Follow

    Wonder Woman

    Character » Wonder Woman appears in 8719 issues.

    The Amazon princess, blessed with god-like super abilities, Wonder Woman is one of Earth's most powerful defenders of peace, justice, and equality and a member of the Justice League. She is considered an archetype for many heroines outside of comic book. Her initial origin depicted her as a clay baby brought to life by patron goddess Aphrodite, but in recent years she has been depicted as the daughter of Zeus and Amazon queen Hippolyta.

    Why there probably WILL be a Wonder Woman film (and why it will probably suck)

    Avatar image for gc8
    GC8

    2900

    Forum Posts

    78610

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 1422

    User Lists: 8

    Edited By GC8

    EDIT: I FEEL MUCH BETTER - they've pushed the date to 2016 and are probably rewriting it. Not rushing it like Man of Steel:

    http://www.screened.com/news/batman-vs-superman-or-whatever-its-called-pushed-to-2016/5321/

    Furthermore, DC's solid win of this case puts them in a position of no longer needing to mandate character changes to strengthen their hold on copyrights:
    http://www.deadline.com/2014/01/superman-warner-bros-dc-comics-copyright-lawsuit/

    Comic book fans and feminists alike have been deploring the fact that there have been oodles of super hero films lately, but still no Wonder Woman film.

    I tried to explain some of the Hollywood reasons why there hasn't been a Wonder Woman film yet (in an admittedly tongue-in-cheek way) and was of course deluged by responses that totally missed the point:

    http://www.comicvine.com/profile/etragedy/blog/why-a-wonder-woman-movie-would-suck/89845/

    (if you take nothing else away from this, understand how WB is a giant departmentalized company... and the part about pants)

    Recently there was another announcement that basically caused the entire Internet to go apeshit - namely, the casting of rail-thin Gal Gadot as the Amazonian Princess in a cameo in the upcoming Batman vs. Superman movie.

    Now there has been another round of rumors about Wonder Woman's character in that movie. She doesn't need to look like an Amazon warrior, because she isn't going to be one!

    http://io9.com/the-rumor-about-wonder-womans-movie-debut-will-make-yo-1495695994?fb_action_ids=10203035381313799&fb_action_types=og.likes&fb_source=aggregation&fb_aggregation_id=288381481237582

    My stock answer to this has been that for awhile now in the comics she flies and is all around a lot more like Supergirl anyway, so they may as well go ahead and make her a Kryptonian instead of an Amazon.

    But wait, you say. Doesn't that change her entire origin? What about the Greek mythology which is the foundation of the entire Wonder Woman lexicon?

    Well, now I am going to tell you why I suspect there really WILL be a Wonder Woman movie, and why it will probably completely suck...

    The first thing you have to understand is a little about copyright law. Yes, copyright law. I don't have time to get into the whole thing here, but just understand that copyright law in the United States has changed several times over the years. Specifically with respect to when fictional works enter the public domain (basically the termination of copyrights). Now that modern media like movies and comics have been around for more than a century, a lot of the characters owned by giant corporations like Disney and Warner Bros. (like Mickey Mouse) were *going* to become public domain characters, meaning anyone could profit off them, until copyright length was extended courtesy of Congressman Sonny Bono (yes, that Sonny Bono).

    But even that extension is now starting to run out. In the meantime comic book companies have found a temporary solution in trademarking these characters (there is no sunset clause on a trademark). But even that issue got muddied when the courts ruled that the draconian work-for-hire contracts under which a lot of these characters (specifically Superman) were created did not grant perpetual ownership.

    Now here's where things get interesting. Last year WB made a lackluster Superman movie called 'Man of Steel', the film to which 'Batman Vs. Superman' (guest starring Wonder Woman) is sequel. Why was that film so lackluster? Part of it was because it was *rushed into production*. The reason it was rushed into production was that a court ordered the film be made or else the rights to Superman would revert to the original creator's (Jerry Siegel) heirs.

    That's right, the film was not made to make money, but to preserve the copyright! (allowing WB to continue to make money off the character in the future and avoid paying a settlement to the Siegel heirs).

    Now, comic fans know that with the release of DC's so-called 'New 52', WB/DC has been making some changes to Superman, most notably his costume and origin have been somewhat tweaked. This is no mere modernization. By making changes to the character they can argue in court that this is a different character and that they own the rights to Superman outright for decades to come! In other words, they are doing an end-run around copyright law by re-inventing the character. Whether this will hold up in court is yet to be determined.

