Corvinus

Wonder Woman (spoiler thread) - skip to pg. 14 for actual movie discussion

417 posts in this topic

11 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

 People's favorite part - the Amazonian island - could have easily been done completely lamely, and we know this because quite often they have done it lamely in various iterations - but they took it seriously and thoughtfully, and as a result it was totally awesome.

Was it? I mean it was fine but I'm not really seeing what was awesome about it. Diana has a largely idyllic childhood on a scenic island with a mother who's protective of her then does some training and becomes a great warrior. There wasn't anything wrong with it in terms of setting the scene but I'm not really seeing what was so great about it either.

Overall I thought the film was ok but not amazing. I think I'm running out of enthusiasm for comic book films. On the other hand I'm really losing interest in the Marvel framework for their films so hopefully DC having produced a decent film will allow a little more variety.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ljkeane said:

Overall I thought the film was ok but not amazing. I think I'm running out of enthusiasm for comic book films. On the other hand I'm really losing interest in the Marvel framework for their films so hopefully DC having produced a decent film will allow a little more variety.

SO MUCH THIS. I'm a huge comics geek, and I'm burnt out. Time to start tapping non cape stuff from the comics world. Locke and Key, anybody?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I have no attachment to superman (or any other superhero, really, I'm not a comic book reader and have only passing knowledge of the more mainstream folk) as a character but Man of Steel was a steaming heap of shite. I lost interest multiple times throughout, didn't care at all about the characters and would be hard pressed to tell you what actually happened now. At least Wonder Woman was entertaining

eta: whoops. This was in response to the few comments on the last page

Edited by HelenaExMachina

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

SO MUCH THIS. I'm a huge comics geek, and I'm burnt out. Time to start tapping non cape stuff from the comics world. Locke and Key, anybody?


To be fair, this is already starting to happen (and has been for time, although budgets and profile are increasing). I mean, you've got the Preacher TV show (and Lucifer, though, you know), Snowpiercer relatively recently, Valerien and the City of 1,000 Planets coming soon...


Like, the best comic book movie ever is Oldboy so it's not a dead thing (also very fond of History of Violence. Well, fond is the wrong word, but you know what I mean).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

1 hour ago, Kalbear said:

Yeah, the plot wasn't incredibly risky or trying to do anything super insane, but I think that ignores the stuff that it does do and makes it look effortless. People's favorite part - the Amazonian island - could have easily been done completely lamely, and we know this because quite often they have done it lamely in various iterations - but they took it seriously and thoughtfully, and as a result it was totally awesome.



I gotta say, I found the Themiscrea bit a little odd because while the people in it were awesome and made the sequence what it was (I could watch a whole movie of Robin Wright as Antiope), I didn't find the place itself as interesting or as coherent as either Krypton in MoS or (especially) Valhalla in Thor (Thor is actually the film I found WW most similar to, out of past superhero ones; WW is a better overal film but Thor had the benefit of a properly good villain).

I will stand up for WW though in saying that it's miles better than Captain America in my opinion. Here's hoping that II can step up the same amount as Cap did between 1 and 2, because if it does then we've got a proper awesome film on the horizon.

(eta: apologies for the double post. I meant to edit this one into the previous one but I forgot as I posted...)

Edited by polishgenius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Channel4s-JonSnow said:

and she's hardly the first honest idealistic superhero. The movie is a patch work of a bunch of other ideas. Let's just admit that. Well stitched together but that's all 

No, she's not the first - but she's one of the only ones that have existed for more than 30 years. The closest that we've gotten is Captain America, and even that isn't believing in the goodness of everyone. He believes in the goodness of America, but he has no problem punching nazis; WW sees the goodness of everyone.

43 minutes ago, Channel4s-JonSnow said:

well it's not the first female led superhero movie, it's probably the best one but that is an incredibly low bar. I'm not sure why people give it a pass for that 

That's also true, but it's the first that actually is good, and for whatever reason female led superhero movies have been led into the path of suckage.

40 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

You had the same basic angle in the first Captain America movie.

 

/That said, I thought WW was the better film by quite a bit.

It's similar, but not the same - largely because Cap believes in the goodness of America first and foremost, and the goodness of Americans and their allies; WW doesn't have that ideological viewpoint at all. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, polishgenius said:



I gotta say, I found the Themiscrea bit a little odd because while the people in it were awesome and made the sequence what it was (I could watch a whole movie of Robin Wright as Antiope), I didn't find the place itself as interesting or as coherent as either Krypton in MoS or (especially) Valhalla in Thor (Thor is actually the film I found WW most similar to, out of past superhero ones; WW is a better overal film but Thor had the benefit of a properly good villain).

 

I largely agree with this, but the people were genuinely awesome and I'd  have been happy to see a movie just about them. The people outside of the island aren't nearly as awesome as Antiope, as an example.

