Lapis Exilis wrote:
Traditionally, people feel much freer to completely reimagine female superheroes...
That's quite a blanket assertion. Evidence, please? If anything, the '70s Wonder Woman
series was much closer to the source than its male-led contemporaries The Incredible Hulk, Spider-Man
, and the Captain America
And really, how many live-action TV adaptations of female comic-book superheroines have there actually been? I can only think of three: the '70s Wonder Woman
, the Yancy Butler Witchblade
, Birds of Prey
, and Painkiller Jane
. The DC-based ones were relatively close to the source material -- the characters mostly had the same names, powers, and origins, with some modifications, and were recognizable as the characters they were based on. Witchblade
was a departure mainly in that they had Sara Pezzini actually wear clothes when she fought crime, but that's an understandable change. The Painkiller Jane
pilot movie with Emmanuelle Vaugier departed heavily from the comic, but the Kristanna Loken weekly series, a complete reboot, was closer. Otherwise the superheroines we've seen on TV have been members of team shows like The Middleman
-- which was extremely close to the source, since its showrunner was the comic's creator, and the comic was based on a script he'd originally written as a TV pilot anyway.
There haven't been that many examples in feature films either -- Supergirl, Elektra, Catwoman
, and heroines in team movies like X-Men, Fantastic Four, Watchmen
, etc. The only real "reimagining" I can see in those examples is Catwoman
-- but if you think about it, that film is really a sequel/retcon to Batman Returns
, implicitly reinterpreting Michelle Pfeiffer's Selina as one member of a lineage of supernaturally endowed Catwomen and Halle Berry's Patience as her successor.
Maybe you're thinking of the Michelle Ryan Bionic Woman
reboot as an example? I'd say that's matched by the Mark Valley Human Target
-- both were shows that pretty much took only the title and the lead character's name and changed everything else, to such an extent that I wondered why they didn't just give them new titles and avoid paying royalties to the creators.
More concerning is "she will fight to the death to make the world safe for innocents and true romantics everywhere.”
Which sounds like there could be episodes of WW intervening in tales of True Love. At this moment in time I wouldn't put it past anyone to try to sell a superheroine who makes the world safe for teenage girls and their vampire lovers to ride off into the sunset, if you get my drift.
Well, keep in mind that "romantic" has other meanings than "concerned with love." A romantic is an idealist, a dreamer. It could be saying she's fighting on behalf of idealism and hope.
Mr. Adventure wrote:
Instead of Iris they should do an update of Isis. As a little boy I watched both Wonder Woman and Isis on TV not to mention Hulk and Spider-Man. They may have been cheesy but you don't have that these days.
I had the same thought when I re-watched Isis
not too long ago -- that I'd like to see a new take on it, a version with better effects and fewer restraints on the action so we could see was Isis was really capable of. (Although she pretty much had godlike powers in the show. She could turn back time, transform anything into anything else, control plants and animals, suspend gravity, you name it. Actually a little scary if you think about it.)