@WDW said:

@TAneT62:

@wondergirl246 said:

I'm not going to name names or argue taste, since there apparently exist people who find Sarah Jessica Parker attractive. There's just no accounting for what some people might enjoy.

I will say this: the worst thing about the pilot is not the production value, the costume, or anything cosmetic. It isn't even the writing or acting that bug me the most, and both are really awful even for a hack like David E. Kelley.

What I hated about it was much more fundamental: This character is not Wonder Woman.

She has some similar powers and the same name, but by stripping away core aspects of her heritage and mythology, it amounts to a cashing in on a familiar name. They only get away with it because of the dearth of popular Wonder Woman media.

Try stripping away Superman's alien backstory or Batman's loss of his parents and see how fans react.

People would dismiss out of hand a show about Clark Kent running "Kal-L Inc." Seriously. Try this crappy setup in place of ANY major character's origin and imagine how it would work.

It's not just an awful setup in and of itself, it's particularly bad for Wonder Woman because she already has such a rich and fascinating history, with so much legend and mythos ripe for mining and adapting.

Really awful, this pilot. That it was even given the greenlight shows how lost DC/WB are in terms of how to use the IP.

The last TV version of Wonder Woman in 1980 which ran 3 seasons was also NOT the Wonder Woman that we know in comics today. She also had all the mythology stripped away from her character. Also to be fair. The 2011 WW pilot made no indication that her back-story had been changed.

The Lynda Carter version didn't strip away all of the mythology. It was muted but it retained the original origin and had her make reference to her Amazon culture and millenia-long lifespan multiple times. It felt different from the comic book character at the time (and now) because it was based on the Marston version (no flying, WW isn't as unique among her sisters, no clay origin, etc).

It's true that they could have retained this back-story in the 2011 version, but it struck me that with all of the other liberties taken, it ultimately would have been irrelevant. So she's 4000 years old and the Olympian gods are real? So what? She's still gotta win Steve back and feed her cat every night. It didn't seem like Kelley was interested in exploring her mythological roots, and I wouldn't trust him to write it well if he did.

I agree that Batman and Superman are easier origin stories for the same reason that "Thor" was a much harder setup to get right than "Iron Man" or "Captain America." But my point stands; if they'd said "screw it, lets just make Thor a modern guy running 'Asgard Inc', and he's a street vigilante who strong-arms cops and suspects, while pining over his lost love" - I doubt it would have worked, and more fundamentally, people would have said "this isn't really Thor..."

I agree that you have to take some liberties for different mediums. Nolan's Batman is a textbook example of how to do it right. He didn't change anything integral to the character, but he made several changes - from adding characters to changing the look - that worked for a more realistic film adaptation.

The 2011 WW I think crosses the line between creative license and cashing in. I respect your view but I personally wouldn't have wanted it to be the "bridge" to more adaptations.

@Lvenger said:

Whilst I'm not American and will take your word that law and order shows are pretty popular over there, the fact is that the Wonder Woman pilot mixed two things together horribly. On the one hand you have Wonder Woman's mythological/fantasy background in that she comes from Paradise Island, was made from clay and given life by the Olympian Gods. The pilot does indicate that WW has a mythological background as at the dinner with the Senator, he says that she's not human by our standards. Also her flashback with Steve Trevor indicates that she's an Amazon from Themyscira. That indicates to me that they were going with the original backstory. On the other hand, we have a corporate law and order type of show. Both are all well and good on their own. But when the pilot mixed them together, it had a horrible result. The fact that this corporate CEO who's also a superhero/vigilante who is in fact an Amazon princess from the island of Themyscira would have been ridiculous for the audience to stomach. There can be no bridge between the comic book version and the Lynda Carter version.

Well with all due respect. I don't think your opinion about a show intended for an American audience when your not even an American is really relevant. for example "Lois and Clark" a show about about a newspaper reporter who's also a superhero/vigilante who is in fact an alien from another planet that crash landed on earth. His disguise is a simple pair of glasses. That show lasted 4 seasons. You saw one pilot episode. How can you possibly know all the things they where going to add to the show?

Smallville and the Green Arrow pilot did at least some things right. They kept the essence of each character whilst providing changes that the audience would enjoy. Clark Kent is still an alien raised on a farm, they simply focused more on the Smallville aspect of his backstory. And Green Arrow is still about a marooned billionaire on an island who returns and begins to clean up his city as a vigilante. Wonder Woman does not respect the source material so if her fantasy background can't be correctly interpreted into TV format as you say, then the idea for a WW TV show should never have been conceived.

Again you saw ONE 40min pilot episode and in that pilot and based on the script. Wonder Woman is still and Amazon Princess from an all female island who has to make a living in "mans world" they simply focused more on her interpersonal relationships. How can you tell me they strayed from the source material? Would you rather Wonder Woman work in Mc Donalds? because that's also in her source material.(comics).

then the idea for a WW TV show should never have been conceived.

But it was already in 1978 and it lasted 3 seasons? Your post really makes no sense. You are acting like your personal taste is universal among everyone. You are entitled to your opinion but please stop acting you are the all knowing authority

It had potential, but I think her journey to becoming Wonder Woman would have been more interesting.

@WDW said:

Well with all due respect. I don't think your opinion about a show intended for an American audience when your not even an American is really relevant. for example "Lois and Clark" a show about about a newspaper reporter who's also a superhero/vigilante who is in fact an alien from another planet that crash landed on earth. His disguise is a simple pair of glasses. That show lasted 4 seasons. You saw one pilot episode. How can you possibly know all the things they where going to add to the show?

