Justice Fatigue: An Exhaustive (and Exhausting) Discussion of Zack Snyder's "Justice League"

So, Zack Snyder's "Justice League." 

Prelude to a Bad Decision

I decided, apropos of nothing, to put on Joss Whedon's Zack Snyder's "Justice League" while doing some work today. I discussed the movie when it came out eleventy billion years ago, and thought it was fine. It's not good, but grading on the curve of every DCEU movie up to that point, it was a solid B-. Sitting in 2021, I remember bits and pieces of it—Steppenwolf looking like he stepped out of an XBox 360 cutscene, the decent cell phone video of Superman that was marred by the terrible attempt to CGI out Cavill's moustache, all the characters sounding like their rough counterparts in "The Avengers"—but not a lot of details.

Obviously the intervening years have altered my perspective on the film, both through the revelations about the behind-the-scenes racism and abuse and through the fanatical and also frequently abusive behavior of the fans clamoring for this version of the film, which absolutely definitely existed and was finished years ago and also needed an additional $70 million dollars and reshoots to complete. 

That perspective has not been altered for the better. 

Against my better judgment, I'm going to watch the Snyder Cut sometime, probably this weekend, so I figured it'd be good to see how it deviates from the theatrical release, like I did for the Lester and Donner cuts of "Superman II" so very long ago. I don't expect to enjoy either one; my feelings on the superhero movies of Zack Snyder are well-documented, and even under the best circumstances, four hours is too @#%*$! long for a superhero movie. But four hours of nihilistic spite dressed up in cinematic deepities and CGI with a sepia-toned overlay is unlikely to be the best of circumstances. 

Will it be better than two hours of the extremely generic re-skinned "Avengers: Age of Ultron" that got released to theaters? There's only one way to find out!

"Both Grunting": A Detailed Look at "Batman V. Superman: Dawn of Justice"

In preparation for my viewing of Justice League, I decided to revisit Batman V. Superman: Dawn of Justice. I've been dithering with this post on and off for a month, and while I don't think it's gotten any shorter, at least I feel like it says all I'm going to need to say on the subject. Also, I added some pictures.

Anyway, you may recall that I did not care for the movie the first time around. I'm approaching this like I did with my Man of Steel rewatch that I did in preparation for that viewing: trying to focus on the positive, to find the movie that I've seen fans posting gifs of on Tumblr for a year and a half. To that end, I'm watching the Ultimate Edition, which I've heard is better than the theatrical cut.

Without further ado...

Batman V. Superman: Dawn of Hot Garbage

Let the record show that I didn't irrationally hate Man of Steel, that I consistently had a lot of positive things to say about it, despite having serious problems with the last part of the film.

I cannot say the same for Batman V. Superman: Dawn of Justice. If you're looking for positivity and charity, look elsewhere. Spoilers, snark, and bile ahead.

Gonna fly now

You may have heard that J. Michael Straczynski is more or less leaving "Superman" and "Wonder Woman" to focus on the next "Superman: Earth One" book. Meanwhile, Chris Roberson of "iZombie" fame and Phil Hester of "Green Arrow" and "The Darkness" will be taking over writing duties on those two titles.

You probably know how I feel about all this.

I like JMS, I really do. I've enjoyed his work on everything from "Real Ghostbusters" to "Babylon 5" to "Amazing Spider-Man" to "Thor." There have often been things I disliked, even strongly (cf. "The Other"), but in general, I've enjoyed his writing. His work on "Superman," however, has been awful. And while I didn't much care for "Superman: Earth One," it was a whole lot better than "Grounded." I'd even be willing to pick up the sequel to "Earth One," to see where the story goes, and in the hope that it would be a less redundant story than "Superman's origin, take fifty-seven."

I've been buying "iZombie," but after the first issue (due to that whole comic shop closing dealie) it kind of ended up on my "to be read" pile, and I haven't caught up. But given the excitement over his work by people I generally trust, I'm pretty excited to see him taking over "Superman." Sure, he's using Straczynski's story notes, but I'll be the first to admit that there's some potential in the conceit of "Grounded." The main problems with the story have all been with the characterization and other details, not so much with the basic plots.