Plus it was pretty. And well-realized. It's nice to see superhero things in actual pretty places instead of grim warzones or fights at night. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WW has no problem killing Germans though. She's not that idealistic, hardly a pasifist. Is she really any more idealistic than Spider-Man, Thor, cap America, superman ( yes man of steel but that was meant to be part of an arc of discovery). That she is essentially a lot less complex than most superheroes isn't really a plus point. 

Anyway i think the whole Universe idea is played out now, the novelty is over. I don't have the mental energy to care about new mythologies and how things fit together. It's tedious. 

If I'll going to enjoy a comic book movie these days it has to do more than just shove familiar characters in a tired plot template. It has to push some sort of boundaries. Logan maybe or Deadpool. WW wasn't a brave film and so in 2017 it was pretty forgettable 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I gotta say I also give it props for giving a space for, as a boxing fans, one of my low-key heroes, Ann Wolfe, former champion and first woman to coach a man to a world title (small warning, that link contains what could be a pretty disturbing-looking knockout if you ain't a boxing fan).



I also gotta say that I think you're being a little harsh on Cap, Kalbear: I guess you could read First Avenger that way, subsequent movies have shown that Cap's optimism really isn't America-only, or even really America-first.

Plus I'd posit that while WW sees that there is good in everyone she also sees that there is evil and that she'd have absolutely no problem punching Nazis in the face. She is, after all, a warrior, one who loves a fight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Channel4s-JonSnow said:

WW has no problem killing Germans though. She's not that idealistic, hardly a pasifist. Is she really any more idealistic than Spider-Man, Thor, cap America, superman ( yes man of steel but that was meant to be part of an arc of discovery). That she is essentially a lot less complex than most superheroes isn't really a plus point. 

She doesn't think that they're the enemy, however. She believes that they are worth saving, but they can't be at that time. This isn't the case for Cap, not at all. 

Just now, Channel4s-JonSnow said:

Anyway i think the whole Universe idea is played out now, the novelty is over. I don't have the mental energy to care about new mythologies and how things fit together. It's tedious. 

If I'll going to enjoy a comic book movie these days it has to do more than just shove familiar characters in a tired plot template. It has to push some sort of boundaries. Logan maybe or Deadpool. WW wasn't a brave film and so in 2017 it was pretty forgettable 

That's perfectly fine for you; for others, it was anything but. WW costumes are flying off the shelves, the merch is incredibly popular, and people are seeing it again and again. It's quite possible that you're not the right target audience, here.

Another thing I've not seen mentioned is that WW shares a success with something like GotG and Thor, in that it introduces an incredibly weird (by our standards) plot baseline and then just goes with it, and lets it fly. It isn't insanely weird that she's an amazon on a magical, hidden island, nor is it weird that she's actually going against a greek god. This is where WW has a much harder time than Cap, and it successfully embraces its disbelief and allows it to go on. Green Lantern, by comparison, fought against this over and over. MoS tried to make it more rational and kind of worked, but also made it impersonal.  That was another hard lift that ended up looking super easy. 

Just now, polishgenius said:

I also gotta say that I think you're being a little harsh on Cap, Kalbear: I guess you could read First Avenger that way, subsequent movies have shown that Cap's optimism really isn't America-only, or even really America-first.

Plus I'd posit that while WW sees that there is good in everyone she also sees that there is evil and that she'd have absolutely no problem punching Nazis in the face. She is, after all, a warrior, one who loves a fight.

Don't get me wrong - I think Cap isn't America-only or particularly bad in that way. He believes in the nobility of the American dream, where people will be embraced for their differences and their viewpoints and that anyone can succeed. He hates bullies and hates dictators. He is optimistic about people in general. However, Cap absolutely believes that some humans are Bad, and need to be stopped. He doesn't believe in redemption for Red Skull or Hitler, and he doesn't think that all humans are at their heart, good. Cap, ultimately, is not about fighting to make humans better, he's fighting to stop specific humans from doing bad things. And that philosophically is a difference, though thematically they end up being very similar. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Channel4s-JonSnow said:

If I'll going to enjoy a comic book movie these days it has to do more than just shove familiar characters in a tired plot template. It has to push some sort of boundaries. Logan maybe or Deadpool.


I honestly didn't think Deadpool pushed any kinds of boundaries. I mean, it was fun, but for me it did almost nothing Kick-Ass didn't do better earlier and it totally wasted its fourth-wall-smashing potential too. Plus the action was... unmemorable, I guess? Definitely liked Wonder Woman more than Deadpool.

But I am, if not a lone voice, distinctly in the minority on that one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well plot wise no, Deadpool was quite standard. But it was 18 rated, poked fun at other comic book movies and was a real differential in an otherwise over crowded market. I didn't love it but I liked that it was funnier than most comic book movies. 

 

As for WW having a weird plot line?? Hmmm, it's basically a cross between Thors home world and then adding in captain americas plot. It's not weird at all. Or different 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Channel4s-JonSnow said:

As for WW having a weird plot line?? Hmmm, it's basically a cross between Thors home world and then adding in captain americas plot. It's not weird at all. Or different 

Suggesting that the greek gods are real, existed on earth, and are still to this day fighting - and there's a secret island on earth where the defenders against Ares exist is a pretty weird thing. Thor didn't do that - they made Asgard another alien planet and simply teched it out of the way. It's not a dissimilar concept, but it's pretty dissimilar otherwise - and it's not like anything else in the DC universe.