I am a fan of Lois and Clark despite the fact it strayed massively from the source material. The reason for that is it mixed two genres, the action/adventure theme of Superman with aspects of comedy drama. Those results were good as they lasted for 4 seasons and I enjoyed a whole lot of them. If the two genres can be mixed then that is good but in the case of the Wonder Woman pilot, they didn't. And Lois and Clark at least kept to the basic Superman origin.

@WDW said:

Again you saw ONE 40min pilot episode and in that pilot and based on the script. Wonder Woman is still and Amazon Princess from an all female island who has to make a living in "mans world" they simply focused more on her interpersonal relationships. How can you tell me they strayed from the source material? Would you rather Wonder Woman work in Mc Donalds? because that's also in her source material.(comics).

Yes that's exactly my point. What I didn't like about the show was that Wonder Woman was too human. She's supposed to be an outsider sent as an emissary to Man's World, a world she does not fully understand. Instead she's acting as a corporate CEO to a company selling her merchandise and she understands the mysterious world of business, something that should be alien to her. Now maybe that is part of the source material but IMO it's a poor choice when there's so much more to choose from. And obviously Wonder Woman working in McDonald's would be an even worse pilot than this one. The point I'm making is that the show went in the wrong direction giving it a corporate them that did not suit Wonder Woman's character.

@WDW said:

But it was already in 1978 and it lasted 3 seasons? Your post really makes no sense. You are acting like your personal taste is universal among everyone. You are entitled to your opinion but please stop acting you are the all knowing authority

I should have said in my opinion to finish my last post. Apologies about that. But my view is commonly shared as shown by this thread. If stating my opinion means that I'm acting like an all knowing authority then what has the world come to? And finally whilst you do seem to think the show had potential, it's clear that the investors agreed with my viewpoint that the show didn't have what it takes and cut the funding, ensuring it would never see the light of day. And when it comes down to it, if the network doesn't think the show is good, then it doesn't matter what you or I think as they choose what to air and what to cut.

@wondergirl246 said:

The Lynda Carter version didn't strip away all of the mythology. It was muted but it retained the original origin and had her make reference to her Amazon culture and millenia-long lifespan multiple times. It felt different from the comic book character at the time (and now) because it was based on the Marston version (no flying, WW isn't as unique among her sisters, no clay origin, etc).

That show lasted 3 seasons and began with the origin story. The 2011 pilot began with a "day of the week story" Based on the script the TV show was going to include the island and other amazons ETC. Probably in flashbacks or whatever. I know your just explaining to me but I own all seasons of the Lynda Carter DVDs and I can tell you that the mythology included is nothing the 2011 pilot shut the door on.

It's true that they could have retained this back-story in the 2011 version, but it struck me that with all of the other liberties taken, it ultimately would have been irrelevant. So she's 4000 years old and the Olympian gods are real? So what? She's still gotta win Steve back and feed her cat every night. It didn't seem like Kelley was interested in exploring her mythological roots, and I wouldn't trust him to write it well if he did.

If you watch the old Wonder Woman you certainly do not get a sense of Wonder Woman's age or any Mythology at all. Essentially if you watch the Lynda Carter version Wonder Woman virtually has no personality what so ever she shows up saves people then quickly becomes Diana prince again. I am telling you NO mythology is explored in the old show.

It didn't seem like Kelley was interested in exploring her mythological roots,

Yet as the show progressed it could have easily been included as the pilot did not close the door on any future possibility especially in this day and age where we all can jump on forums and give feedback about TV episodes unlike the 1970's. This show could have easily been steered by public opinion as the show moved on exactly how Smallville was.

I agree that Batman and Superman are easier origin stories for the same reason that "Thor" was a much harder setup to get right than "Iron Man" or "Captain America." But my point stands; if they'd said "screw it, lets just make Thor a modern guy running 'Asgard Inc', and he's a street vigilante who strong-arms cops and suspects, while pining over his lost love" - I doubt it would have worked, and more fundamentally, people would have said "this isn't really Thor..."

One of the biggest issues when debating comic-book adaptions is that comicbook people always think that everyone is familiar with there characters. That is not the case especially with TV audiences.Thor a modern guy running Asgard Inc maybe seem appalling to comic fans but how do you know it would not work for people who never read his comic? Ok sure Thor is a movie star now so the non-comicbook readers can say "this is not Thor". The same is NOT true with Wonder Woman since she has not been on Television 30 years and never had a live action movie ever. Thor has.

So let me ask you this if you are going to do a TV show about Wonder Woman in "mans world" how would you develop the character and keep with all the source material? She can't be Wonder Woman all the time like in the movies so when she is not Wonder Woman where would she live? How would she make money? Who are her friends? What kind of flaws does she have and what makes her special?

can you get all that information from her comic source material? because I can't Do you know how Wonder Woman makes money in in her comic source material? Do you care? because a TV audience will.

I agree that you have to take some liberties for different mediums. Nolan's Batman is a textbook example of how to do it right. He didn't change anything integral to the character, but he made several changes - from adding characters to changing the look - that worked for a more realistic film adaptation.

The 2011 WW I think crosses the line between creative license and cashing in. I respect your view but I personally wouldn't have wanted it to be the "bridge" to more adaptations.

