I think it's worth pointing out that one of the least authentic superhero adaptations in history was the Bill Bixby Incredible Hulk
series, which kept virtually nothing from the comics, not even the main character's first name. Indeed, its creator went to great lengths to make it as completely unlike the comics as he possibly could. And yet it's regarded today as one of the best and most beloved comic-book adaptations of all time. Conversely, you have something like the Green Lantern
movie, which was obsessively faithful to the minutiae of the comics' history, but is regarded as a failure. If anything, its fidelity to the source was key to its failure, because it made the story too cluttered and unfocused. So what really matters isn't how faithful something is to the source, but how good a story it tells in its own right.
That said, I find it surprising that they would do such a revisionist take on Wonder Woman in this day and age, when comics adaptations as a rule are far closer to the source than ever before. Arrow
has its revisionist elements, but it's very faithful to the Mike Grell era of the comic in many ways, and is bringing in a ton of characters and elements from the comics, even while putting new spins on them. True, it wasn't that long ago that we had the Human Target
series that had absolutely nothing in common with the comic besides its title and the lead character's name. But that was a pretty obscure comic, and a challenging one to do faithfully (though I liked the previous, more authentic adaptation in the '90s from The Flash
producers Danny Bilson & Paul DeMeo).