And IMO, Thor didn't do a particularly good job of it. The first Thor wasn't particularly memorable and the second Thor wasn't much better, and the best thing about Thor was Loki. WW, by comparison, was far better realized and set up. I'm not saying that it's a weird plotline either - I'm saying that the backstory is difficult to do without breaking disbelief incredibly badly, and WW did it well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

2 hours ago, Kalbear said:

She doesn't think that they're the enemy, however. She believes that they are worth saving, but they can't be at that time. This isn't the case for Cap, not at all. 

To be fair, Nazism is like the German Nationalism of WWI cubed, right? I think it's fair to assume that Diana might have had a similar reaction to them as Steve did. The main difference there (as you pointed out) is she doesn't have her own nationalistic ideologies driving her.

Edited by Manhole Eunuchsbane

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

To be fair, Nazism is like the German Nationalism of WWI cubed, right? I think it's fair to assume that Diana might have had a similar reaction to them as Steve did. They main difference there (as you pointed out) is she doesn't have her own nationalistic ideologies driving her.

Sure, that's fine. But that's a difference.

Another is that Diana is always clearly fighting for and caring about people. She enjoys seeing others, she enjoys dancing and drinking beer and hanging out and getting to know people. Captain America is fighting others because they're bullies, basically - and that's noble, but the 'protecting innocents' isn't nearly as big a deal for him as it is Diana. For her, every innocent is a person, someone that she genuinely cares about and worries about. I think the two movies differ greatly in being able to showcase this with Diana; her need to get through No-Man's land isn't driven because she wants to defeat Ares or stop Nazis; it's because there are literally people suffering, right there, and they need help, and she can help them. Same thing goes for why she leaves in the first place - it's because her goal is not to stop a bad guy, it's to end war, and she doesn't think about Ares being evil - her first thought is the countless people dying and suffering and fighting. 

Between her clear compassion, her ability to speak all languages and actually use it, her interactivity and her drives, she comes across as different even if some of her actions are the same. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, WW is on track to hit $700m worldwide and $350m domestic, which is pretty insane and I believe is second only to Avengers1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Kalbear said:

Sure, that's fine. But that's a difference.

Another is that Diana is always clearly fighting for and caring about people. She enjoys seeing others, she enjoys dancing and drinking beer and hanging out and getting to know people. Captain America is fighting others because they're bullies, basically - and that's noble, but the 'protecting innocents' isn't nearly as big a deal for him as it is Diana. For her, every innocent is a person, someone that she genuinely cares about and worries about. I think the two movies differ greatly in being able to showcase this with Diana; her need to get through No-Man's land isn't driven because she wants to defeat Ares or stop Nazis; it's because there are literally people suffering, right there, and they need help, and she can help them. Same thing goes for why she leaves in the first place - it's because her goal is not to stop a bad guy, it's to end war, and she doesn't think about Ares being evil - her first thought is the countless people dying and suffering and fighting. 

Between her clear compassion, her ability to speak all languages and actually use it, her interactivity and her drives, she comes across as different even if some of her actions are the same. 

She's still killing people.. german people. She doesn't seem to have any qualms about that, nor is she adverse to the collateral damage she might cause (something that gets aimed at MoS, but gets a pass here apparently). Her compassion only extends as far as women and children or people who don't speak german. 

And where does this compassion for Humans even come from? She's never met any before, didn't really seem to know much about the outside world. But all of a sudden its her goal in life to protect them? She mainly just comes across as naive, possibly dim when looking at world affairs for most of the movie. I'm not sure that is a positive attribute. It hardly makes for a much complexity. Instead of dealing with the nature of man instead she just kills the big bad dude who's creating all wars. A simple answer to a simple problem. 

 

 

9 hours ago, Kalbear said:

Suggesting that the greek gods are real, existed on earth, and are still to this day fighting - and there's a secret island on earth where the defenders against Ares exist is a pretty weird thing. Thor didn't do that - they made Asgard another alien planet and simply teched it out of the way. It's not a dissimilar concept, but it's pretty dissimilar otherwise - and it's not like anything else in the DC universe.

And IMO, Thor didn't do a particularly good job of it. The first Thor wasn't particularly memorable and the second Thor wasn't much better, and the best thing about Thor was Loki. WW, by comparison, was far better realized and set up. I'm not saying that it's a weird plotline either - I'm saying that the backstory is difficult to do without breaking disbelief incredibly badly, and WW did it well. 

Thor isn't a great movie, its a patchy at best, its earth sections are pretty dull. But its Asgard is far better realised and more interesting than the Greek island in WW. Thor manages a sort of theatrical shakespearean tone in its Asgard sections, mainly helped by Tom Huddlestone and Anthony Hopkins. WW is much flatter in comparison

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.