Well Nolan's batman is not a textbook example because that's a movie. A TV show is very different.

@Lvenger:

I am a fan of Lois and Clark despite the fact it strayed massively from the source material. The reason for that is it mixed two genres, the action/adventure theme of Superman with aspects of comedy drama. Those results were good as they lasted for 4 seasons and I enjoyed a whole lot of them. If the two genres can be mixed then that is good but in the case of the Wonder Woman pilot, they didn't. And Lois and Clark at least kept to the basic Superman origin.

So basically your argument is that Kelley did not start with an origin story because you can't really determine what Kelley was going to include and not include from one pilot episode. If I remember correctly Lois and Clark did not start with an Origin Story. Clark Kent just showed up at the daily planet the first episode. If that was the only episode you saw how are you sure his origin is still intact? Same applies to Wonder Woman pilot. All could have been dealt with in another episode ETC. The possibilities where endless as I said before kelley gave us clues to her origin which suggest her history is still intact. You are focusing on the single pilot like its a full season of Wonder Woman.

.

Yes that's exactly my point. What I didn't like about the show was that Wonder Woman was too human. She's supposed to be an outsider sent as an emissary to Man's World, a world she does not fully understand. Instead she's acting as a corporate CEO to a company selling her merchandise and she understands the mysterious world of business, something that should be alien to her. Now maybe that is part of the source material but IMO it's a poor choice when there's so much more to choose from. And obviously Wonder Woman working in McDonald's would be an even worse pilot than this one. The point I'm making is that the show went in the wrong direction giving it a corporate them that did not suit Wonder Woman's character.

Well again you clearly did not watch the pilot closely. Henry Johns is the CEO and runs the company. Diana Theymiscara is just the face of the company. There is NO indication that she can run the business herself and every indication it would go bankrupt if she did. Wonder Woman may not understand man's world completely but she is not stupid. Having a general understanding of value and demand is all anyone would need to understand a sales business. You make it seem like she was an accountant or analyst or something.

So as far as wonder woman having an income in this pilot what would you have her do?

I should have said in my opinion to finish my last post. Apologies about that. But my view is commonly shared as shown by this thread. If stating my opinion means that I'm acting like an all knowing authority then what has the world come to? And finally whilst you do seem to think the show had potential, it's clear that the investors agreed with my viewpoint that the show didn't have what it takes and cut the funding, ensuring it would never see the light of day. And when it comes down to it, if the network doesn't think the show is good, then it doesn't matter what you or I think as they choose what to air and what to cut.

Saying the show was dropped because "it did not have what it takes" is so ambiguous as to be meaningless. Yes the show was dropped but we all know that and that's not what this thread is about. In essence your saying if it was more closely based on the comic then NBC would have picked it up which is certainly not a given as you suggest.

By the way have you seen the CAPE also on NBC? currently canceled? This is the show Wonder Woman probably would have replaced. What show would you rather give a chance?

@WDW said:

So basically your argument is that Kelley did not start with an origin story because you can't really determine what Kelley was going to include and not include from one pilot episode. If I remember correctly Lois and Clark did not start with an Origin Story. Clark Kent just showed up at the daily planet the first episode. If that was the only episode you saw how are you sure his origin is still intact? Same applies to Wonder Woman pilot. All could have been dealt with in another episode ETC. The possibilities where endless as I said before kelley gave us clues to her origin which suggest her history is still intact. You are focusing on the single pilot like its a full season of Wonder Woman.

Fair point here. But if the Wonder Woman pilot had been given the go ahead and Wonder Woman's origin had been explored later on, it would be ridiculous to contrast this corporate business woman who's also a vigilante crimefighter as an emissary from Paradise Island, a mythical island filled with women who have created an idylic society. Those two things do not mix well and would have clashed had this pilot been extended into a WW series.

@WDW said:

Well again you clearly did not watch the pilot closely. Henry Johns is the CEO and runs the company. Diana Theymiscara is just the face of the company. There is NO indication that she can run the business herself and every indication it would go bankrupt if she did. Wonder Woman may not understand man's world completely but she is not stupid. Having a general understanding of value and demand is all anyone would need to understand a sales business. You make it seem like she was an accountant or analyst or something.

So as far as wonder woman having an income in this pilot what would you have her do?

She's at the meeting giving input, she meets with Veronica Cale, the senator and Steve Trevors (who she thought was the Justice Department guy) and those are things I would not expect someone who has no idea of the business world to do. And I'm not an expert at adapting comic books into a television format but I can say that the way the pilot did it is not a television programme I would want aired on television. Wonder Woman is a notably hard charcter to adapt into any genre but there had to be a better way of doing it than what the pilot came up with.

@WDW said:

Saying the show was dropped because "it did not have what it takes" is so ambiguous as to be meaningless. Yes the show was dropped but we all know that and that's not what this thread is about. In essence your saying if it was more closely based on the comic then NBC would have picked it up which is certainly not a given as you suggest.

By the way have you seen the CAPE also on NBC? currently canceled? This is the show Wonder Woman probably would have replaced. What show would you rather give a chance?

Well clearly the points you're putting forward in the pilot's defense are kind of moot seeing as this show isn't going to be developed. And whilst I wouldn't have the pilot be totally based on the comic, I would include far more mythology to get the audience slowly familiar with the true essence of Wonder Woman than the approach Kelley and Reiner took of "a vigilante crime fighter in L.A." who is also "a successful corporate executive and a modern woman, under the alias Diana Prince, trying to balance all of the elements of her extraordinary life." That doesn't sound like Wonder Woman at all to me.

