Guest Blogger: Mike Discusses 10 Fundamental Flaws of Wonder Woman

Re-post in preparation for a (mostly) positive review of the latest Wonder Woman movie (2017).

Not too long ago, Kate asked me to recommend some good Wonder Woman stories. As an avid comics fan, I can usually recommend dozens of different comics/graphic novels for either the hard core fan or the interested newcomer. Despite this, Kate caught me at a loss. Perhaps the most surprising thing about my inability to fulfill her request was that I was unaware of it! I believe my answer was "Oh, sure! Umm--" Right about then I realized I was in trouble.

I received a similar response from many comics fan friends. Not only were we unable to think of a defining WW run, none of us even realized it until we were asked. As we looked into the matter further, we found there is no defining WW story. For the most part, she just is, much like background noise in a phone call.

I believe, as Kate has suggested, that WW’s success really stems from the Lynda Carter television show. With a toned-down origin and clever acting, the character resonated with women of the time, enduring to this day. The resemblance of this character to the comics portrayal, however, is minimal. As she exists in the comics, WW has continually failed to be a character that fans can relate to and care about, despite having some very strong writers through the years.

Following are 10 reasons Wonder Woman in the comics has often proved inaccessible to a larger audience. Understand that these are the views of a thirty-something married man who has read comics most of his life and not a sexist teenager flipping through comics for skin and tight costumes.

Speaking of costumes . . .

Lynda Carter and Gal Gadot can pull

off the original costume. Many modern

graphic novels cover her up more.

1. Wonder Woman's costume is impractical.

I know many women protest it because they feel it’s sexist. Many men support it because it’s sexy. I, however, find it completely impractical. First, it’s a glorified swimsuit. While WW is super-powered, her costume should still be designed to provide some sort of protection and cover. If she’s going to bother with boots, surely she feels SOME leg covering is needed? The breastplate itself is metal. If a hero is going to bother with armor, surely she would wear it in more than one place?

Also, the color scheme makes no sense. While this has been explained a thousand different ways, the costume was originally designed to sell comics to patriotic comics fans. But story-wise, no matter HOW you explain it, there is no reason an Amazon warrior from Greek mythology would be wearing the stars and stripes. In addition, WW’s look is not even consistent with what the other Amazons wear in the comics. All of WW’s friends wear armor and Greek-inspired dress. Surely she would too?

2. Wonder Woman lacks an understandable motive.

Wonder Women is a Greek warrior molded from clay, given life by the gods of Greek myth, and raised on an island inhabited by nothing but women. While she has been known to have a private life in "the world of man," she divides most of her time between Themyscira and whatever Justice League headquarters are being used at the time. In other words, WW is completely cut off from mortal men and women and has no relationship or understanding of them. Why would she defend them or risk exposure of her people and the existence of the Greek gods when they have gone to such lengths to be hidden for so long? Especially for a race of beings that WW has every reason to believe is beneath her?

[Original Note from Kate: I think a series devoted to just this problem would be very interesting! Wonder Woman has to decide between isolationism/secrecy and humanity/exposure, between demi-god aristocracy and of-the-people mediocrity/meritocracy. However, it could end with her turning her back on her origins...

New Note from Kate: See upcoming preview.]

3. Wonder Woman lacks connection with humanity.

Likewise, with WW so cut off from humanity and all the cares and concerns of a mortal life, how are everyday fans expected to relate and connect to her? To be fair, some efforts have been made to give WW a secret identity and to involve her in the mortal world, but all these efforts reek of the "new girl in town" mentality and fail to really establish a connection between WW and humanity.

Lyle Waggoner: The most boring superhero's special-someone

in the history of superheroes' special-someones.

Wonder Women has a perfect physique, no need to work or pay the bills, and hangs out with arguably the most perfect and noble men on the planet. The closest thing to children she has is a sidekick (Wonder Girl) who operates almost completely independent of WW. As a reader, there is no "hook," nothing to make me care about the character or relate to her.

[Note from Kate: I argue that one reason Lois & Clark works is that the protagonist's human persona, Clark, is more real and important to him than his superhero persona. Diana Prince as Steve Trevor's lackey is simply a superhero in disguise.]

