Wonder Woman 1984

[Coola Yagami]

Also what in the..... so Steve Trevor doesn't so much as come back, he basically haunts the body of an 80's lookalike?

[ZariusTwo]

Originally Posted by CyberCubed

A lot of people on twitter and reddit are complaining about the "rape" scene in the movie:

Spoiler:

Because Chris Pine is in another mans body when he sleeps with Diana.

So they're calling Wonder Woman a rapist now.

And I think we've just realised why Zack Snyder still has a credit on this movie...

Mind you, Geoff also has a sinister mind...

[TigerClaw]

Originally Posted by NinjaPug

Other than some of the wardrobe and the mall scene what was the 80s nostalgia?

The settings. Like the Mall look like your typical 80s mall. You see a couple of dudes breakdancing. All that stuff

[ZariusTwo]

Originally Posted by TigerClaw

You see a couple of dudes breakdancing. All that stuff

...People do that now.

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by ZariusTwo

Mind you, Geoff also has a sinister mind...

Just think small-minded frat boy who is afraid of debate and that's Johns.

[CyberCubed]

Originally Posted by Coola Yagami

Also what in the..... so Steve Trevor doesn't so much as come back, he basically haunts the body of an 80's lookalike?

His spirit comes back and takes over another mans body. So Diana sees him as Steve Trevor but everyone else just as the random guy he took over.

Spoiler:

At the end of the film Steve goes back to the afterlife so the guy is fine, he and Diana even speak at the end of the film. But unknown to him he slept with her while Steve controlled his body.

[Coola Yagami]

Originally Posted by CyberCubed

His spirit comes back and takes over another mans body. So Diana sees him as Steve Trevor but everyone else just as the random guy he took over.

Spoiler:

At the end of the film Steve goes back to the afterlife so the guy is fine, he and Diana even speak at the end of the film. But unknown to him he slept with her while Steve controlled his body.

Wow..... so they couldn't even do 'undo a comic book death' thing correctly.

I don't understand why they even killed him. Isn't he still alive in current DC comics? Or is that just the trade off cause WW has been around in comics since WW1 and Steve is destined to meet her first but they can't explain how he can still be alive in modern day without being a billion years old. How do they explain it in the comics?

[Shark_Blade]

#WonderWoman1984* director @PattyJenks says, if given the chance, she would want to direct #SpiderMan and #BlackWidow movies! Details: https://thedirect.com/article/wonder...-patty-jenkins

#WW84* director Patty Jenkins says Superman is the next DC character she wants to make a movie about https://twitter.com/culturecrave/sta...711010306?s=21
https://twitter.com/getfandom/status...968656385?s=21

[oldmanwinters]

Originally Posted by Coola Yagami

Also what in the..... so Steve Trevor doesn't so much as come back, he basically haunts the body of an 80's lookalike?

Originally Posted by Shark_Blade

#WonderWoman1984* director @PattyJenks says, if given the chance, she would want to direct #SpiderMan and #BlackWidow movies! Details: https://thedirect.com/article/wonder...-patty-jenkins

#WW84* director Patty Jenkins says Superman is the next DC character she wants to make a movie about https://twitter.com/culturecrave/sta...711010306?s=21
https://twitter.com/getfandom/status...968656385?s=21

Sounds like Patty should do a DC Deadman movie!

[Leo656]

Originally Posted by ZariusTwo

It's very much in the tone of Whedon Justice League, both in humour and presentation

Those aren't things you tell someone as "Positives". Those are very much Reasons To Avoid.

Originally Posted by CyberCubed

Also was Kristen Wiig/Cheetah trying to be like Burton's Selina Kyle/Catwoman? Another awkward blonde woman who doesn't fit in at her workplace and her boss takes advantage of her? Then she gains powers, gets stronger and takes revenge on people, and then almost dies at the end of the movie by electrocution but doesn't? This was all Batman Returns Catwoman, wasn't it? It's all I could think of while watching her scenes because of how similar they were.

Definitely not the first person to say that, I'm seeing it everywhere. It seems like Patty Jenkins is a huge fan of "remixing" other peoples' work as part of her "visionary" style.

Originally Posted by ZariusTwo

If you loved it, that's all the reason anyone needs to dislike it.

HAH! Glad I didn't have to be That Guy this time.

Originally Posted by Coola Yagami

Wow..... so they couldn't even do 'undo a comic book death' thing correctly.

I don't understand why they even killed him. Isn't he still alive in current DC comics? Or is that just the trade off cause WW has been around in comics since WW1 and Steve is destined to meet her first but they can't explain how he can still be alive in modern day without being a billion years old. How do they explain it in the comics?