And I have heard of the Cape and seen bits of the pilot. Wonder Woman was better but not by much.

@Lvenger:

Fair point here. But if the Wonder Woman pilot had been given the go ahead and Wonder Woman's origin had been explored later on, it would be ridiculous to contrast this corporate business woman who's also a vigilante crimefighter as an emissary from Paradise Island, a mythical island filled with women who have created an idylic society. Those two things do not mix well and would have clashed had this pilot been extended into a WW series.

Look Lvenger honestly I respect your opinion but seriously your simply chasing your tail on this one. Wonder Woman is NOT a corporate business person she DOES NOT RUN the company In the Pilot her CEO (Chief Executive Officer) does Henry Johns. BIG DIFFERENCE Maybe you don't get it I am not trying patronizing but for your information. EVERY-SUPERHERO can be essentially boiled down to a vigilante crime fighter. It does not matter if they Come from Krypton (SUPERMAN), The Planet Mars (MARTIAN MAN HUNTER), are part of an intergalactic peace keeping force (GREEN LANTERN) or are the king of ATLANTIS (Aquaman).... They are all vigilante crime-fighters according to American LAW

In the DCnU Wonder Womans reasons for leaving there island is still not even determined and she is actually the daughter of Zeus. They don't have an idylic society anymore as you should know. The Pilot does not violate either history as it stands

She's at the meeting giving input, she meets with Veronica Cale, the senator and Steve Trevors (who she thought was the Justice Department guy) and those are things I would not expect someone who has no idea of the business world to do. And I'm not an expert at adapting comic books into a television format but I can say that the way the pilot did it is not a television programme I would want aired on television. Wonder Woman is a notably hard charcter to adapt into any genre but there had to be a better way of doing it than what the pilot came up with.

Lvenger you really DID NOT watch this Pilot did you please watch it again.

Wonder Woman is at the meeting and busy talking with ETTA Candy about Veronica Cale's illegal activities and the reason why the police do not want her interrogating the man she caught in the beginning of the episode. Henry Johns asks Diana about input on the doll. So what? Basketball players do the same thing when someone makes them into a DOLL action figure with there likeness or video game character.

Paris Hilton and Kim Kardashian do the same thing when they approve a new perfume line. That does not mean they know anything about business and it certainly does not mean they are running the business. Same exact situation in this pilot. Wonder Woman is not a corporate employee!

Veronica Cale comes to confront Diana about her accusations.... Veronica Cale DID NOT go to discuss business with Diana.

The senator talked to Diana about her Actions as Wonder Woman... how is that talking about business?

Steve Trevor also Talked to Wonder Woman Diana about her actions as Wonder Woman how does that involve business?

Honestly I feel that you did not even watch the show because these observations of yours are completely wrong.... that's not opinion that's fact

Well clearly the points you're putting forward in the pilot's defense are kind of moot seeing as this show isn't going to be developed.

.Well you replied to my posts knowing it was moot so you must have wanted to get something out of it.

Well clearly the points you're putting forward in the pilot's defense are kind of moot seeing as this show isn't going to be developed. And whilst I wouldn't have the pilot be totally based on the comic, I would include far more mythology to get the audience slowly familiar with the true essence of Wonder Woman than the approach Kelley and Reiner took of "a vigilante crime fighter in L.A." who is also "a successful corporate executive and a modern woman, under the alias Diana Prince, trying to balance all of the elements of her extraordinary life." That doesn't sound like Wonder Woman at all to me.

And I have heard of the Cape and seen bits of the pilot. Wonder Woman was better but not by much.

Anyway....Yeah sure its really easy to tell people what you would do on such a general terms.

I would include far more mythology to get the audience slowly familiar with the true essence of Wonder Woman

Really? and you could get that all down in 40min Pilot episode slowly? and What's the true essence of Wonder Woman? It sounds pretty but what exactly is it? And after all the mythology when she gets into mans world then what? how will she make a living? What will she do?

Will she live on the Justice League Watchtower?

@WDW: Now you are just being that annoying fanboy of something that everyone hates.

@x_29 said:

@WDW: Now you are just being that annoying fanboy of something that everyone hates.

So you hate me because I am posting on a public wonder woman forum? or because I don't agree with someones view? The word fanBoy/Girl is thrown around so much I am unsure of the exact meaning.

@WDW said:

If you watch the old Wonder Woman you certainly do not get a sense of Wonder Woman's age or any Mythology at all. Essentially if you watch the Lynda Carter version Wonder Woman virtually has no personality what so ever she shows up saves people then quickly becomes Diana prince again. I am telling you NO mythology is explored in the old show.

Yeah, I've seen most of the old series too and what I wrote stands. I never said that they "explored" the mythology, but rather that it was muted. She does reference her age and culture a few times but it is fair to say that her Amazon heritage was not a very relevant part of the show. I also wouldn't go so far as to say that she has "no personality what so ever".

@WDW said:

Yet as the show progressed it could have easily been included as the pilot did not close the door on any future possibility especially in this day and age where we all can jump on forums and give feedback about TV episodes unlike the 1970's. This show could have easily been steered by public opinion as the show moved on exactly how Smallville was.

Sure, the show could have done that. But I'm glad Kelley never got the chance. His writing is insufferable.