Regarding "Wonder Woman," I've never actually read anything that Phil Hester has written, and frankly, it's unlikely that I'll be resubscribing to WW for the remainder of JMS's new-status-quo story. Somewhere under six issues of "iZombie" on my "to be read" pile is the first issue of JMS's "Wonder Woman," which I have never quite gotten around to reading, and which doesn't really excite me enough to seek it out. Depending on how it looks and what I hear, though, Hester's involvement may be enough to get me to check it out in trade, and I certainly hope it does well and he gets the chance to stay on the title beyond the fill-in work.

By the way, the best take on this news is right here.

As for me, I'm going to keep chronicling my own version of Superman's trek across the country. I'm almost a third of the way through; how could I stop now?

Walking with Superman: Day 26

Maxie Zeus has imprisoned Superman and enslaved Olympia, Washington, but he seeks to assert his godhood over the rest of the world. The creatures and armies of Zeus march across the Pacific Northwest, expanding the reign of god-king Zeus, and no mortal superhero can get anywhere near the ever-increasing boundaries of Olympus. To take down a mad god, the heroes must become gods themselves. Batman assembles a pantheon: Wonder Woman, Aquaman, Steel, the Flash, Plastic Man, and ancient Roman hero Alpha Centurion. Together they must storm Olympus, rescue Superman, and take down Maxie Zeus once and for all, or Earth will fall before the thunderous might of Zeus.

Wonder Wardrobe

Wonder Woman's getting a temporary new costume and backstory. There's a lot of brouhaha about it, and quite a bit of counter-brouhaha as well. "The costume is ugly, the story is stupid" say one crowd; "it's not like it's permanent or anything, costume changes and retcons are status quo for comics" sneer the other¹.

Frankly, I don't care for it. The whole outfit looks way too much like what Sersi wore in the '90s, it recalls unpleasantly the Messner-Loebs/Deodato biker shorts outfit, and the combination of jacket and gold spangly bracelets make it look like it'd fit better on Gypsy. Its heart is certainly in the right place, giving Wonder Woman pants and something a little more practical than a strapless bustier (though a spaghetti-strap top with no apparent armoring is only very slightly more practical), but it's way too stuck in the '90s with its senseless jacket, choker, and fingerless gloves (in fact, if you popped a couple of loose-hanging hip belts on there, you'd basically have a color-rearranged version of Superboy's original costume). I dislike making the tiara into something purely decorative, and the general shrinking of Wonder Woman's recognizable accessories and emblems. Plus, isn't black-with-dark-blue kind of a fashion no-no? At the very least, I'd want to see the pants and jacket colors swapped. I think Jamie McKelvie's redesign is a much better way of accomplishing the same basic idea, but I'd like to see the black and white swapped out for dark blue and gold.

My problem is not really with the costume and story. As the counter-brouhahaers say, it's just a temporary thing, probably only lasting as long as JMS's run. And they're right; this won't stick around. It's the Electric Superman costume/powers, it's AzBats, it's even more temporary than most things in comics, and it's certainly not intended to be permanent. Same with the rebooted history thing, not a permanent change.

And really, that's the problem. As Ragnell notes quite brilliantly, Wonder Woman needs a new costume and an origin reboot. JMS talks (bizarrely) about how rich supporting casts are apparently a sign of weak protagonists and how one needs to take a weed whacker to "overgrown" mythology and casts.

Well, he's partially right. How you can look at a character whose powers come from Greek goddesses and think they have too much mythology is beyond me, but it's true that Wonder Woman has had some serious supporting cast issues. The problem is basically the one I mentioned recently as endemic to comics in general, but with Diana it's been an off-and-on issue since the Perez revamp. Wonder Woman isn't blessed with an iconic and well-known supporting cast; the only character who has really made any impression on the public consciousness is Steve Trevor, and one could argue for Etta Candy, Hippolyta, and maybe Donna Troy, by virtue of history and closeness to Diana. Unfortunately, the Perez revamp made Steve and Etta non-contemporaries of Diana, which removed the civilian characters that anyone knew and cared about from her close circle.

There are characters who can function with a small supporting cast, or one made of mostly superheroes. Batman's a good example; depending on the writer and era, the only civilians you're likely to find in a Batman story are Alfred, who almost doesn't count, and Commissioner Gordon. The thing about Batman, the thing that helps make that situation tenable, is that his city is so distinctive as to be almost a character unto itself, and he also has a fantastic cast of colorful, interesting, rich villains. Wonder Woman, on the other hand, has one of the worst rogues galleries in comics. Sure, Dr. Psycho is awesome, and Circe is interesting. Ares is generally good for a big story, but what's left? Cheetah? Wonder Woman runs out of good villains faster than Superman.

