Wonder Woman movie rumor

[Rubystreak]

@Evil Captor

Just don’t serve up some wimpy-ass white chick with pipestem arms and legs, no tits and a goneass, and try to tell me she’s a better match for the role of Wonder Woman than Torres. (Like, for example, Eliza Dushku.)

Hey, no reason to dis so hard on Eliza. She is seriously gorgeous and as buff as skinny Hollywood girls get. I love Gina Torres as much as the next hetero girl, mostly due to Firefly, but seriously, she is a stick figure, not the Amazon you’d have us believe. She too has pipestem arms and toothpick legs, and while not flat chested, she ain’t buxom. Also, let’s not paint Lynda Carter as anything but a skinny Hollywood beauty-- her arms and legs were pretty twiggy too, though she is far more busty than either Eliza or Gina.

Gina is a beautiful woman and a great presence, but she’s no buffer or more Wonder Woman-esque than Eliza except for her height; Lynda Carter is 5’9, Gina is 5’10", and Eliza is 5’5", or five by five if you will.

If Monica Bellucci wasn’t 40 and Angela Bassett wasn’t 46, I’d go for either of them over Eliza or Gina. Bridget Moynahan has the look, and Stacey Williams ain’t bad either. It’ll be interesting to see who gets chosen. Incidentally, Lynda Carter said in 1999 that she’d like to see either Catherine Zeta-Jones or Cindy Crawford play Wonder Woman. Huh.

[CandidGamera]

@holmes

Nubia’s worst than “Black” insert power after black? Or Sabra, the Israel’s mutant?

No, I wouldn’t say she’s worse. You’re barking up the wrong tree now.

I understand your point and I’m not trying to be a dick, but I don’t get why this is important. Her origins as you admit were no more ridiculous than the usual fare for that time period. Where did Wonder Girl come from, is her origin any less retroactive than Nubia’s ? How many times has it been retconned?

Wonder Girl has a really crappy place in DC continuity too. And if they tried to stick “Donna Troy” in as Wonder Woman for this movie, this would be a relevant point. But they’re not doing that, so it’s not.

Popular media, has a responsiblity to reflect, well popular culture. I can’t see fault with at least trying to do something…current. The fault I do have, is with the relutance to keep going…but again the bean counters at the time felt that having black characters didn’t sell books or writers didn’t ‘know’ how to write them.

See, now, this is entirely misguided. The comics do reflect what’s current. They add new characters of various races, and they also occasionally try to replace current, reasonably popular characters with “black” versions. The last time I checked, there were still white people, so they’re just as current. And let’s look at the results - Black Lois, Nubia - neither of them were longtermers. But there is one character that leaps to mind - Jim Rhodes, AKA War Machine. They tried to make him “Black Iron Man”. Didn’t work out too well. People like Tony Stark. Tony Stark is not an interchangeable piece of flotsam. So they reversed the change, Jim Rhodes got his War Machine Armor, and Tony became Iron Man again. Jim Rhodes actually started to develop as a character independent of “Iron Man”.

I mean, these thigns are disasters when you replace any hero with someone of any race. Artemis as Wonder Woman. Azrael as Batman. Do I even need to say the words “Clone Saga”?

It was the 70’s and both publishers were trying to fit in. The Black Panther was introduced in 66, he didn’t get his own book (jungle action) until 1973. I think Kirby wanted to call him the Coal Cat. He had the Black Racer, Vikyn the Black…You don’t think Gravedigger, or Gabe Jones were created to create diversity as well? Or Amazing Man in the All Star Squardon? Luke Cage, John Stewart, Tyroc, Black Goliath, Storm, Vixen? The list goes on… the New Dr. Midnight female & black, the new Wildcat, female & Latin. Nods to diversity? Glimmers…?

Some were done well … eventually. Because they were transformed into something beyond a nod to diversity. John Stewart actually has a character now. You might want to avoid Dr. Midnight and Wildcat II, though, they lasted about five seconds.

If their reasons for existing are the same as Nubia’s, then what’s the difference? How many books they were in? Luke Cage ran for years and for the most part only fought/interacted other black characters, was that diversity? (before he joined Iron Fist)

What are you talking about? He joined up with Iron Fist pretty quick, firstly; secondly, even if he only interacted with black characters… have you ever seen a blaxploitation film?