@WDW said:

One of the biggest issues when debating comic-book adaptions is that comicbook people always think that everyone is familiar with there characters. That is not the case especially with TV audiences.Thor a modern guy running Asgard Inc maybe seem appalling to comic fans but how do you know it would not work for people who never read his comic? Ok sure Thor is a movie star now so the non-comicbook readers can say "this is not Thor". The same is NOT true with Wonder Woman since she has not been on Television 30 years and never had a live action movie ever. Thor has.

So let me ask you this if you are going to do a TV show about Wonder Woman in "mans world" how would you develop the character and keep with all the source material? She can't be Wonder Woman all the time like in the movies so when she is not Wonder Woman where would she live? How would she make money? Who are her friends? What kind of flaws does she have and what makes her special?

can you get all that information from her comic source material? because I can't Do you know how Wonder Woman makes money in in her comic source material? Do you care? because a TV audience will.

I think Thor is sufficiently iconic that, even prior to the film, a TV adaptation with him as a corporate executive would not have had a chance. That's speculation of course, but the broader point I was making in my two posts was about what defines a character, not public understanding or perception. I address this more below. I like the questions in the second two paragraphs.

Firstly, you needn't rely on the source material to fill in the blanks and I never meant to imply that that would be necessary or even ideal. Still, if you start from there, Wonder Woman has had a few alter egos. Usually she works for the government in some way as a military secretary or spy. She has Steve and Etta as companions in her personal life, and her flaws tend to revolve around her not being able to relate to humans in "Man's World" i.e., she's arrogant or something. All of this is totally workable for a TV show and far better than what Kelley was going for IMHO.

But if you're asking me personally how I'd do a TV show, I would do away with the dual identity thing entirely. It's too common of a trope, I feel, and the typical "I want to understand humanity!" motivation is cheesy. I liked how the Justice League cartoon didn't bother with a disguise, and she was just an ambassador for her people. I would give her a residence in "Man's World" but make her spend a good amount of time with her people, and explore the history of the Amazons and the Olympian gods. I wouldn't even bother with a love interest and I'd go for more of a dark fantasy take (somewhat like the current comic run but not as all over the place and with the full suite of powers). If you'd like more details just ask. I have more detailed writeups and adaptation ideas for a bunch of characters : )

@WDW said:

Well Nolan's batman is not a textbook example because that's a movie. A TV show is very different.

I was speaking in broad terms and making a general point about adaptations. The writer has to respect that they are borrowing some other creator's success, essentially piggybacking on an existing following and concept. As such, outside of Elseworlds stories, a good adaptation shows an understanding of the line between interpreting and gutting a character. Nolan's Batman suggests a good understanding of the character and his history, while at the same time still functions as a quintessentially "Nolan" suspense film. Kelley's WW does not suggest an understanding of the character at all. Rather it suggests that Kelley felt like doing another procedural, but this time with more action and some campy humor, and he thought that slapping the name and cosmetics of "Wonder Woman" on it would get some attention. To use exaggeration, if I wanted to make a TV show about sassy high school French teacher and then call it "Wonder Woman", people would rightly dismiss it; "Interpretation shminterpretation! That's NOT the character!" they'd say. Kelley gets away with it because of his reputation, the fact that he retains just enough of the cosmetics, and DC/WB's desperation for a successful Wonder Woman something.

I get your point about this being only a 40 minute first effort, and that the show could have gotten better or tried to explore WW"s roots more. Nevertheless, a pilot is meant to set the tone - to show what is essential about show before further development. I was not encouraged about the show's future from even one scene.

@x_29 said:

@WDW: Now you are just being that annoying fanboy of something that everyone hates.

She is not being a fanboy "/ She's merely saying what she thinks, if you have a problem than drop it ae.

@wondergirl246:

Yeah, I've seen most of the old series too and what I wrote stands. I never said that they "explored" the mythology, but rather that it was muted. She does reference her age and culture a few times but it is fair to say that her Amazon heritage was not a very relevant part of the show. I also wouldn't go so far as to say that she has "no personality what so ever.

ok I also would like to add the Kelley show did make reference to Wonder Woman having no father

I think Thor is sufficiently iconic that, even prior to the film, a TV adaptation with him as a corporate executive would not have had a chance. That's speculation of course, but the broader point I was making in my two posts was about what defines a character, not public understanding or perception. I address this more below. I like the questions in the second two paragraphs.

Well Thor is a VERY bad example because his alter ego was established as a medical Doctor in his comics. In a TV show based on the source material he would be a medical doctor and the mighty Thor. Wonder Woman has no established alter ego she is a public figure for the most part which is cool. To me it totally makes sense that a public superhero especially wonder woman would have people scrambling to have her endorse there brands in a TV show adaption. Its almost impossible to ignore that scenario no matter how much mythology you include.

Also Wonder Woman Diana was NOT a corporate executive in the sense that you seem to be using it. Henry Johns was the CEO running the company she was just the face of the company. Same concept when Paris Hilton and Kim Kardashian label there perfume or develop clothing lines. Same thing when sports figures allow there likeness to be used in Dolls and video games. None of thous people are considered to be running there company. They just provide input on the final products. Wonder Woman DID not "run" any part of her company.

If you watched the show The part where Etta was briefing Wonder Woman about her daily schedule She mentions a Photo shot, A press conference addressing her actions as Wonder Woman. A doll marketing meeting and meeting with a designer to redesign the Wonder Woman outfit. All that pretty much can be supported by her activities in her comics.

