So, what do we see here:
- I guess points are awarded to DC for covering her chest in more modest manner.
- I'm surprised they went with so much leg showing as some of the more recent attempts to revise her look have tried to cover her legs.
- Not wild about the half sleeves with the stars on them.
- Seems like the Stars and Stripes motif has been downplayed (less stars for one thing.) No gold anywhere.
- What the hell is that weird thing on her chest? That's gone from being an eagle, to a stylized double W logo to what is it now? The hood ornament from a 1950's car?
As make overs go, it's not the worst I've seen, I just think they could have done better. Now I wonder if this the version of the costume we are going to see in the Superman movie?
What do you think of this new look?
- Jim
It's not really that new, except for the stuff on the arms, it looks largely like a simplification for animation version of the New 52 WW costume.
ReplyDelete(If you look around on the internet, it looks like artists can't decide what the thing is on her chest either: some make it a stylized eagle, others a "W").
I prefer the classic costume but I think a lot of the bad rap it gets is more from how it is drawn by modern artists than anything else. Whatever sexy factor anybody could want is more than taken care of. So when artists draw it smaller or render her trunks as a thong or basically having the camera zoomed in on her assets it's just total and needless overkill.
ReplyDeleteAlso I'm just really tired of portrayals of Wonder Woman where she's basically a pretty Klingon or brunette Red Sonja. The character I knew as a kid didn't require a sword or blood stained axe, she could dispatch opponents with her bare hands and a rope.
Was there talk of giving her the pants from the original Jim Lee sketches but then they decided to simply redistribute a portion of the cloth to her neck and arms?