    O.K., now back to Wonder Woman. The thing is they already don't want a Wonder Woman in a skirt or go-go pants (see my link above about 'why there hasn't been a Wonder Woman film' yet). But mainly, Wonder Woman is the *next* DC character whose copyright is set to expire (they already took care of renewing Batman). Furthermore, remember that part about Greek mythology? Well Greek mythology is squarely in the public domain, no ifs, ands, or buts about it. WB doesn't 'own' Amazons or Aphrodite or Athena... but they do own Krytonians (a court already confirmed this). By making Wonder Woman a Kryptonian, ditching her traditional costume for 'armor' (with the added benefit of being able to sell more toys), they can renew Wonder Woman for decades to come too, with no fear of claims from 'greedy' heirs!

    And that, my friends is why there probably WILL be a Wonder Woman movie (and why it will probably suck).

    Avatar image for darkman61288
    darkman61288

    972

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    Interesting. I wonder though if the movie does bomb would DC let it's rights to WW expire.

    Avatar image for jphulk26
    jphulk26

    2401

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    @etragedy:

    Actually the Marston Moultons had a quite different deal than the Seigal and Shuster as did Bob Cain. Moulton who was harvard psychologist and didn´t go off to war never signed the rights of Wonder Woman the character over to DC, so infact his heirs still own a large part of the character and would get huge payday if a movie was ever made about her.

    I´m not a lawyer so I don´t know exactly how it works but she is not completely DC owned like Batman or now Superman.

    Avatar image for darkman61288
    darkman61288

    972

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    @jphulk26: I'll ask Christina Marston about it. I'm friends with her on facebook. Plus if that is the case then the marston rights would expire in 2027 70 years after WW'creators death.


    Avatar image for Pokeysteve
    Pokeysteve

    12042

    Forum Posts

    21613

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 9

    User Lists: 0

    Way too long and I didn't read it all but yeah. A Wonder Woman movie will definitely suck and I have zero faith in Hollywood. Sucks cause she's one of my top 3 favs.

    Avatar image for jphulk26
    jphulk26

    2401

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    #5  Edited By jphulk26

    @darkman61288 said:

    @jphulk26: I'll ask Christina Marston about it. I'm friends with her on facebook. Plus if that is the case then the marston rights would expire in 2027 70 years after WW'creators death.

    No way, how cool. Thats an awesome connection. Sure let me know. By the way DC were able to get the rights to Superman because Schuster and Siegal were young, going off to war and DC convinced them they wanted the rights to Superman so they could still publish while they were at war. But when they came back they basically black balled them. Thankfully that was not the case for Cain and the Marston´s who never went to ww 2.

    Avatar image for gc8
    GC8

    2900

    Forum Posts

    78610

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 1422

    User Lists: 8

    #6  Edited By GC8

    @jphulk26: Interesting point. Regardless of who owns the copyright, though, the looming public domain deadline will be a concern for whomever.

    @darkman61288: very cool. Be interesting to hear what she says. If it was even partially work-for-hire it will be creator's life +95 rather than 70. Either way be interesting to more about the Marston's details.

    @pokeysteve: sorry, tried to make it as brief as possible, but it's a complex issue that most people don't know the background on.

    Avatar image for kidchipotle
    kidchipotle

    15770

    Forum Posts

    229

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 1

    Complete overreaction based off of meaningless rumors. Man of Steel being lackluster is a subjective opinion. Wonder Woman wearing armor is nothing new, she's worn armor before, and it makes more sense to wear than some skimpy one piece like in the comics. She's an Amazon Warrior, armor makes sense. As for her, and the rest of the Amazons, being descendants of the lost Krypton fleet? Probably the most ridiculous rumor I've heard in all of comic book movie rumors. The fact DC doesn't own "Amazons" or "Greek Mythology" doesn't mean they'll go out of their way to change Diana's origin for the sake of owning all of the material. Whenever Diana Prince get's a movie, whether it's to keep the rights or because it's apart of the upcoming DCCU JLA movie franchise, she will be a Princess and she will be Amazonian. DC, despite all of their craziness, would not disrespect one of the leading characters like that.

