Wonder Woman to undergo massive overhaul. And puts on some damn pants already.

[Funka Genocide]

Originally Posted by Archbio

I really don't think "visual cues" equates with "useless" in a visual medium.

I'm betting on less than three years.

I always found dynamic visuals to be far more important than static. The uniform is a static element.

What is more important? The fact that wonder woman just punched out some dude, sending him flying through a wall, or that she was wearing a Freedom Thong when she did it?

Like take a relatively recent Super Hero story, Kill Bill, and look at the dynamism inherent to the main character.

She was the same character throughout, driven by rage and coldly calculating, her important psychological features were made apparent and kept consistent. Her outfit, however, constantly changed. There were some iconic outfits sure (the yellow biker suit really stands out as one) but they were iconic because she wore them WHILE DOING SOMETHING important. They didn't need to be repeated for emphasis.

It cheapens the character to leash it to a costume.

[Archbio]

The super-cool-outfit is equal in importance to the super punch.

You were saying that "the entire premise [of costumes] is juvenile and so intrinsically intertwined with military ethos and the establishment," but it really seems like that's even more of a problem with the "solving some (some) problems (selectively picked as important) through punching" element than the distinctive costumes that are being worn.

Not that the use of costumes aren't problematic, including in the sense that they can serve as substitute for having an actual character, but none of these things can't be salvaged, deepened.

[Funka Genocide]

Ok I can see what you're getting at.

I just think the negatives outweigh the positives. On one hand you have the impact a striking visual makes, the immediate and visceral connection between a heroic persona and it's most basic visual trademark, however on the other hand you have the creative stagnation a recurring costume brings, the reliance on that impact which breeds a laziness in characterization, and a sort of crippling of the character brought on by the need for the costume.

The concept of the mask is similar. I'd rather see a departure from costumes and masks and an emphasis on characterization and drama.

what I mean is John Fucking Constantine.

[bluestarultor]

Originally Posted by Archbio

The super-cool-outfit is equal in importance to the super punch.

You were saying that "the entire premise [of costumes] is juvenile and so intrinsically intertwined with military ethos and the establishment," but it really seems like that's even more of a problem with the "solving some (some) problems (selectively picked as important) through punching" element than the distinctive costumes that are being worn.

Not that the use of costumes aren't problematic, including in the sense that they can serve as substitute for having an actual character, but none of these things can't be salvaged, deepened.

A good costume reflects the character. It's only in really lazy cases where it's the other way around.



Edit:

Originally Posted by Funka Genocide

Ok I can see what you're getting at.

I just think the negatives outweigh the positives. On one hand you have the impact a striking visual makes, the immediate and visceral connection between a heroic persona and it's most basic visual trademark, however on the other hand you have the creative stagnation a recurring costume brings, the reliance on that impact which breeds a laziness in characterization, and a sort of crippling of the character brought on by the need for the costume.

The concept of the mask is similar. I'd rather see a departure from costumes and masks and an emphasis on characterization and drama.

what I mean is John Fucking Constantine.

What you mean is Dazzler. If you never knew she had her own comic series before she was stuck with the X-Men, well, there's a good reason for it. Turns out nobody cares about people's everyday lives and struggles. Flashy outfits and explosions sell better.

[Premmy]

Originally Posted by Funky old man

Like take a relatively recent Super Hero story, Kill Bill, and look at the dynamism inherent to the main character.

Kill Bill was a Super Hero story?

She was the same character throughout, driven by rage and coldly calculating, her important psychological features were made apparent and kept consistent. Her outfit, however, constantly changed. There were some iconic outfits sure (the yellow biker suit really stands out as one) but they were iconic because she wore them WHILE DOING SOMETHING important. They didn't need to be repeated for emphasis.

It cheapens the character to leash it to a costume.

You DO realize that's why superheroes have secret identities, no? Most super hero flicks are
"Drama out of costume drama out of costume ACTION IN TIGHTS!"

[Funka Genocide]

Don't get me started on the whole secret identity circle jerk.

Also yes, of course Kill Bill was a super hero movie. How else does Uma Thurman kill like 50 Japanese dudes with swords and punch her way out of a coffin?

You've seen the movie right?

Edit: @Blues: No, what I mean is John Motherfucking Constantine

[Archbio]

On one hand you have the impact a striking visual makes, the immediate and visceral connection between a heroic persona and it's most basic visual trademark, however on the other hand you have the creative stagnation a recurring costume brings, the reliance on that impact which breeds a laziness in characterization, and a sort of crippling of the character brought on by the need for the costume.

I really think that the costumes and visuals are being stagnated intentionally for marketing (through icons) purposes.

I'd rather see a departure from costumes and masks and an emphasis on characterization and drama.

They're really not mutually exclusive things.

what I mean is John Fucking Constantine.

Your problem might be that you're reading a narrow subgenre* you don't like?

*A subgenre with overinflated visbility compared to the rest of the comic book medium.

[Donomni]

Originally Posted by POS Industries

On the other, this gigantic retcon sounds a bit on the awful side, and makes Marvel's One More Day fiasco look like the best executive decision since the Louisiana Purchase.

Oh, now you're just being crazy.

[Premmy]

Originally Posted by Funky old Man

Don't get me started on the whole secret identity circle jerk.

That's, like, a central element of being a super hero

Also yes, of course Kill Bill was a super hero movie. How else does Uma Thurman kill like 50 Japanese dudes with swords and punch her way out of a coffin?

I call that a kung-fu flick

You've seen the movie right?

Yes, and I understand the difference between a super-hero and a story with fighting

Your problem might be that you're reading a narrow subgenre* you don't like?

Pretty much this
V

Originally Posted by Funky Old man

I hate Superheroes!

[Funka Genocide]

I think that conceptually characterization and costumes are not mutually exclusive, yes.

However, in practice I find that the converse is true.

What really matters is that there's no way in hell anyone should still be reading Wonder Woman in 2010. There should be something new to take its place.

@Prems: The central elements to being a super hero are A: Superhuman capability(ies) and B: Heroic disposition. Everything else is fluff. Also, A can be ignored if you have enough money.