|
|
|
Wonder Woman #1
Book Released: 07 June 2006
Review posted: 09 June 2006
Writer: Allan Heinberg
Artist: Terry Dodson
Ink: Rachel Dodson
Publisher: DC Comics
1.00 out of 5 Stars
Reviewed by Adam White
|
|
Dear God.
I recall reading something about DC wanting to make Wonder Woman relevant again as a main character, which is why they
hired Greg Rucka a while back; although I still didn’t care for the book, at least DC went to a solid writer and artist
for the attempt. Now, OYL, DC has relaunched Wonder Woman with a new #1 and tons of advertisements for, I assumed,
another attempt to get people to give the series a chance. I held out some hope for Wonder Woman yet, at least until
I saw the creative team attached. Still, I don’t critique books I haven’t read, so I took a chance and put
Wonder Woman #1 on my list. I should have trusted my instincts, because that was the biggest waste of money
I’ve had the misfortune to be a part of in some time.
Allan Heinberg, best known for his work on television shows I don’t like and his biannual Young Avengers
series at Marvel, produces exactly the script I was dreading for #1: boring, hackneyed, and nothing I haven’t read a
thousand times before. It’s almost sad how bad Wonder Woman #1 is, because it’s full of bad dialogue,
lazy plotting, and vapid characterization;
It’s almost sad how bad Wonder Woman #1 is, because it’s full of bad dialogue,
lazy plotting, and vapid characterization.
|
Heinberg phoned this one in on his lunch break just to keep his name on the covers. The villains of the piece lack true
motivation of any kind — they only attack because they want to fight the missing Diana. They get Donna Troy, the
“new” Wonder Woman, a woman who should still be dead, and treat her like the joke Heinberg writes her as. The
cackling harpies (a good team name for them actually) Heinberg employs serve no purpose but to be the antagonists of the plot
because every plot calls for at least one, and he makes random changes in their names and appearances as if superficial
alterations somehow make them more dangerous or interesting. Then Heinberg throws in the big “payoff” at the
end, having the apparently One Year Dumber Sarge Steel introduce Agent Diana Prince (although Heinberg never identifies the
agency).
[Note: I try never to do spoilers, but since this book is so pointless and predictable I don’t feel I’m
spoiling anything] Heinberg even includes an appearance by Dr. Psycho, whom I could have sworn was in jail over in
Manhunter (which goes to show that Heinberg is one of the too many people not reading Manhunter who should be).
Wonder Woman #1 showcases bad comicbook writing at its best (worst?), and does nothing to endear the oft-hyped
Heinberg to me at all.
Before I start in here, let me say that I find nothing “technically” wrong with Terry & Rachel Dodson’s
art; that said, I really despise what is going on artistically in Wonder Woman #1. First, the Dodsons’ Donna
Troy looks exactly like Diana, so I would not have
known it was not in fact Diana had Donna’s name not been repeated over and over and over again in the script. The
biggest problem I have, however, is that the Dodsons have become synonymous with cheesecake T&A art, and rightly so, but that
is the absolute last kind of style that should be present in Wonder Woman if DC wants anyone to respect the character.
Every female in the book (and most were female) has had breast enhancements during the missing year, and their huge knockers
DC has turned Wonder Woman into a cut-rate Lady Death, and I can’t think of a
worse fate for any series.
|
are the main attraction of Wonder Woman by design. The whole issue is a T&A fest, the weak plot only there to
facilitate reasons for heaving cleavage and busily bouncing boobs. And what T&A book would be complete without form-fitting
attire, which is especially atrocious on “Agent Diana Prince” on the last page — she sports a skintight white jumpsuit that simply cannot
serve any functional purpose other than to show off her body. I hate to sound like a prude, because I’m definitely
not one, but my detestation of this art style that focuses on T&A stems from the fact that it makes the series and the characters
a big joke, and surely Wonder Woman deserves better than that.
One of DC’s solicitations for Wonder Woman #1 said that Heinberg and the Dodsons give “Wonder Woman a
fresh, sexy look and a bold new direction;” they definitely got the “sexy look” part right, but the only
thing “bold” about the new direction is that they had the nerve to turn Wonder Woman into a cut-rate
Lady Death, and I can’t think of a worse fate for any series. I haven’t felt this much virulent hate for a
series since House of M, and Wonder Woman is so bad that it really just makes me angry.
And you wouldn’t like me when I’m angry.
[Sorry, couldn’t resist]
The bottom line is that you should not buy this book under any circumstances. Do not support the dumbing down of an
icon, a reduction of everything about her and her series except for the breasts. Refuse to buy it and urge your retailers to
skip it and spend their money on great books with real characters instead (like Manhunter). Write to DC and let them
know you have no respect for a series that has no respect for the characters. Tell them to —
Y’know, why do I suddenly get the feeling this will be a bestseller anyway? Even so, I’ll still get the last
laugh when you have to wait eight months for the next issue.
—CCdC—
Cover image used without explicit permission in accordance with the "Fair Use" provision of US copyright law.
|
|