    Avatar image for m3th
    M3th

    2107

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    I read all tHat crap just for basically seeing your argument being, WW movie will suck because tHey will cHange Her origin and give Her pants.

    1St, WW popularity mainly comes from casual fans wHo don't know squat. Same can be said about Superman. MetH Has meet people witH Superman's logo (S) tattooed on tHem but tHey Have no idea wHo Kal-El is.

    So a majority of tHe audiences wHo find out WW is a ancient Kryptonian will feel like tHey learned sometHing or will not care.

    2Nd, WW batHing suit is worse tHan Superman wearing His underwear on top of His pants. WW sHould wear Armor, Pants, or a skirt.

    -ABstract4$$#073-

    Avatar image for lyrafay
    LyraFay

    2643

    Forum Posts

    43

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 5

    User Lists: 12

    First of all have you see Gal Gadot act the part? And using Man of Steel as an argument is subjective, some people loved and some people hated it. And secondly we don't know what Wonder Woman's role is in the Batman/Superman movie, it could be large or simply a cameo (personally I think it'll be bigger). I think Wonder Woman can have a good movie if done right, I'm sure WB will find a director (because they are good at finding those) that could bring her well in the screen.

    And please remember there's so much rumours and speculation about this film that it could we could be wrong about everything!

    Avatar image for powerwoman
    PowerWoman

    3642

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    wonder woman movie would be sucks,just like supergirl movie

    Avatar image for scorpio_cassadine
    SCORPIO_CASSADINE

    2139

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    Dude's argument falls apart because it's based on too many personal opinions, unsubstantiated information and possibly false assumptions. I'm not willing to jump the gun or fly off the handle, until I see the whites of their eyes.

    Avatar image for vampire_batman
    Vampire_Batman

    142

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    The creators threw some basic sketch together and wrote a few stories over 50 years ago. The reason for the characters popularity is 95% the result of DC comics on going series and they deserve the same ratio of profit. Orbit weren't for DC the character would have long since faded into obscurity.

    Avatar image for vampire_batman
    Vampire_Batman

    142

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    #13  Edited By Vampire_Batman

    I really hope they continue with the dark and violent trend DC has been in. She needs to show up wearing full hood and cloak and use her lasso to rip a villain's head off in her first appearance.

    Avatar image for jonez_
    Jonez_

    11499

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    #14  Edited By Jonez_

    A large part of a Super Hero movie's target audience is young boys. Probably age 6-13. I doubt if they want to see a movie about a girl hero. I apologize if I come off a bit sexist.

    Avatar image for tigerkaya
    tigerkaya

    1433

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    It probably will suck WB and DC will make her a protagonist that gets dragged to points of the story by the supporting characters with no personality or a voice. Her only goal will be to slash and eviscerate with her sword and non Wonder Woman fans and New 52 fans will clamor this is the great version. While true fans like myself will face palm at this poor excuse of trash. In conclusion movie version will just be a female Kratos.

    Avatar image for dmessmer
    dmessmer

    376

    Forum Posts

    4150

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    #16  Edited By dmessmer

    If I'm understanding all the legal stuff you guys brought up, would it then be possible that the reason there hasn't been a Wonder Woman movie is that it makes it a bigger financial risk for WB since they have to pay the family part of the profits. I imagine WB would provide all of the money to make the film, then the ticket sales would first go towards paying that back, then they would split the profits with the Marston family? That might not be a wise investment on their part. Just a thought.

    Avatar image for muyjingo
    MuyJingo

    2862

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    MoS wasn't rushed. They only had to start production by a certain date to keep rights. Once it was started, no need to rush.

    Avatar image for tazzmission
    TazzMission

    5765

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    #18  Edited By TazzMission

    mos wasnt rushed and if you think it was id like to know what movie you were watching. i noticed a trend in holly wood where movies take less than a half of a year to shoot and everything else is all cleaning it up computer magic until release. i also want to add jj is about to shoot the new star wars ( i believe end of this month)wich is scheduled to release december of 2015 so are you going to just assume it was ** rushed**?

    Avatar image for 90mv
    90mv

    154

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    @jonez120: One shot of WW suplexing a Minotaur would change their mind.

    Avatar image for gc8
    GC8

    2900

    Forum Posts

    78610

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 1422

    User Lists: 8

    @muyjingo: That is rushed. The production and postproduction wasn't rushed, but the longest and most important stage, the preproduction was. They even scrapped a sequel and rebooted the whole franchise only a handful of years after the last reboot.

