
'I worry that I’m really not in sync with what is popular and what sells these days, which is probably why I am not offered leading, or A-List titles. A friend told me last week, “Dude, that [Denny O’Neil] era is over.” Man, I really hope not. I loved Cary Bates’ Superman and Flash, But Denny took Superman and grounded him in reality — got rid of Kryptonite and de-powered him, then wrote him introspectively. It should not be zero sum. Grant Morrison’s “JLA” was certainly larger than life and sold a gajillion copies, obliterating my “Justice League Task Force.” So, do I still belong here? I guess that’s for the readers to decide.' - Christopher J. Priest

no subject
Date: 2018-04-03 05:54 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-04-03 08:21 pm (UTC)Either way... she should be slightly vulnerable to them right? thick skin but not absolute, otherwise, whats the point of her iconic bullet deflecting bracelets?
Then again, making her vulnerable to bullets makes her way less of a challenge to Superman, so I'm not sure what the right answer is.
no subject
Date: 2018-04-03 08:24 pm (UTC)1. Same as Superman's cape. It's a cool visual.
2. She wouldn't just be deflecting, she would be directing where the ricochet would go so it wouldn't hurt any civilians nearby.
3. "If you're bulletproof, why block them?" "Force of habit." ;)
no subject
Date: 2018-04-04 01:16 am (UTC)I'd say coolness is the very reason the bullet vulnerability sticks. It's simply cooler when someone's deflecting bullets to keep them from hitting her than when she's doing it as an unnecessarily flourish or as a bit of showing off. The latter's kind of like revealing Batman only does detective work to keep his mind sharp but actually has a super-computer that can solve his cases for him.
no subject
Date: 2018-04-05 01:35 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-04-03 09:43 pm (UTC)http://kerrycallen.blogspot.ca/2015/04/bullet-bouncing.html
no subject
Date: 2018-04-04 06:21 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-04-04 09:48 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-04-05 01:39 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-04-03 11:00 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-04-04 12:34 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-04-04 06:28 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-04-03 10:59 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-04-04 01:10 am (UTC)https://comicvine.gamespot.com/forums/gen-discussion-1/wonder-woman-is-not-bulletproof-confirmed-1873739/
no subject
Date: 2018-04-04 03:13 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-04-04 03:33 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-04-04 03:38 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-04-04 04:17 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-04-03 11:19 pm (UTC)And while I think you're on to something with the "control the ricochet"/intimidation angle; I had heard an interesting suggestion once, for how to handle Diana's invulnerability/toughness and still explain the bullets and bracelets thing.
Basically (and I take no credit for this) is that you run with the idea that Diana is at least several hundred years old, and that among her god given gifts is "protection from all the weapons of man." But because this is x hundred years ago and because magic loves loopholes, this is only applies to weapons (or classes of weapons) that were around then. So she's immune to fists, arrows, swords, etc... but bullets, bombs, lasers, can kill her.
no subject
no subject
Date: 2018-04-04 11:59 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-04-04 03:58 am (UTC)https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1xPFxtsHvk
no subject
Date: 2018-04-04 12:00 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-04-04 07:03 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-04-03 11:26 pm (UTC)So let me see if I understand it, because it took me a few readings to even get this much.
1) The Wakanda-stand in country the Watchtower crashed in is embroiled in its own refugee crisis.
2) Those refugees have made their way to the crash site, knowing the League would provide them with protection and aid.
3) This upsets the natives, because they see this as taking sides.
4) The natives also want to strip the Watchtower under salvage rights.
...am I anywhere close on this?
And on the Priest quote... isn't the Denny O'Neil era of Superman generally regarded as a pretty low point?
no subject
Date: 2018-04-04 12:49 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-04-04 12:51 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-04-04 08:33 am (UTC)