Again, even Wonder Woman herself was created for the same purpose. The point I’m trying to make, is that someone has to say, “Why can’t it be a woman, why can’t it be a black person, why can’t it be an Asian?”…and unless the industry changes, i.e more people of color are calling the shots, then it’s gonna be a white person deciding that diversity is important and hopes that the character catches on and transcends it’s origin.

For the same reason Azrael wasn’t Batman. Because Diana is a person, a character, and not to be chucked in the rubbish heap.

[CandidGamera]

@shy guy

That said, I don’t really see a major WW revamp if a black actress is chosen to play her. If that were the case, why didn’t they do that to Catwoman?

Well, because the Catwoman movie tanked.

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

Candid, you’re like half of a percent of the audience for the movie. Better than 90% of the people who go to see it will have no idea who Linda Carter is, much less know that Wonder Woman has any ocnnection to Amazons, before they enter the theater. While I appreciate that the whole retcon thing would upset you, I dearly hope Joss doesn’t lose any sleep over that.

Daniel

[CandidGamera]

@Left Hand of Dorkness

Candid, you’re like half of a percent of the audience for the movie. Better than 90% of the people who go to see it will have no idea who Linda Carter is, much less know that Wonder Woman has any ocnnection to Amazons, before they enter the theater. While I appreciate that the whole retcon thing would upset you, I dearly hope Joss doesn’t lose any sleep over that.

Daniel

I’m, by myself, half a percent of the audience? Well, heck, it’s already doing better than Catwoman…

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

@CandidGamera

I’m, by myself, half a percent of the audience? Well, heck, it’s already doing better than Catwoman…

You know what I mean.

Daniel

[JThunder]

I think that a rather large portion of the population knows darned well who Lynda Carter is. Heck, she’s pretty much a cultural icon.

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

@JThunder

I think that a rather large portion of the population knows darned well who Lynda Carter is. Heck, she’s pretty much a cultural icon.

I think you’d be surprised. I’m a pretty big damn dork, and prior to this thread I couldn’t have told you her name off the top of my head.

I’m basing this partly on being at the theater last year and having some kidsi n line behind me point at a poster and say, “Starsky and Hutch? Who the hell is that?” What’s a cultural icon for your generation is an unknown for younger folk. And comic book movies tend to rely on teenagers to rake in the big bucks.

So when I talk about 90% of the people who will go to see it, I’m assuming that teenagers will comprise a big number of that 90%.

Daniel

[holmes]

@CandidGamera

No, I wouldn’t say she’s worse. You’re barking up the wrong tree now.

Then why point out her name as being a wink? Again, her name was no different than the majority of ethnic characters. It’s not important enough reason IMO, especially considering the time-period in which she was created, to mention it. It is, what it is.

You seem be saying, if they named her Susan, it would be less indictative of the attempt at social commentary that they were attempting. Ignoring the fact, that most ethnic characters were named for their color or place of origin, anyway.

It was 1970, any attempt to add diversity into DC comics, would have been one created from a desire to make social commentary. So I fail to see the importance of what she was called, retroactively added or how many issues she ran in; the reasons for creating her would still be the same. Had DC decided to give her, her own book or a recurring character, then yes; the ultimate results would have changed; but again it was 1970.; it wasn’t time yet. No black character had his OWN book yet. That’s it. It seems unfair to hold this character up to a litmus, that didn’t exist yet.

Wonder Girl has a really crappy place in DC continuity too. And if they tried to stick “Donna Troy” in as Wonder Woman for this movie, this would be a relevant point. But they’re not doing that, so it’s not.

It’s relevant to point out, that retroactively creating history and characters even, one shot characters in Wonder Woman, wasn’t reserved to Nubia and any arguments based on that, need to be seen in context with the history of how the book has been written.

See, now, this is entirely misguided…

I was referring to the 60 and 70’s.