4. Wonder Woman lacks a good rival.

Wonder Women’s rogues gallery consists of Greek Gods and monsters, magic-powered villains, and totemic-powered individuals (like the Cheetah) who usually have no real reason to be robbing banks, meddling in politics, or really even trying to destroy the world. In fact, many of them share the same distance from humanity that WW herself has. Not only are none of them truly compelling, none of them provide a convincing or emotionally-fueled rivalry with WW.

5. Wonder Woman's combination of powers makes no sense.

Wonder Woman has super-strength, the enhanced senses of animals, nearly invulnerable skin, the ability to fly, and the Aphrodite-given gift of beauty (really). She also has a tiara that can be used as a boomerang-like throwing weapon, indestructible bracelets, and the lasso of truth.

I don’t even know where to start! WW being close to invulnerable would explain the skimpy costume…but if she doesn’t need armor, why does she need the bracelets? The lasso would seem to indicate that WW needs some trick to capture villains, yet she can’t leave them tied up with the lasso (it is gold, after all), and since she’s already beat them with her super strength before tying them up, why would she need a truth spell on men who already know she can kick their ass? I’m at a loss.

Not to mention, the tiara hardly seems like an accessory of someone trying to embody female empowerment.

[Note from Kate: There is a brand of feminism which touts girl-power: pinkness, Barbie, and make-up. However, WW doesn't really belong to this school of thought. Her rather odd creator was somewhat more fascinated with WW's dominatrix skills rather than her Barbie-like attributes. Still, making her a proponent of this brand of feminism would be a possible solution! If it was allowed, that is . . . see Mike's notes under 7 & 8 below.]

6. Wonder Woman’s role in the superhero community is redundant.

Black Widow: Successful Superheroine

She’s not as strong as Superman, Super Girl, or Power Girl, and while she can be a brilliant tactician, Batman still has her beat. Although she does have a connection to magic through the Greek Gods, this is easily rivaled by Captain Marvel (SHAZAM!) or Zatana. Even as the holder of the lasso of truth, questioning prisoners for information is far easier if you just have Martian Manhunter read the villain’s mind. Essentially WW is on the team because she’s been around for a LONG time. Even as the token female on the team, there are dozens of female characters better developed, more powerful, and easier to relate to for fans than WW.

7. Wonder Women is kept from the possibility of a romance.

Most graphic novels that don't pair Wonder Woman with

Steve Trevor pair her with the only man who can actually

literally handle a goddess: Superman.

Writing romantic relationships for Wonder Woman is so fraught with complications, the relationships often end up either jokes or controversy. I get annoyed by the idea that a strong female must either be gay or single. Yet, I also don’t believe that a woman MUST be in a relationship to define herself. However, Wonder Woman's untouchability (as both a hero and an icon) has so politically charged her love life, there is no possible relationship that would not end with fans marching on DC Comics’ headquarters. Consequently, WW is often without a romantic interest, robbing her of yet another thing that would provide depth and humanity to the character.

8. Wonder Woman isn't allowed to change.

tremary.deviantart.com

While DC Comics and most writers understand that Wonder Woman is flawed, the fans fight any suggestion of change. Changes need to be made, but die-hard fans become defensive at the slightest alteration and often lash out so strongly that any long term changes to the character are usually reversed within a year or less. In the last five years, Wonder Woman has been blind, worn a cape and a sword, become a secret agent in her free time, murdered a super-villain on live television, and lost her powers and role of Wonder Woman. Yet all of these plot points were soon reversed, bringing WW back to her traditional status quo.

9. Wonder Woman can never escape being Wonder Woman.

The idea of Wonder Woman proving herself to be just as good as men continually affects the quality of her books. The extent to which this issue is explored varies with the writer. However, if a writer chooses to tone down the issue, he or she draws attention to the fact, often with a line like "Oh, I don’t have to prove I’m as good as you guys. I’m worried about doing my job!" which is still a very verbal political statement about the argument! There’s no way to escape it; it’s tied to the character.