    Avatar image for muyjingo
    MuyJingo

    2862

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    @etragedy said:

    @muyjingo: That is rushed. The production and postproduction wasn't rushed, but the longest and most important stage, the preproduction was. They even scrapped a sequel and rebooted the whole franchise only a handful of years after the last reboot.

    Nope. They were always going to reboot the franchise given the lackluster response to returns, and they had increasing pressure from the MCU. It wasn't any more rushed than TDKR.

    Avatar image for gc8
    GC8

    2900

    Forum Posts

    78610

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 1422

    User Lists: 8

    @muyjingo: O.K., never mind the reboot part. But it is a fact that it WAS rushed into preproduction. That was well covered in the Hollywood Reporter and Variety at the time. If you have an account with either of those trades you can log in and see it in the archives.

    Avatar image for muyjingo
    MuyJingo

    2862

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    #23  Edited By MuyJingo

    @etragedy said:

    @muyjingo: O.K., never mind the reboot part. But it is a fact that it WAS rushed into preproduction. That was well covered in the Hollywood Reporter and Variety at the time. If you have an account with either of those trades you can log in and see it in the archives.

    I read the account in Variety, but it seemed like pure speculation.

    I didn't see any evidence that the pre-production was rushed. What I saw was a juicy story since the rights were expiring soon.

    Avatar image for lvenger
    Lvenger

    36475

    Forum Posts

    899

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 50

    User Lists: 18

    #24  Edited By Lvenger

    @arturocalakayvee said:

    Complete overreaction based off of meaningless rumors. Man of Steel being lackluster is a subjective opinion. Wonder Woman wearing armor is nothing new, she's worn armor before, and it makes more sense to wear than some skimpy one piece like in the comics. She's an Amazon Warrior, armor makes sense. As for her, and the rest of the Amazons, being descendants of the lost Krypton fleet? Probably the most ridiculous rumor I've heard in all of comic book movie rumors. The fact DC doesn't own "Amazons" or "Greek Mythology" doesn't mean they'll go out of their way to change Diana's origin for the sake of owning all of the material. Whenever Diana Prince get's a movie, whether it's to keep the rights or because it's apart of the upcoming DCCU JLA movie franchise, she will be a Princess and she will be Amazonian. DC, despite all of their craziness, would not disrespect one of the leading characters like that.

    Basically all this sums up what I think. I can't believe the OP is making such an outlandish claim nor do I see how the Wonder Woman film will suck when it hasn't even been put into the casting or production stage yet. Such blogs are regrettable reminders of the lengthy and false assertions some comic book fans rant about in pieces like these.

    Avatar image for itsdaveyj
    ItsDaveyJ

    200

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    I don't think that the Wonder Woman film will necessarily suck. For me, the bigger concern is that I think other studios are playing a "wait and see" game because DC HAS to make a Wonder Woman film. There is just way too much pressure on them to do so. And depending on how well her film does at the box office will make a big impact on whether or not we'll be seeing female-lead superhero solo films in the near future. None of the other studios seem to want to make the first move after giving it a whirl and getting all flops (Elektra, Catwoman, etc.) and I don't think we'll be seeing any again until Wonder Woman makes her appearance.

    I am 99% sure WW will keep her Greek mythological ties. That would just be guaranteed suicide to completely change that. And yes WB is rushing all their films but at this point everyone is playing catch-up to Marvel. Fox, Sony... WB... But I have an inkling that WB understands just how crucial it is to get WW right the first time and hopefully won't rush it too much.

    Avatar image for jonez_
    Jonez_

    11499

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    #26  Edited By Jonez_

    @90mv: Yes that would be awesome

    Avatar image for lyrafay
    LyraFay

    2643

    Forum Posts

    43

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 5

    User Lists: 12

    I don't think that the Wonder Woman film will necessarily suck. For me, the bigger concern is that I think other studios are playing a "wait and see" game because DC HAS to make a Wonder Woman film. There is just way too much pressure on them to do so. And depending on how well her film does at the box office will make a big impact on whether or not we'll be seeing female-lead superhero solo films in the near future. None of the other studios seem to want to make the first move after giving it a whirl and getting all flops (Elektra, Catwoman, etc.) and I don't think we'll be seeing any again until Wonder Woman makes her appearance.