Firstly, you needn't rely on the source material to fill in the blanks and I never meant to imply that that would be necessary or even ideal. Still, if you start from there, Wonder Woman has had a few alter egos. Usually she works for the government in some way as a military secretary or spy.

Well thats wrong regarding Post Crisis Wonder Woman she does not work as a spy or government agent from 1986 to 2007 in 2007 batman got her a job at the Department of "meta human affairs" which obviously would not work since no META's exist. the one thing that is consistent throught out her post crisis history is that Wonder Woman is a public figure with a publicist and agent who sign deals to sell Wonder Woman dolls, comics movies and other Wonder Woman trademark stuff. Thats how she makes money and that comes directly from source material.

She has Steve and Etta as companions in her personal life and her flaws tend to revolve around her not being able to relate to humans in "Man's World" i.e., she's arrogant or something. All of this is totally workable for a TV show and far better than what Kelley was going for IMHO.

Well of all the flaws I think wonder woman has she is certainly not "arrogant or something"

But if you're asking me personally how I'd do a TV show, I would do away with the dual identity thing entirely. It's too common of a trope, I feel, and the typical "I want to understand humanity!" motivation is cheesy. I liked how the Justice League cartoon didn't bother with a disguise, and she was just an ambassador for her people. I would give her a residence in "Man's World" but make her spend a good amount of time with her people, and explore the history of the Amazons and the Olympian gods. I wouldn't even bother with a love interest and I'd go for more of a dark fantasy take (somewhat like the current comic run but not as all over the place and with the full suite of powers). If you'd like more details just ask. I have more detailed writeups and adaptation ideas for a bunch of characters : )

Well that sounds neat but that would not work for a prime time audience for NBC or other major network that sounds like a show more suited for the SCI-FI channel and I doubt they could afford Wonder Woman. In the justice league animated series she did not need much character development since its a cartoon. Wonder Woman does not spend her career trying to understand humanity however its something she deals with when she first arrives. its not a central theme I agree with you there.

was speaking in broad terms and making a general point about adaptations. The writer has to respect that they are borrowing some other creator's success, essentially piggybacking on an existing following and concept. As such, outside of Elseworlds stories, a good adaptation shows an understanding of the line between interpreting and gutting a character. Nolan's Batman suggests a good understanding of the character and his history, while at the same time still functions as a quintessentially "Nolan" suspense film. Kelley's WW does not suggest an understanding of the character at all. Rather it suggests that Kelley felt like doing another procedural, but this time with more action and some campy humor, and he thought that slapping the name and cosmetics of "Wonder Woman" on it would get some attention. To use exaggeration, if I wanted to make a TV show about sassy high school French teacher and then call it "Wonder Woman", people would rightly dismiss it; "Interpretation shminterpretation! That's NOT the character!" they'd say. Kelley gets away with it because of his reputation, the fact that he retains just enough of the cosmetics, and DC/WB's desperation for a successful Wonder Woman something.

Well first you are comparing a TV show to a MOVIE that's like comparing apples and oranges. Most people don't realize that when doing a TV show for a major network you are RESTRICTED. You are not free to be creative in anyway you want. Any TV show has to fit in with the TONE(for lack of a better word) of the other TV shows the network has running. Kelley tried to adapt his Wonder Woman based on that restriction. Same thing all TV writers are required to do on all networks (and one of the reasons TV show switch nights etc when new shows are picked up or drop off). That is why I like the TV adaption of Wonder Woman. It was fine when you take into account the restrictions it had to work with. People don't understand this important distinction and assume a TV show on NBC, ABC, FOX, CBS can be about anything and everything that POPS into the mind of a script writer. NO that is not the case. TV is RESTRICTIVE to writers. They must work within the limits of the TV Network as far as Tone, Plot and Theme. I can't stress this enough. So fanciful ideas about Wonder Womans Mythos complete with Greek gods ETC would have an EXTREMELY difficult time being picked up much less considered for a prime time TV series on NBC given there current lineup Even if the pilot script is stellar.

Second ,had this been a MOVIE Wonder Woman we would not be having this conversation. Kelley's Wonder Woman does not make a good movie. A movie is generally FREE to be as creative as it wants. A script is written and approved before any production. Its pretty much the opposite with TV shows as a pilot can be rejected after its made. Actors sometimes don't act to the best of there abilities for this reason until the TV show is officially picked up. That is why acting in Pilot episodes can sometimes seem stiff.

Third Warner Bros and DC approached Kelley to write the script. Kelley did not go to them. The reason they wanted Kelley to do it was because he was one of the best in the TV industry and they knew he would be able to ADAPT Wonder Woman GIVEN THE NETWORKS RESTRICTION to fit in with the one of major networks who typically like LAW and CRIME based shows. Go on any major network NBC, ABC, CBS and look at there line of of shows and count how many law and crime shows there are. How could a comic book Wonder Woman or your version of Wonder Woman fit in? The networks would NEVER allow it if its full of mythology Greek GODs ETC even if the script was GREAT. They don't care. They are only interested in giving the TV audience what has always worked in the past. The only other alternative is to make Wonder Woman a reality show.

The only other network which could possibly allow more of a comic-book mythological based Wonder Woman would be the CW but they can not AFFORD to pay the wonder woman license fee WB imposes. Same reason why Small-ville was restricted. and why Batman and Wonder Woman did not show up on the show but just about every other Justice league member did.