10. Ultimately, Wonder Woman's is a mass of contradictions.

She is a well-endowed, beautiful princess who runs around in a swimsuit (that barely fits her), yet the character [or some of her fans] resents the derogatory idea of being viewed as a sex symbol. She is an Amazonian Warrior that actively fights crime, sometimes with a sword, even going so far as to kill, yet she is on a mission of peace to humanity (a humanity that she has little to nothing to do with). She is a model of female empowerment in an industry where the majority of the customer base is men. She was sent to protect and care for man, yet she does not trust mankind and has little to no interaction with the everyday person. She is presented as an American Icon, wearing the red, white, and blue, yet she was raised in a religious and political culture bearing no resemblance to the American system or its religious roots as "one nation under God." Ultimately, Wonder Woman has no consistent or relevant reason for existing, no mission statement that guides the character.

While any of these reasons alone would signal trouble for a character, combined they form a picture of an outdated and poorly constructed character that is so far removed from its readers that no real bond of affection can be formed. There is, however, some good news.

Hope for Wonder Woman

In recent months, the Wonder Woman franchise has been handed to J. Michael Straczynski, the writer of Babylon 5 and the mind behind the recent comeback of Thor as well as a hugely successful Spiderman run that ran for several years. Whenever Starczynski is handed a project, his trademark is moving the character into the present, using classic and new elements to create something accessible to everyone. His Thor run is a perfect example of how well he can pull this off.

With Wonder Woman, he had A LOT of work to do. And while the public is still reeling from many of the changes, which are drastic, I can tell you the changes have addressed nearly every concern listed above. In the New Wonder Women series, time has been altered and Paradise Island has been destroyed. Diana (Wonder Woman) has been raised by refugees of the Amazon culture in the underbelly of New York. WW has become a street-wise warrior, searching to fulfill her destiny to save her people and defeat the evil that has changed her world.

My hope is that these changes will be long lasting, avoiding the normal cycle of changing things up and returning back to status quo. Wonder Woman needed some serious retooling, and it seems that it has finally happened. Here’s hoping it lasts.

Guest Blogger: Mike Discusses Laying the Bait--The Disconnect Between Movies and Trailers

A couple years ago, I caught wind of an announcement of what I suspected was a very bad idea: Fox had decided to remake--or in modern terms, “reboot”--the Spider-man franchise. While the first two movies had been pretty successful and pretty well received by comic fans such as myself (fans, I should point out, just entering the Geek Golden Age), the third movie was something of a disaster. While it made money, the movie was panned critically (especially by fans, who took the movie, as a whole, as a personal insult), threatening to end the franchise.

Sensing there was still money buried in the franchise, Fox followed the lead of two recent superhero franchises that had started from scratch: Batman Begins and The Incredible Hulk. Hoping to appeal to the sore and angry fans (who get far more service than they probably deserve), the studio decided to rename the franchise, going with the traditional adjective-toting title of the comics.

And thus, The Amazing Spider-man was made and has been widely advertised for nearly a year with footage, clips, TV spots, and trailers. While many fans feared a rehash of the story seen in the Raimi movies, the new director, writers, and actors of the reboot all promised a take on Peter Parker’s origin story that explored the disappearance and death of his parents.

The second trailer from the film sells the new premise with vigor. The two minute preview features several clips from the film that not only emphasize Peter’s search for answers regarding his parents but the villain’s ability to grant these answers. Featuring such phrases as “If you want the truth about your parents, Peter, come and get it,” and “Do you think this was an accident, Peter?” the trailer aims to reduce nearly every comic geek who sees it into a driveling, drooling pile of excitement.

That the trailer nearly succeeds is saying a lot, especially considering the general pessimism that most fans felt towards the reboot (and, yes, I was among them). No comic fan can resist the promise of revealed secrets and hidden histories. The trailers promised this and more.

(Beware: mild spoilers ahead!)
 
The only trouble is, when the film was released, those of us who were successfully tempted into seeing the film for these reasons came away completely empty-handed.