And let’s look at the results - Black Lois, Nubia - neither of them were longtermers. But there is one character that leaps to mind - Jim Rhodes, AKA War Machine. They tried to make him “Black Iron Man”. Didn’t work out too well. People like Tony Stark. Tony Stark is not an interchangeable piece of flotsam. So they reversed the change, Jim Rhodes got his War Machine Armor, and Tony became Iron Man again. Jim Rhodes actually started to develop as a character independent of “Iron Man”…

Some were done well … eventually. Because they were transformed into something beyond a nod to diversity. John Stewart actually has a character now. You might want to avoid Dr. Midnight and Wildcat II, though, they lasted about five seconds.

Why did they last five seconds? Because new creative teams come it and decide yay or nay. They may well be right. However someone has to say, I’m going to keep pushing that character. How does that transformation occur? Again, it took the Black Panther, 7 years to get is own book and that was in Marvel’s 50’s reprint, Jungle Action. The character was dying a slow death, but someone liked it enough to keep it going. You don’t think having the Panther join the Avengers was a nod to diversity? It’s taken what, 30 years for John Stewart to become a good well rounded character. I submit that most of that change came from his selection as GL for the JL and JLU TV series; where they HAD to write well for his character…he couldn’t just be the “black” GL. He had to be THE GL and that requires a committment.

This is an imperfect medium and maybe I’m misunderstanding you, but you seem be saying that unless someone in control of character development, deems an “ethnic” character worth pushing, it’s just a nod to diversity…regardless of how good the character is. Which seems to guarantee that whenever a non-white or female character is introduced, they’re sole purpose it there as a nod to diversity. Unless they make the cut.

What are you talking about? He joined up with Iron Fist pretty quick, firstly; secondly, even if he only interacted with black characters… have you ever seen a blaxploitation film?

Lots of 'em. Your point was that Nubia only ran for a few issues, therefor she was a ‘nod’ to diversity. Cage ran for many more and was hardly diverse at all. I was simple asking if the number of books a character ran in, defines whether or not that character is a nod to diversity? BTW Luke Cage didn’t join Iron Fist until issue 48.

For the same reason Azrael wasn’t Batman. Because Diana is a person, a character, and not to be chucked in the rubbish heap.

Um, you know we’re talking about comics, right? Diana doesn’t exist and her character is a mallable as the person writing her deems her to be. You may not like it and stop buying her books, but if DC decides she’s not Wonder Woman anymore, she’s not Wonder Woman anymore…until the next retcon.

[CandidGamera]

@holmes

Then why point out her name as being a wink? Again, her name was no different than the majority of ethnic characters. It’s not important enough reason IMO, especially considering the time-period in which she was created, to mention it. It is, what it is.

Because you’re trying to base an argument that “Gina Torres can play Wonder Woman just fine, thank you, what’s the difference?” on a character who is less than a blip on a radar screen. They didn’t add Nubia because she was an interesting, independent character - they added her because it was the 70’s and they felt they had to. That’s the point.

It’s relevant to point out, that retroactively creating history and characters even, one shot characters in Wonder Woman, wasn’t reserved to Nubia and any arguments based on that, need to be seen in context with the history of how the book has been written.

It goes to my argument that Nubia is in no way a “true” substitute for Wonder Woman.

I was referring to the 60 and 70’s.

Oh, so there weren’t any white people in the 60’s or 70’s. Okay.

Why did they last five seconds? Because new creative teams come it and decide yay or nay. They may well be right. However someone has to say, I’m going to keep pushing that character.

Comics are an audience-driven medium. You give the people what they want. If, after a couple of years, people are still saying “Wildcat’s a woman now? When did that happen? That sucks.” you get rid of her. While it’s true that a good writer can give depth to just about any lame character - you’re off to a better start if the first writer does it.

Jeez, Wildcat II’s “origin” was ten seconds of face time in the Crisis Maxiseries. Probably dictated by the editorial high-ups at DC. “We feel we might be able to make inroads with the hispanic demographic if we replace… throws dart at dartboard Wildcat with a Latina.”

How does that transformation occur? Again, it took the Black Panther, 7 years to get is own book and that was in Marvel’s 50’s reprint, Jungle Action. The character was dying a slow death, but someone liked it enough to keep it going. You don’t think having the Panther join the Avengers was a nod to diversity? It’s taken what, 30 years for John Stewart to become a good well rounded character. I submit that most of that change came from his selection as GL for the JL and JLU TV series; where they HAD to write well for his character…he couldn’t just be the “black” GL. He had to be THE GL and that requires a committment.

