"Thankfully left out the bondage and the astral projection and the utopian psychology"? That's the best PART! I mean, OK, the bondage may have been a bit much, but the rest were what made Wonder Woman a success in the first place. Marston's stories weren't just about a crime-fighting Amazon - they were delightfully bizarre mishmashes of whatever he felt like writing about at the time, and it's that bizarre quality that made WW distinctive. The stories were part fantasy, part science fiction, part feminist creed and part slapstick comedy - you could find yourself on Mars in one issue, or in the land of the Leprechauns the next. It's when that 'anything can happen' quality was abandoned that the book started to lose its way, in my opinion - Wonder Woman has had about a million different writers since then, and not one of them seems to agree with the other as to just who and what she IS. Batman and Superman have had similar tonal shifts, but at least they've had certain elements that have remained consistent over the years - today's Superman may be vastly different from the Superman of Jerry Siegel or Mort Weisinger, but he still lives in Metropolis, works at the Daily Planet under Perry White, fights Lex Luthor, and goes steady with Lois Lane. Wonder Woman, on the other hand, often seems to differ wildly from month to month (less so in recent years, but still). One issue she's an army secretary, the next she's a nurse, or a consultant at a museum, or a private detective. She lives in Boston - no, wait, it's New York - no, Gateway City - no, a floating, invisible Themysciran embassy! Her powers may or may not include a degree of invulnerability, her strength ranges from Superman-level to slightly above weightlifter-class, her lasso is supposed to be unbreakable, but I've seen it broken on at least three occasions, and only in recent years has it been pinned down as to whether or not she can actually fly, just 'glide on air currents', use an invisible plane, or some combination of all three. Sometimes she doesn't even HAVE powers. I mean, it is CONFUSING trying to keep track of this woman's history! Don't get me wrong - she's still a great character, and I certainly like the Perez version of her - it's just that I think a mistake was made early on in her career by jettisoning a number of the elements that made her successful. If those had been kept in some form or another, I think the character's mythos would be much stronger today - most non-comics fans can tell you who Batman or Superman's arch-nemeses are, for example, but I'll bet you they couldn't with Wondy, due to all the shifting around. Diana herself is instantly recognizable, but the details surrounding her are not - and that is ultimately deleterious to the character.