    I am 99% sure WW will keep her Greek mythological ties. That would just be guaranteed suicide to completely change that. And yes WB is rushing all their films but at this point everyone is playing catch-up to Marvel. Fox, Sony... WB... But I have an inkling that WB understands just how crucial it is to get WW right the first time and hopefully won't rush it too much.

    Good point.

    Avatar image for gc8
    GC8

    2900

    Forum Posts

    78610

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 1422

    User Lists: 8

    #28  Edited By GC8

    @itsdaveyj: I hope you're right.

    Thanks for one of the only well reasoned responses. I think the i09 rumor seems crazy, but I wouldn't be surprised, they have such a history of messing up these characters on film. I do think they've probably got too much at stake to make ditch the Greek origins.

    But I still expect they'll put her in pants. These studios are notoriously timid when it comes to offending people. Just read today Ant-Man isn't going to be Hank Pym because having a 'wife beater' was too controversial. Bleh.

    Avatar image for lykopis
    lykopis

    10845

    Forum Posts

    40100

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    Interesting points about copyright. You are onto something there.

    Avatar image for armiv2
    ARMIV2

    10074

    Forum Posts

    15

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    I could see that as a further away probability, yeah. I'm hoping they wouldn't do any of the bullcrap for the sake of, and regardless of bogus copyright laws, making her even more of their own thing.

    Avatar image for gc8
    GC8

    2900

    Forum Posts

    78610

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 1422

    User Lists: 8

    I feel much better about things now.

    Avatar image for muffin_sangria
    Muffin_Sangria

    844

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    #32  Edited By Muffin_Sangria

    @m3th: Even if most people know her origin they at least know that she isn't Kryptonian. Even the people who aren't her fans will feel like this was a cop out.

    Avatar image for muffin_sangria
    Muffin_Sangria

    844

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    @itsdaveyj: I actually liked Electra. I never got why everyone hated that movie so much. Of course I don't know much about the comic book character either.

    Avatar image for m3th
    M3th

    2107

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    @muffin_sangria: Even if it is a cop out, if DC doesn't Have tHe rigHts to be able to use tHe term, Amazon, wHat are tHey suppose to do? Never use WW?

    -ABstract4$$#073-

    Avatar image for tifalockhart
    TifaLockhart

    24744

    Forum Posts

    253

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 4

    Y'know, if the character is as enduring as WW I think they can afford to try. I mean she's not gonna go down in history as a bad movie, ultimately. It took MoS to eliminate the bad taste of Superman Returns. They should try. It's long overdue.

    Avatar image for gc8
    GC8

    2900

    Forum Posts

    78610

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 1422

    User Lists: 8

    #36  Edited By GC8

    Just a couple corrections:

    @m3th: they don't need the rights to 'amazon'; it's in the public domain.

    @tifalockhart: WWII

    Avatar image for m3th
    M3th

    2107

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    @etragedy: if tHey don't need tHe rrigHts to 'Amazon' wHy aren't tHey using tHe term. Plus, tHe opening post toucHes on tHe subject of copyright law.

    -ABstract4$$#073-

    Avatar image for archizoom
    ArchiZoom

    1128

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    @etragedy said:

    @itsdaveyj: I hope you're right.

    Thanks for one of the only well reasoned responses. I think the i09 rumor seems crazy, but I wouldn't be surprised, they have such a history of messing up these characters on film. I do think they've probably got too much at stake to make ditch the Greek origins.

    But I still expect they'll put her in pants. These studios are notoriously timid when it comes to offending people. Just read today Ant-Man isn't going to be Hank Pym because having a 'wife beater' was too controversial. Bleh.

    The wonder Woman being kryptonian thing was just a blogger's personal opinion as to what her origin should be. Bill Ramey of Batman on film to be more precise. Then by word of mouth it became a rumor.

    “Apparently, several outlets picked up on what I wrote in the mailbag below – especially my take on how Amazons might be explained in ‘Batman vs. Superman’ – and claimed that I was reporting it as fact and/or that it was a ‘rumor’ I had heard. They. Are. All. WRONG.

    His brilliant idea was to turn the Amazons into Kryptonians who settled on earth a long time ago and devolved making Wonder Woman a female, degenerate version of Superman.

    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.