Nope. John Stewart was distinct at least as far back as the early 80’s. The Green Lantern Corps is an especially easy place to introduce “substitute” heroes, and in this case, it paid off. But people still want Hal. The beauty of the GL concept was that they could have both. They could have John without diminishing Hal. Why the devil do you think most everyone hates Kyle so much? Because he replaced Hal in a cosmic cop-out. And Kyle is a good character.

Lots of 'em. Your point was that Nubia only ran for a few issues, therefor she was a ‘nod’ to diversity. Cage ran for many more and was hardly diverse at all. I was simple asking if the number of books a character ran in, defines whether or not that character is a nod to diversity? BTW Luke Cage didn’t join Iron Fist until issue 48.

The existence of Cage’s book contributed to diversity, it didn’t matter that everyone who appeared in it was Black. And #48 is pretty early on - that’s about 4 years, comics-time.

Um, you know we’re talking about comics, right? Diana doesn’t exist and her character is a mallable as the person writing her deems her to be. You may not like it and stop buying her books, but if DC decides she’s not Wonder Woman anymore, she’s not Wonder Woman anymore…until the next retcon.

When DC decides she’s not Wonder Woman anymore, the fans rebel, DC buckles, and the status quo is restored.

[Harborwolf]

@Left Hand of Dorkness

Candid, you’re like half of a percent of the audience for the movie. Better than 90% of the people who go to see it will have no idea who Linda Carter is, much less know that Wonder Woman has any ocnnection to Amazons, before they enter the theater. While I appreciate that the whole retcon thing would upset you, I dearly hope Joss doesn’t lose any sleep over that.

Daniel

They may not know now, but once the movie is announced and certainly in the months before it comes out, Linda Carter and the Wonder Woman tv show will be everywhere. Some network will pick it up, probably Nick at Night. They’ll compare it to the tv show. By the time the movie premieres, they’ll know who Linda Carter is and that Wonder Woman is white.

Also, if they do choose an actress of differing ethnicity to play Wonder Woman, the press will be all over it. The geeks will be all over it. If it gets out that the movie is even possibly too much of a departure, you might as well call this Catwoman 2.

IMHO, they would be better off casting an unknown to play WW. It’ll attract the right kind of press to at least give the movie a strong weekend.

[Lochdale]

I am not sure it matters who they cast in this movie as I just don’t think it will do very well. There has never been much of a demand for a Wonder Woman movie and I can’t see it attracting much more attention than Catwoman did.

[JThunder]

@Left Hand of Dorkness

I’m basing this partly on being at the theater last year and having some kidsi n line behind me point at a poster and say, “Starsky and Hutch? Who the hell is that?” What’s a cultural icon for your generation is an unknown for younger folk. And comic book movies tend to rely on teenagers to rake in the big bucks.

So when I talk about 90% of the people who will go to see it, I’m assuming that teenagers will comprise a big number of that 90%.

Sure, they’ll comprise a large number… but not so many that the movie producers would want to pander to that crowd.

Just look at the more successful comic book flicks. The Spider-movies were successful because they appealed to audiences of all ages; indeed, there were several winks to the audience that the younger fans would probably miss. The X-movies were likewise designed to appeal to a broad demographic.

I think it would be foolish for the movie producers to cast someone who doesn’t fit the classic Wonder Woman mold.

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

@JThunder

I think it would be foolish for the movie producers to cast someone who doesn’t fit the classic Wonder Woman mold.

We just disagree on what constitutes an important part of that mold, is all. I don’t think race is an important part.

Daniel

[holmes]

@CandidGamera

Because you’re trying to base an argument that “Gina Torres can play Wonder Woman just fine, thank you, what’s the difference?” on a character who is less than a blip on a radar screen.

Whoa. There’s two trains here. One was that were NO black Amazons and an Amazon COULDN’T be black…that’s were the Nubia/Nu 'bia comes in. Yes I realize YOU didn’t make that point.

According to the comics themselves, any Amazon who wins the trials becomes Wonder Woman…that’s already happened. Therefor Wonder Woman doesn’t HAVE to look like Diana Prince…and as there are clearly non-white Amazons; Ms Torres’ blackness shouldn’t automatically disqualify her. That’s it…that’s the Nubia connection. Period.