I get your point about this being only a 40 minute first effort, and that the show could have gotten better or tried to explore WW"s roots more. Nevertheless, a pilot is meant to set the tone - to show what is essential about show before further development. I was not encouraged about the show's future from even one scene.

As I said before the tone and just about everything else needs to fit in with the networks other shows. NBC has LAW and Order. that show has been running for over 20 years! and has multiple spin offs... Same with CSI. Prime time TV loves its Law shows. Kelley specializes in these types of shows and adapted Wonder Woman accordingly. Based on all this I thought it was good considering the restriction. Nolan would have done NO BETTER given the restrictions the major networks have.

So all that being said. I have NO major problem with a Wonder Woman TV show Kelley did. I actually enjoyed it and wanted more..... However a movie version would obviously be quite different.

Its Ok not to like the show. I am not trying to convince anyone to like it but the reasons given really can't be helped. None of the reviews take into consideration That this show is a TV adaption of Wonder Woman and they clearly don't understand the significance in that regard.

I think we're getting into subjective I-like-this-you-like-that territory, so I'll just address a couple of things:

Also Wonder Woman Diana was NOT a corporate executive in the show. Not sure why people keep saying that. Henry Johns was the CEO running the company she was just the face of the company.

Eh. This is sort of hair-splitting. People keep saying that because that is the distinct impression they get. She goes to board meetings and gives press conferences. So another guy is the CEO. She's still a corporate shill.

Well thats wrong regarding Post Crisis Wonder Woman she does not work as a spy or government agent from 1986 to 2007...Well of all the flaws I think wonder woman has she is certainly not "arrogant or something"

I thought my writing implied a good deal of qualification. Note the use of the term "usually". I've read Perez's Wonder Woman and I know that WW is not always a military worker, but I was giving a "for instance" sort of example.

Same thing with her flaws. Different writers focus on different things. In Alex Ross' Spirit of Truth and Kingdom Come, for example, her flaw is a kind of arrogance - more specifically her disconnect from humanity. Again, I was being broad and just giving an example.

Well first you are comparing a TV show to a MOVIE that's like comparing apples and oranges.

I'm really not. I'm just explaining my views on adaptations. I get that network shows have more restrictions; it doesn't change how I feel about adaptations. If you have to gut a character to fit the police procedural model, you shouldn't bother.

You seem to want to justify the pilot by suggesting that it's the best that could have been done - that no network would have agreed to anything better. That's not really any consolation to me or most fans I suspect.

I don't think live-action network drama is a good medium for Wonder Woman in general, however there's nothing to support the idea that no network would have dared to air something better. Unconventional shows slip through the cracks all the time.

That DC/WB approached Kelley bolsters my point that they really are lost when it comes to the character.

And I'm skeptical that the "restrictions" you refer to were as ironclad as you suggest, and there's no way to know what Nolan or any other writer could have done.

Again, if you dug it, that's fine, but you can't convince me that this was the best that could be done given the medium and its "restrictions", because it's unprovable.

I think the entire concept was ill-conceived from its inception.

@TAneT62: Mind yo business bub.

@x_29: Nah, I created this thread so p!ss of mate :) adios

@wondergirl246:

I don't think live-action network drama is a good medium for Wonder Woman in general, however there's nothing to support the idea that no network would have dared to air something better. Unconventional shows slip through the cracks all the time.

This statement is essentially what our debate boils down too.

I enjoyed the TV adaption knowing the comics and a movie would not follow the same direction and that Warner Bros would feel more comfortable with doing a Wonder Woman movie if they see a TV audience for the character. If a TV adaption fails Wonder Woman simply goes back to the same situation we have with her now. No live action media. Really nothing to lose here. Smallville and Lois and Clark set the standard of this setup.

I sense that you would rather have NO attempt at a TV adaption if you feel it would need to take too many liberties with the source material to satisfy a potential audience.

No big deal. We just disagree

Just to add if your interested take a look at this article about new fall shows. It does not prove anything but it gives you a taste of the kind of shows the TV networks are looking for and approve. Notice how similar the shows are and category groupings. That's not a coincidence.

Networks actively encourage and discourage scripts and stories based on the trend. Show that do not fit the categories.... like a comic book adaption of wonder woman, would be difficult to get looked at much less approved by a major network so script writers would really have no motivation to create one. Kelley wrote Wonder Woman on the basis that it needs to fit/compete other offerings on the major networks.

@WDW said

So you hate me because I am posting on a public wonder woman forum? or because I don't agree with someones view?

No. Did i even say that?? Well then.

@TAneT62: Nah, it is a public thread:)

@x_29 said:

@WDW said

So you hate me because I am posting on a public wonder woman forum? or because I don't agree with someones view?

No. Did i even say that?? Well then.

@x_29 said:

@WDW: Now you are just being that annoying fanboy of something that everyone hates.

Oh I get it. Because you think everyone hates it I must hate it too so I don't annoy people? Is that what you mean then? or I should not talk about it because people hate it and it annoys them when I don't conform to their views?

@WDW: I'm not commenting to debate/argue with you but I looked at that article of the shows you posted and if those are the type of shows NBC are looking to show then they should not have picked Wonder Woman as it really didn't fit the style of shows NBC are looking to air.

@Lvenger said:

@WDW: I'm not commenting to debate/argue with you but I looked at that article of the shows you posted and if those are the type of shows NBC are looking to show then they should not have picked Wonder Woman as it really didn't fit the style of shows NBC are looking to air.