Despite my fears and pessimism, I did see the film. And while the purpose of this writing is NOT to present a review, I will say that I found it satisfying on some levels, though it never reached the level of the originals (even considering how dated they feel to me these days) though it does rehash earlier ideas.

The biggest disappointment of the movie, however, is not the quality or even the inevitable revisiting of many plot points from the original films. The main disappointment is the film’s failure to explore the mystery promised in the previews. In fact, many of the scenes and lines featured in the trailer, all of which addressed the mystery directly, are missing from the theatrical release altogether.

While this is certainly disappointing, the sad reality is that modern previews and trailers do this ALL THE TIME. While there have been some famous missing scenes in the past (Twister has long been mocked for a scene of a flying tire hitting a windshield that was seen in the trailer but not the film), the last several years have seen an increase of these incidents.

Even Avengers, the only summer release I’ve seen this year that wasn’t a disappointment, featured a couple trailer moments that were either cut from the film or replaced by a different take (the “billionaire playboy philanthropist” line being the most notable replaced scene).

While many will argue that this is par for the course for Hollywood, I feel it’s a genuine problem.

I am a movie news junkie. I have several websites that I visit several times a day, eagerly scoping for news on upcoming films, new scenes, and trailers. And Hollywood, in its goal to make money, desperately tries to appease me. The fear, however, is that while we fans love these tastes, no one will want to watch the final product (which we've mostly seen through bits and pieces by the time it comes out). As a result, studios are being put in a difficult position by their customers. We movie fans may partly have ourselves to blame when studios oversell a film.

Partly to blame. Studios aren't just overselling; they are making false promises to their audience, and we as consumers shouldn’t just accept that. A couple years ago, the film Drive was sued by consumers, claiming false advertising, as the trailers of the film made what was a slow, violent drama seem like an action-oriented Fast and the Furious rip-off.

While a lawsuit may seem a bit melodramatic, this needs to happen more often. A piece of art (which, despite some strong arguments to the contrary, I still believe film to be) should be sold on its own merits, not for what it pretends to be. If a studio suspects that a film is not what an audience wants, it will advertise the film as the desired product rather than change the film itself. I’m all for artistic integrity; money or not, studios should deliver the product they promised!

The sad truth is that things probably won’t change. The “bait and switch” is an age old concept of sales and trade and will be a part of humanity for a long time to come. But when untruth is prevalent, it’s hard to take pleasure in much of anything, especially those things we SHOULD enjoy, like a trip to the movies. I’m not giving up yet, but if The Dark Knight Rises turns out to be a romantic comedy, my next stop will be the library.

Mike can be reached at his Facebook page and at the Mike-Kate Video Club.

Great Explosions

Out of commiseration for Mike's feelings of deprivation, I have compiled a small list of great explosions, some from television shows and some from movies:

Television:

• CSI: When the lab blows up ("Play With Fire") and when the garage blows up on CSI ("Down the Drain") because of the editing and unexpected nature of both events.  
• The high school blowing up in Buffy because it is so gosh-darn thematically perfect.
• The rocket launcher sequence in Buffy ("Innocence") because it is so gosh-darn dramatic. (You go, girl!)
• The opening sequence in Numb3rs' "Burn Rate" for the editing and music ("Hard to Concentrate" by the Red Hot Chili Peppers). This episode also has a good non-explosion scene when the Bomb Squad uses a remote control robot to retrieve and "blow up" a bomb. 
• The season finale of Season 1 Leverage (Part 1) right after Alec says, "Sterling, you're in my house. Get out of my house."
• The exploding gas station (I had to have one!) in X-Files' "Dreamland" and "Dreamland II." A Season 6 episode combo, "Dreamland" combines good story with a strong Mulder-Scully relationship without losing X-Files' classic dreamy feel (plus Michael McKean is fantastic).  The exploding/non-exploding gas station is an important clue. 

Movies:

• All the explosions in Die Hard because, well, it's Die Hard (and for the line, "We're gonna need some more FBI guys"). 
• The exploding submarine in Hunt for Red October since it is such a strong pay-off/resolution to a fairly complex set of variables (plus the pay-off lasts right to the end: "You've lost another submarine?"). 