So thanks to the Perez reboot's virtual sidelining of Steve and Etta, and thanks to Wonder Woman's crappy rogues gallery, Wonder Woman's creative teams have worked quite hard to give Diana a distinct personality, an interesting status quo, and a rich supporting cast. We've had Julia Kapatelis, the Sandsmarks, Trevor Barnes and Ferdinand, and most recently Nemesis and Tolifhar. Each attempt was good (some--like the most recent sets of casts--better than others), but each attempt was a fairly clean break from the previous attempt, so there's been little chance for continuous development. And JMS is just continuing the trend, and somehow thinking that he's a better writer for it. I've only been reading Wonder Woman regularly (this time around--I read a bunch of Byrne's run) since Jimenez was on, and the title's seen at least two full cast and circumstance changes in that time. Wonder Woman isn't like Superman, where you can at least count on the Daily Planet cast to stay constant and keep the book grounded; with Steve and Etta reduced to bit players, her cast is almost completely unrooted.

Which is only part of why she's in desperate need of a reboot. The other part is, as Ragnell mentioned, the misogyny that resulted from trying to make the Amazons' origins meaningful and relevant. Casting all the Amazons as the reincarnated souls of abuse victims, making Hercules a rapist...it's really a black mark in their backstory, and it's well past time to change that (I mean, Superman's had three or four origin reboots since then, why not give Diana one?).

She could also use a costume update, which is considerably harder to do, for two big reasons. The first is brand recognition; Wonder Woman's costume has remained relatively unchanged (except for temporary stunts like this one, and the mod era) for almost seventy years, showing up in every major multimedia presentation. That's a lot of cultural inertia to overcome for any length of time, which is why Wonder Woman's costume changes for the last twenty years or more have mostly been minor cosmetic tweaks. I'd like to see something more dramatic, and something done with the intention of being permanent, but this clearly isn't it, tied to an alternate timeline story and lacking the basic components of brand recognition.

The other big problem in giving Wonder Woman a new costume is that, while her costume hasn't changed much, her legacy characters, particularly Donna Troy, have gone through a wide variety of different costumes, running much of the gamut available to red-gold-and-blue-with-stars costumes. Donna's gone mostly red, stars and armor, and her more recent starfield and silver number. If you're looking for the more casual/street style that Jim Lee seems to be going for in this rendition, Cassie has that well and truly covered. With all those designs, it must be difficult to give Wonder Woman a decent looking Wonder Woman costume that doesn't look derivative of one of her sidekicks. Difficult, but not necessarily impossible, and I don't think Lee's version is that good an attempt.

Wonder Woman deserves pants, and she deserves to have the abuse and victimization excised from her backstory. For that matter, she deserves to have Hercules as a rival or ally (or both), not her uncomfortable equivalent of the Comedian. But this story isn't going to give her either (for any length of time). If it does well, it'll likely just lead to a restoration of the status quo once it runs its course. If it does poorly, editors will conclude that people don't want Wonder Woman to have a new costume or revamped origin, even if they just don't want Straczynski's inept attempt to turn her into a '90s-costumed Superman clone.

The best thing that could come out of this, as far as I'm concerned, is what Wonder Woman should have gotten long before the Flash did: a Secret Origin miniseries, establishing her with a rebooted backstory and a costume that perhaps combines the best aspects of this one and her classic outfit (or better yet, let's establish her as someone who has more than one available costume, some of which are more than underwear). Unfortunately, the only two people I'd trust to write such a thing are either taking a break from comics (Greg Rucka) or recently removed from the Wonder Woman title (Gail Simone). Or maybe Phil Jimenez. Sadly, it'd almost certainly be done by Geoff Johns, and I can't imagine that having less gratuitous victimization and unnecessary culling of the supporting cast.

So I can't speak for everyone who dislikes this change, but my biggest problem with it isn't aesthetic or plot-based, but it's that I think this makes real changes less likely to happen and/or stick. And Wonder Woman is a character in need of real change, not just a change of clothes.