Well Yes exactly my point.... To be fair Kelley wrote the script last year and at that time law crime shows where in vogue but probably on there way out. (the trend can change from one season to the next) This year the trend has changed. Had Kelley's show been accepted and popular then his show could have bucked the trend in favor of that type of a show Just like LOST, 24 and Alias did a few years back for there genre. Now all networks are looking at scripts with similar themes as lost, 24 ETC according to the article (Honestly its all about the money not so much creativity with TV)

Not saying Kelley's show was going to be as good as "lost" just saying there is a reason why he had to take liberties. I understood why it was done that way and I enjoyed the show for what is was and what it was trying to do. NBC ordered the pilot which says a lot because hundreds of other potential fall shows do not even get ORDERED to make a pilot. Last year Kelleys wonder woman was one of the most talked about new TV shows. They should have at-least been allowed to finish a 2 hour TV movie or the 40min pilot to replace the CAPE. If at that point the non-comic-book world said it sucked then I would really not be here talking about it.

This year Law based shows seem to be on there way out finally . Kelleys Wonder Woman script is not relevant anymore

As I said before only the CW would do a Wonder Woman type comic-book adaption but they can not afford the license fee.

@x_29: Well stop whining ok, Children on threads really get on my nerves :)

@WDW:

I think you've identified the essential disconnect. Arguing taste is a fool's errand. While I think a better show could have been done, I just think it's a bad medium for WW. Sometimes you can be surprised by how well a good writer can make a seemingly difficult concept work in an unusual medium. A Batman musical sounds like a crazy idea, but...

Outside of comics, I think the absolute best medium for WW would be a mature animated series like the Batman from the early 90's but with more rich animation (Studio Ghibli if I had my druthers). A live action film would also be cool but I have a sinking feeling WB is going to muck it up.

Thanks for a good discussion though. Interesting viewpoint.

@TAneT62 said:

I personally think Kelley’s Wonder Woman if picked up could have given Wonder Woman a SOLID personality for the first time in LIVE ACTION history while keeping a lot of comic book functionality. Even if it was not perfect the fans could have really influenced and steered the show in a better direction.

Uh, lets hope NOT!

Fans should not be dictating how a WW production goes!

Becuz I happen to know that WW fans are the WORSE casting directors, the WORSE creators, the WORSE anything involving WW.

Leave all those decisions to the WW aficionados & WW students & WW writers.

WW is a COMPLEX character....she is 3-dimensional...unlike other superheroes who werent created so specifically, but rather were created simply & by semi-educated young writers. WW is the only one created by a sophisticated psychologist.

Here is my take on the pilot:

1. This is not Wonder Woman. This is not even a good interpretation of Wonder Woman. WW here is a self-absorbed, unlikeable, no respect for the law, corporate crime vigilante.The whole truth, justice and the american way line in the pilot feels like a cheap ploy to fool us into believing that this was WW. There is no reference to the amazons, nor greek mythology, you know the most important backgrounds to Wonder Woman.

2. The plot and overall tone feels like a rip-off from the abysmal 2004 catwoman movie.

3.The action scenes, while i understand were not quite finished, looked terrible and probably would still look terrible or mediocre at best if finished.

4. When i think of wonder woman, Nancy Grace, Dr Phil and Facebook do not come to mind. Its those little things that make this pilot feel like it is struggling to modernize wonder woman.

5. To everyone who keeps saying, "I am sure it would have gotten better if the series went on", you are wrong. To everyone who says " Its unfair to judge an unfinished pilot as if it were a finalized product" , in this case it is fair seeing as how we will never see the finished version of this nor was it ever finished, and by that standpoint, this unfortunately is the finalized product whether we like it or not.

6. The moral of the pilot is basically, " Its okay to break the laws and torture people because you are the popular good guy superhero and people love you."

I saw it and I don't see why people think its bad. This is a take on Wonder Woman and it felt that way to me. To bad we could not have seen the full tv movie so much of the issues surrounding Wonder Woman's actions could be resolved.

@FanteFun said:

I saw it and I don't see why people think its bad. This is a take on Wonder Woman and it felt that way to me. To bad we could not have seen the full tv movie so much of the issues surrounding Wonder Woman's actions could be resolved.

The problem is that a lot of people see it as a terrible take on WW, including me.

I am amazed how people were supporting this bloody mess. Yes there is some parts I liked about it I thought Adrienne Palickli looked the part and might have played the part if given time and the fight sequences looked half-decent. The writing and complete and utter poor characterization is what killed the project absolutely. You know you are in deep s**** when someone compare her positively to Abu Ghraib; you know what, that can't be accidental. David Kelly decided to play her up as dark, edgy and grim as possible because he was aiming to the lowest common denominator, and intentionally turned her into alarmingly violent, barely restrained psychopathic maniac.

@WDW said:

@x_29 said:

@WDW said

So you hate me because I am posting on a public wonder woman forum? or because I don't agree with someones view?

No. Did i even say that?? Well then.

@x_29 said:

@WDW: Now you are just being that annoying fanboy of something that everyone hates.

Oh I get it. Because you think everyone hates it I must hate it too so I don't annoy people? Is that what you mean then? or I should not talk about it because people hate it and it annoys them when I don't conform to their views?

I have given reasons why I greatly dislike the pilot. Stop pretending that the only reason someone does not like this pilot is because they did not watch it.