Now the second train concerns what constitutes a nod to diversity.

They didn’t add Nubia because she was an interesting, independent character - they added her because it was the 70’s and they felt they had to. That’s the point.

And I ask again…So What? Wasn’t John Stewart created for the same purpose? Wasn’t Wonder Woman created for the same purpose? Etc…?

“William Moulton Marston was an educational consultant in 1940 for Detective Comics, Inc. (now better known as DC Comics). Marston saw that the DC line was filled with images of super men such as Green Lantern, Batman, and their flagship character Superman. Seeing all these male heroes, Marston was left wondering why there was not a female hero.” Marston

Why is that any different and I’ve asked this a few times now, than deciding why there wasn’t a BLACK hero and then creating one? You may not like the Nubia character, but it was a far change from how black people and women in particular were portrayed in comics. Very original for it’s time. Your answer still appears to be the amount of books they’re in or headline, changes them from a NOD to a real diversity. I find that to be an unfair burden, considering we’re talking about social morays that influence how much ‘play’ a character receives…especially in the 60’s and 70’s.

My point is, at least in the past, most non-white, non- male characters were created as a nod, as an attempt at diversity; but that’s not a bad thing. It just is. That the important difference between John Stewart and Nubia, isn’t that they were created as ‘nods’, but the lack of creative vision that causes some characters to stagnate and others to grow into full characters.

Oh, so there weren’t any white people in the 60’s or 70’s. Okay.

Dishonest.

Comics are an audience-driven medium. You give the people what they want.

Right, so if people feel uncomfortable for whatever reason when an ethnic character is introduced and the character is dropped…does that mean that the character was created as nod to diversity? I’ve asked several times about the Panther, about Gabe Jones, about other characters either retconned or created and whether or not their very existence means that they are nods to diversity…if they don’t headline books or are rarely seen.

Using the New Mr. Terrific, if the powers that be decided they didn’t like his character and dropped him early on, would his existence mean he was created as a nod to diversity? Does all the good things you said about the character disappear, if DC decided to only us him once or twice?

“We feel we might be able to make inroads with the hispanic demographic if we replace… throws dart at dartboard Wildcat with a Latina.”

So what? You don’t think that didn’t happen with John Stewart or Jim Rhodes (not the dart part) It’s all the same thing, "We need a “blank”, who do we have? The difference is who’s writting the character. Someone, sometime has to make the decision to add diversity to a particular group, that’s the way it goes. It’s not like these are real people who walk into Justice League and apply for a job. Someone has to create them and in the creation process,decide.

Nope. John Stewart was distinct at least as far back as the early 80’s.

We’re talking about the 70’s when Nubia was created. So I ask again. Was John Stewart’s reason for creation any different than Nubia’s? He had a one shot in 1972, then again in 1974, then again in 1977…So I’ll ask again. A what point did Stewart stop becoming a nod to diversity? When he took over GL book for a while? Is that what it takes? Your “own” book or being a featured character? I say it’s an unfair burden.

If that’s the case and I said this before, the majority of ethnic characters will always be considered nods to diversity, as opposed to representing the way the world is.

The existence of Cage’s book contributed to diversity, it didn’t matter that everyone who appeared in it was Black. And #48 is pretty early on - that’s about 4 years, comics-time.

Right, but it was created for the same reason as Nubia was. To make social commentary, to ride the wave of the changing culture. There was more money to be made in blaxploitation, than there was in having a comic with a “black” twin sister to Wonder Woman, but the intent was the same. To keep up with a changing society…

[CandidGamera]

@holmes

Whoa. There’s two trains here. One was that were NO black Amazons and an Amazon COULDN’T be black…that’s were the Nubia/Nu 'bia comes in. Yes I realize YOU didn’t make that point.

Then stop addressing arguments regarding that point to me.

According to the comics themselves, any Amazon who wins the trials becomes Wonder Woman…that’s already happened. Therefor Wonder Woman doesn’t HAVE to look like Diana Prince…and as there are clearly non-white Amazons; Ms Torres’ blackness shouldn’t automatically disqualify her. That’s it…that’s the Nubia connection. Period.

