(even Rucka and Simone) did.

#28 Posted by GWHH (576 posts) - - Show Bio

Good points all around

This edit will also create new pages on Comic Vine for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Comic Vine users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.