---

1. Comments, of course, boiled down to remove any nuance².

2. "Nuance" is used broadly here, as it must always be when describing fan-fights.

Friend 'Ship

As a comic fan, I expect to enter into any number of pointless conversations at any given moment, but especially at comic shops. And depending on the circumstances and content, I'm totally happy to jump into those conversations and have at it. There are some topics that I just stay away from in meatspace, unless it happens to be with friends.

One of those topics came up recently, when I was taking my brother to a semi-local comic shop. One of the shop's employees was talking to me as I browsed the TPB racks, and I chit-chatted in a friendly manner, right up until he got to that topic, at which point I got very engrossed in the racks and responded with absentminded "yeahs" and "mm-hmms."

The offending point? Paraphrased: 'I think Frank Miller really had the right idea; he just put Superman and Wonder Woman together. That's the way it should be, he should never have been with Lois Lane.'

And what a common sentiment this is, that Superman and Wonder Woman should be together. And every time I hear this argument, I have to wonder: have you ever read a Superman or Wonder Woman comic book?

There's only one reason I can think of to pair the two up, and it's not a pleasant one. The only thing Superman and Wonder Woman really have in common is that they're both A-list superheroes with similar power sets. If anyone else has more to add there, feel free, but the only rationale I can figure is "stick with your own kind." I think this position not only shows a lack of knowledge of the characters (as well as a lack of knowledge of musical theater), but also a lack of respect for them, and a general lack of understanding how relationships work in reality.

Let's remember who we have here: on one hand, there's the farm-raised alien boy scout, who makes his living as an investigative journalist. On the other hand, there's the Amazon warrior princess who makes her living as a diplomat (and occasionally, as a secret agent). If it weren't for the fact that they both dress up in spandex and fight crime occasionally, they'd never even have met, let alone dated. People tend to enter into romantic relationships with people that they spend a lot of time with. Hence why Superman has consistently dated a hard-nosed city-girl reporter who works with him, and why Diana's notable love interests have been a pilot co-worker, a fellow peace activist, and a fellow secret agent. Even her short-lived relationship with Batman built out of working more and more closely over several story arcs. I just don't think Superman and Wonder Woman have enough in common to warrant such a relationship.

I think a lot of the problem I have with this is that it largely ignores who both characters are as people. One of the most important characteristics of Superman's personality, I think, is that he sees himself as a normal person; he self-identifies as a human. Given who he is, we'd expect him to fall in love with a normal woman.

Diana's position is similar; her origin story is about a young woman of privilege who wanted to be treated as an equal to everyone else, and to be the bridge between two disparate cultures. Given who she is, we would expect her to fall in love with a normal man.

For Superman and Wonder Woman to get together, it would require a rejection of these basic components of their characters. Instead of further connecting himself with humanity, Superman would be with a demigoddess from an isolationist nation; instead of interacting with man's world, Wonder Woman would be spending her life with another visitor to that world, another outsider. All on the basis that they share similar abilities, on the basis of the things which make them particularly special and set them apart from their peoples--the very same things that neither one wants to be judged by.

It's essentially "I want someone who loves me for who I am, not what I can do."

And when it all comes down to it, I don't think real people approach relationships this way--deciding who to date based on who appears to be the most similar in terms of abilities or looks. That completely ignores the roles of personality and proximity in partner selection, boiling everything down to a mechanistic trait-matching game. Or to simplify, Wonder Woman is not Maxima.

There's another issue I have with this position, though it may be less sinister than I suspect. I always hear it phrased as "Superman should be with Wonder Woman, not Lois Lane," and I think, "doesn't Wonder Woman have a say in this arrangement?" I never hear "Wonder Woman should be with Superman, not Steve Trevor"--though it's possible that Diana's traditional relationship is just not well-known enough, and it certainly hasn't been the status quo for over twenty years. Even so, the implication is that Lois Lane is somehow beneath Superman, unworthy of him, while Wonder Woman possesses whatever quality would make her a suitable mate for the great Man of Steel. The whole thing smacks of sexism, both because it makes Superman the only agent in the discussion, and because it treats these two women as if their only value is as a physical mate.

Wonder Woman and Superman may be many things, and may have been many things over the last six decades, but one thing I can't see them being is lovers.