Any Amazon who wins the trials becomes Wonder Woman, yes. But with the exception of a “blip” now and then, blips which arguably serve the purpose of functioning as turmoil in Diana’s life, Diana has always been Wonder Woman.

And I ask again…So What? Wasn’t John Stewart created for the same purpose? Wasn’t Wonder Woman created for the same purpose? Etc…?

Why are you comparing Nubia to John Stewart? There’s one Wonder Woman. There are 3600+ Green Lanterns.

Wonder Woman was arguably created as the manifested fetishes of a slightly disturbed pervert, cloaked in the guise of feminism.

“William Moulton Marston was an educational consultant in 1940 for Detective Comics, Inc. (now better known as DC Comics). Marston saw that the DC line was filled with images of super men such as Green Lantern, Batman, and their flagship character Superman. Seeing all these male heroes, Marston was left wondering why there was not a female hero.” Marston

Yup, him. Do your research on him. His motivations aside, Wonder Woman wasn’t replacing any already existing character. She was not a stand-in, an also-ran, or “Female equivalent” of anyone.

Why is that any different and I’ve asked this a few times now, than deciding why there wasn’t a BLACK hero and then creating one? You may not like the Nubia character, but it was a far change from how black people and women in particular were portrayed in comics. Very original for it’s time. Your answer still appears to be the amount of books they’re in or headline, changes them from a NOD to a real diversity. I find that to be an unfair burden, considering we’re talking about social morays that influence how much ‘play’ a character receives…especially in the 60’s and 70’s.

Because with Nubia they created nothing. She’s “Wonder Woman … but black!” That’s not creation, that’s self-plagiarism.

My point is, at least in the past, most non-white, non- male characters were created as a nod, as an attempt at diversity; but that’s not a bad thing. It just is. That the important difference between John Stewart and Nubia, isn’t that they were created as ‘nods’, but the lack of creative vision that causes some characters to stagnate and others to grow into full characters.

You’re overlooking the forest for the trees. I mentioned the origins of Nubia’s creation to show just how truly irrelevant she was to DC Comics, DC Comics fans, or as a reflection on any part of the history of Wonder Woman.

Dishonest.

That’s what it sounds like you’re trying to say, to me.

Right, so if people feel uncomfortable for whatever reason when an ethnic character is introduced and the character is dropped…does that mean that the character was created as nod to diversity? I’ve asked several times about the Panther, about Gabe Jones, about other characters either retconned or created and whether or not their very existence means that they are nods to diversity…if they don’t headline books or are rarely seen.

Who the hell cares? We’re talking about Wonder Woman and Nubia. Let me repeat myself : “I mentioned the origins of Nubia’s creation to show just how truly irrelevant she was to DC Comics, DC Comics fans, or as a reflection on any part of the history of Wonder Woman.” So with few exceptions, I’m going to disregard the further sidetracks on this point.

[holmes]

I get you dig Wonder Woman, but the scope of our conversation has grown slightly beyond that. I suggest you read your own contributions to this thread, in fact you’re the one who first mentioned “Social relevance”.

I assumed that you were interested in some of the issues YOU brought up…but it appears that you were just basically lining up points to find a reason why only people with the image of Diana Prince should be considered Wonder Woman material.

Fair enough.

You don’t wish to continue fine. I think this is interesting and I’ll start a new thread.

peace

[CandidGamera]

@holmes

I get you dig Wonder Woman, but the scope of our conversation has grown slightly beyond that. I suggest you read your own contributions to this thread, in fact you’re the one who first mentioned “Social relevance”.

You know, I posted it twice, and it apparently still didn’t take.

@Me

I mentioned the origins of Nubia’s creation to show just how truly irrelevant she was to DC Comics, DC Comics fans, or as a reflection on any part of the history of Wonder Woman.

[holmes]

It took. I don’t believe you.

[CandidGamera]

@holmes

It took. I don’t believe you.

You don’t believe that my assertions are accurate? Debunk them then.

Or you disbelieve my claims as to my motivation? Why not? Do you honestly think I want to debate 1970’s blaxploitation trends in Comics? I didn’t learn to read until 1980, why the devil would I care to debate about “blaxploitation trends of 1970s comics”? I can see them there in retrospect, and I think they’re a pretty lame reason to do something, and that’s about it. I mean, start a thread about it, and watch me not show up.