Last post laid out where Wonder Woman as launched in 1987 and Wonder Woman as launched in 2011 went in plotting. Both had a lot going on. Both rely heavily on Greek mythology. Both lay out very interesting stories that explore Diana's origins. But there are a lot of differences.
Personally, I like this new take very much. In reading the 1987 version
Which brings me to the second major distinction. Perez and Wein had the characters refer to one another by name all the time. It was the style of the time with superhero books, along with the long expository soliloquies and description boxes. It reflected the buying pattern of the time, which was generally younger and not all that likely to get every consecutive issue of a book. Filling in what was missed was expected. But, man, is it a drag to read now. It slows it all down. Azzarello and Chiang present a story where dialog and pictures work hand in hand, not repeating one another. The only words on the page that aren't characters speaking are location identification, such as "Firenze, Italia". The words that are spoken
In the end, I prefer the subtly of the new Wonder Woman over the heavy handed exposition of the 1987 Wonder Woman. Which is not to say that the older version wasn't great. It was. It broke all kinds of new ground with the character. Much of what was new then is relied on as a basis of what Azzarello is doing now. It's just it's a lot more nuanced now.
Which brings me to what I recall to be Lee's two biggest complaints about the new book. One was that Hera is naked all the time. The other is that the new Wonder Woman should be a point of entry to the DCU and isn't.
Naked Hera I addressed in our discussion. She isn't naked all the time.
Besides which, there's the exact same kind of nudity in the first issue of 1987 Wonder Woman. Hell, it's even on the back cover. When Hyppolite and her Amazons are taken captive and raped by Hercules and his men they're pretty much all naked. They're all naked when they come up out of the lake/pond where they're re-birthed, too. I don't think the Hera nudity is any more an problem now than that issue was then.
Now, if you mean by entry point that young readers could read from the first issue to gain an appreciation for the DCU and pick up more books from there, I'd have to say the current version is better for that than the 1987 version. This Diana is saving a pregnant woman from a jealous woman, then saving the child from machinations by royalty. This Diana is an independent woman who loses those who raised her, and clearly didn't have an idyllic childhood, but nonetheless had a very good one. This Diana is an equal with the gods she fights, especially when she removes the bracelets that restrain her power. She can't fly, either, which makes her more relatable. If you want a kid in the low teens to read this, yeah, you might be a bit uncomfortable with the out of wedlock pregnancy and marital affairs. Then again, you might be fresh off the Amish farm. Otherwise I don't know how these young teens wouldn't be aware of such things. You don't have to be participating in them to be aware of them.
The 1987 Wonder Woman is quite different. She's uncertain of who
The art in 1987 Wonder Woman is much more classically beautiful. Perez really can't be beat in that regard. The plot lines were good, solid starts for the book's run, too, Millenium nonsense aside. But when it comes to reading a story, I much prefer both the style and substance of the Azzarello run. I highly recommend it for anyone looking to start reading comics, whatever the age, too. Ok, not elementary school, maybe, but you get my drift.