Non-Explosions (the bomb might go off but doesn't which can be just as dramatic as an explosion):

• Two tense non-explosions: the mailed package in Criminal Minds' "Won't Get Fooled Again" which the little girl holds until the Bomb Squad shows up plus the mailed package. 
• Nero Wolfe's "Murder is Corny" which Nero Wolfe anticipates and prevents exploding by calling the Bomb Squad (what can I say: I really like to watch professionals follow procedure).  

Unimpressive Explosions:

• I hate to say it since I love Star Trek but watching ships explode in space almost bores me senseless. Wrath of Khan is an exception since the entire end sequence--including explosion--is so well-done, but I am including Spock's death and the creation of a new planet in that sequence. 

Exceptions to Unimpressive Explosions:

• Stargate SG-1 explosions--even in space--are generally quite fun. ("More! More!")
• The FIRST (1977) destruction of the Death Star, an example of how old non-digital technology trumps new digital technology through sheer good story-telling.

My conclusion: as with car chases, context is everything when it comes to explosions. And thematic pay-offs help underscore the awesomeness of an explosion tremendously. Lots of things blow up in the Die Hard movies but few of the later explosions equal John McCain's desperate attempt to stop the robbers by pushing the computer bomb down the elevator shaft.

If it is going to go off, it should go off with a "bang"!

Guest Blogger: The Finale of Smallville

Mike writes about the finale of Smallville:

I just watched the Smallville finale (despite not seeing any episode of the entire current season). It was . . . okay. (Lois and Clark ALMOST get married; the wedding is interrupted by evil, of course). Yet, somehow, with ten years to prepare, the ending still felt rushed. The two hours spent so much time wrapping up different relationships (talk talk talk) that the "Big Fight" at the end was compressed into 30 seconds that you don't even really get to see!

One things that bugs me about shows with continuity is how often the budget hinders the quality, and the quality thus affects the storytelling. For instance, it would have made sense for many of the people Clark Kent helped, loved, and worked with through the years to attend his wedding. Instead, presumably due to budget, the entire attendance of the wedding is made up of extras. Only six actors in the chapel are familiar to the viewer, and TWO of them are the wedding couple!

And while there are a few great guest appearances (the returns of Lex, Lionel, and Jonathan Kent are all great), many other people would have been logical additions. Any of the dozens of heroes Clark has met are really missed.

Perhaps the most embarrassing budget-inspired cheat is the suit. Introduced at the end of last year, the Superman suit was "borrowed" from Superman Returns. (I understand it was used mostly as a set piece over the past two seasons). While Clark officially dons it in the finale, it seems that Tom Welling doesn't. This is only speculation, but it seems the producers didn't want to make a new suit for the episode (movie suits cost THOUSANDS), and since Tom Welling didn't fit the one used for the movie, well . . . they faked it: back shots of a computer-animated Superman and close-up head shot with a CGI cape behind. No actual full body Superman shot. I felt bad for poor Tom.

The finale does finally allow Clark to fly but the moment feels . . . rushed. Almost like an after thought.

Another thing that bugged me, although I appreciated the attempt, is how the finale made a point of finishing the storyline but then chickened out on several things in order to please the "die hard fans" of Superman. For instance, the shows ends 7 years in the future with Lois and Clark only then deciding to reattempt marriage. Lex, resurrected and fully aware of Clark and his powers, conveniently gets his memory erased.

Despite both Superman and Smallville fans, one of the funniest things is just how little background knowledge the finale needed. I've only seen half of season 9 and nothing of 10, and the two minute summary before the episode was enough to fill me in. This highlights perhaps my biggest complaint about Smallville: The sheer amount of time the show wasted treading water instead of moving forward. It's infuriating! The writers never seemed to understand the slow growth of plot and development. Instead the show was a series of starts and stops. It would move forward a bit, then stop and drag its feet, afraid to move too quickly to the ending everyone was waiting TEN years for.

Smallville decided to go its own way retelling a lot of Superman history, but it even waffled staying true to that! In the end, I'm kinda glad the show is finally over; it could have ended a LONG time ago.