Wonder Woman Message Board >> View Post
Post By

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 9,736
In Reply To
emerick man 

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 59,932
Subj: Re: Wonder Woman #38: Swan Song or opening number?
Posted: Thu Jan 11, 2018 at 12:12:59 pm EST (Viewed 300 times)
Reply Subj: Wonder Woman #38: Swan Song or opening number?
Posted: Thu Jan 11, 2018 at 08:29:27 am EST (Viewed 341 times)

    Too often unnecessarily RETCONNED origins annoy me - but this one was pretty good. (Can't really remember Perez' retcon of Silver Swan without digging it out of the longbox but recall that one was okay too.) Maybe it's finally returning a notable foe to WW's Rogue's Gallery makes it that much better. The art was okay - but some panel image choices and panel space alottment could have been better. BOTH covers are GREAT. Diana's splash page cry grabbe my attention too - it was a shock to here her calling for help to save someone but then we quickly learn she had a bank building on her back at the time so "you're excused"! ;\) Tying Silver Swan's origin to Majoar Disaster and Cyborg makes the story more DCU inclusive (although it technically retcons MD and raises flags with that hospital M.D. too).

I honestly felt that this story should have been stretched out a bit more, perhaps in a two part story or more. Vanessa's transformation into the Silver Swan was crammed into one issue. Because of that, her motivations are shallow and lacking. She hates Diana simply because Wonder Woman stopped visiting her and payed a visit to another family?! That doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

In post crisis, Vanessa was Diana's friend for a while before she got transformed into the Silver Swan and it was because of some brainwashing that she hated Diana. That origin made much more sense and it had much larger pay off later. Here, Vanessa's origin is retold in one issue with questionable motivations that leave me scratching my head, wondering why the writer even bothered doing it this way. Simply put, this issue fell flat on it's face for me. \(no\)

    The first half narrated by Kapatelis was more engaging than Diana's dialogue and the inspiration for her new metahuman persona was perfectly organic and through vicarious hardships. Julia's sudden AND EXTREME flip to psychopathic evil felt more plot device than convincing though. The second half of the story was the "origin" of Diana's brother new... persona: the "Party Animal". Yeesh. It was a bit forced and Diana was forced to sound like a clucking mother hen in a few too many panels. On the other hand, this was the first real chance they delve into their newfound sibling relationship. It sets readers up with what to expect with Jason who will probably go on to DCU adventures under the watchful eye of the Amazon Princess.

I liked some elements of this issue. Diana visiting Vanessa in the hospital and inspiring her to walk again was touching. It's too bad Diana's continued relationship, and lecture, with her brother is an element I have yet to warm up to. I find Jason a little annoying to be honest and his presence does nothing to add to the overall story. I'm struggling to find a reason to like Jason when all he's good so far is unnecessary sibling baggage. \(no\)

    Comments? Do you see this sort of like a fresh start?

Not really. Once again, this issue took the focus off of Diana and put it squarely on Vanessa. Every few issue this writer seems to do that and it's jarring and very annoying.

Your right about one thing, though. Loved the covers. \:\)

It's interesting that a hero/villain performs one amazing feat, or use a power they haven't used for 20+ years, and that automatically propels them to a high status despite scans and evidence to the contrary. I don't know what is worse, selective feat picking that has only been done once or twice 20, or more, years ago or ignoring evidence from scans or the lack thereof. We need to stop putting our favorite heroes/villains on pedestals and start putting them where they really belong. But it's evident that people never will because they would rather accuse others of cherry picking feats, when they don't, and being 'morally superior' when they aren't. I guess being honest and as fair as possible only opens one up to being the target of childish accusations and fault finding by those who insist on acting petty and childish. What happened to a good debate between two civil, mature, adults?
Posted with Mozilla 11.0 on Windows 7
Alvaro's Comicboards powered by On Topic™ © 2003-2018 Powermad Software
All the content of these boards Copyright © 1996-2018 by Alvaro Ortiz and Dave Galanter. Software Copyright © 2003-2018 Powermad Software