In January, Michael sent out an alert to the CliqueClack gang about Amazon’s Wonder Woman DVD sale. Sucker that I was, I ponied up six to eight bucks for the season three DVD collection. Surprisingly, it proved the best investment ever.
As a child I remembered enjoying Wonder Woman’s inaugural season and wanting to rock her anti-bullet bracelets, her underoos, and her transformation turn. But, after the hideousness of David E. Kelly’s failed pilot, I wondered if the original TV series would prove as delightful and well-written as I remembered. Luckily, it did.
Season three surrounded Diana Prince as the chief investigator for the IADC, a 1970s version of the Department of Homeland Security, who investigates national terrorist threats, corporate espionage and the occasional X-File. Watching all 24-episodes back to back, I further understood how the show succeeded compared with David E. Kelly’s attempt.
Wonder Woman: Season Three focused on creating a good, action TV show. The writers didn’t try to make a statement about women or the iconic costume. Instead, they surrounded Diana’s job. By making Diana Prince a federal investigator, the show put her more naturally in danger’s bullseye. But, unlike Kelly’s version, this Wonder Woman wasn’t a one-woman crime-fighting industry who absolutely ignored national laws. Instead, she worked legally with the IADC. Wonder Woman typically only appeared when Diana was truly in danger or when suspicious circumstances presented themselves (i.e. a public office closed during the day with huge bodyguards out front).
In fact, after watching Wonder Woman: Season Three, I saw not just what David E. Kelly could have done better, I saw how today’s TV writers could write female characters better. Yes, that’s right. The decade that gave us disco, neon bell-bottoms, and polyester can teach us how to write strong, female characters.
Are you interested in what they did? If so, read on!
Clacked by An Nicholson 
on Feb 15, 2012 @ 12:08 EST5EDT
%20-%20CliqueClack%20Flashback){kind=link}
Wait a minute. If “The directors didn’t even up the cheesecake factor with the Wonder Woman costume”, why did you choose a shot of Lynda Carter falling out of it to banner this column?
I did see a lot of good writing in Wonder Woman, but the Carter was not chosen for this part because she looked good in glasses and a dark pantsuit. And definitely not because she was a great actor. She was chosen for two reasons, and they bare-ly fit into that costume.
*POST AUTHOR*
The image above is not from season 3. I searched three of WB’s public sites for high quality large sized images of Wonder Woman’s third season (and, after that, just Wonder Woman), to no avail. Then, I google image searched for known sources (i.e. periodicals) containing large, high quality images of Wonder Woman in Season 3. When that didn’t happen I google image searched for shots from any season of the 1970s show which you see above. USA Today proved the winner.
I have no doubt LC looked attractive in glasses, although I didn’t write about that. And, I don’t discount your statements regarding why the casting directors initially chose Lynda Carter in SEASON 1. However, my article focuses on SEASON 3’s writing and costuming; but, it’s good to know you enjoyed the writing.
Lynda Carter’s portrayal of Wonder Woman was perfection. She’s an excellent actress. Her Wonder Woman is right up there with Christopher Reeve’s Superman. In fact it may have been too good for it’s own good. The reason Wonder Woman has never made it to the big screen, or back to television is because no one could ever take Lynda Carter’s place.