Poorly. Steve Trevor's died and come back several times, both due to "sliding timelines" (sometimes he's introduced as a 1940s-era character, sometimes Diana meets him in the modern day, depending on which timeline you're in) and the fact that he's the only "love interest" for Diana that anyone knows of or is interested in writing about. But in either case he's been killed and resurrected several times and it's always pretty hokey. Wikipedia can explain it better than I can. But I'd argue that there's no "good" version of it.

And yeah, given that they set the first movie so far in the past and insisted on including him, there's no plausible way he could still be alive Now. Gotta do something to work around that. Which would be fine if they didn't insist on finding ways to bring him back. Like this movie's take on it is VERY stupid, even if it fits the rest of the movie's plot. But then I rather find the entire Monkey's Paw Crystal plot to be rather stupid in and of itself, anyway. But that's me.

I never cared about Steve all that much, myself, because I first got into Wonder Woman comics during a time when he wasn't much of a factor, and Diana herself at that point wasn't being defined by who her relationship partner was. Frankly the "romance" stuff has always been the least-interesting part of Wonder Woman stories, to me. In most of the 80s/90s comics I grew up on it wasn't even a big factor, she was "just" a super-hero.

Which to me makes a bit more sense, given that she's thousands of years old and any "true love" she ever meets is going to end up being someone she spends figuratively five minutes with during the course of her entire lifespan. Sure, there's a tragedy in that, sort of a "Highlander" thing; but to me it's not worth spending a huge amount of time dwelling on, it's just morbid. I'unno. I don't think who she sleeps with should ever be a main primary focus of the character or her adventures.

Originally Posted by Shark_Blade

#WW84* director Patty Jenkins says Superman is the next DC character she wants to make a movie about https://twitter.com/culturecrave/sta...711010306?s=21
https://twitter.com/getfandom/status...968656385?s=21

That's a hard "No" from me, dawg. Hokey, cheesy, cornball Superman can stay in the goddamn 1970s. Regression is not Evolution. We already had an entire movie where Superman wastes the entire running time trying to get in Lois Lane's panties instead of saving the world when Donner did it, and it was awful. Based on all evidence that's what Jenkins would do (and she more or less ripped off That Movie for This Movie in some ways, thematically). No thanks. She can keep making Wonder Woman, she can keep doing "Girl Power" chick flicks disguised as super-hero movies. But for the love of God, keep her away from Superman.

Originally Posted by oldmanwinters

Sounds like Patty should do a DC Deadman movie!

I don't know, are there any movies similar enough to the "Deadman" character/concept for her to rip o-... I mean, "homage"?
---------------------

More and more, from what I'm seeing, it's pretty obvious that Jenkins was only really interested in making a rom/com about Diana and Steve Trevor, and by all accounts that's where this movie shines brightest. But when it gets back into "Super-Hero Stuff", it apparently stumbles. That seems to be a near-unanimous consensus whether a person really liked the movie or really disliked it, they all seem to mostly agree on that part.

That's the stuff I care about the least in most super-hero movies (allowing for Lois and Clark stuff, if done well, which in Superman II it most certainly was not), and as explained above I particularly don't care about it in Wonder Woman stories. So I pretty much know what to expect when I get around to this one, probably when the Blu-ray comes out eventually.

I really did enjoy almost everything about the first one, even the stuff with her and Steve, but all that stuff seemed "finished" by the end. And I get wanting to revisit it for this one so Diana can learn a lesson or two, but it also sounds like they focus so much on that to the point where the rest of the film suffers for it. I'm not sure if there'll be more (even Jenkins has said she's unsure about coming back for Round 3), but between these two movies and Steve getting name-dropped in Whedon's "Justice League", we're getting dangerously close to Diana being a character whose primary trait is mooning over someone she was in love with once upon a time, and that shouldn't be the case.

I'm definitely not against more Wonder Woman movies because there's a lot more to be done with the character, for sure. But I sincerely hope that they give the romance/Steve Trevor stuff a rest after this. Like okay, she learned about Love and Loss, she learned about Moving On and not being selfish... time to let things move forward and not keep Steve as the Defining Moment and Factor in her entire life.

Of course, given the huge bath this movie's gonna take financially, who knows if they'll do a Part 3 anytime soon? And when they do, it might have to look a whole lot different. Guess we'll have to wait and see what happens.

[IMJ]

Saw it tonight. It was fine. The strongest thing that franchise has going for it is an endlessly respectable and lovable Gal Gadot. Jenkins is good at that sort of over-arching thematic buildup that can choke you up emotionally, but beyond that both of these flicks really linger on in some moments, and this one had some really strange plot contrivances that sort of just happen. And, like the first one it ends on a note of extreme melodrama.

And seriously? Another super hero movie where the superhero loses her/his powers and has to endeavor to get them back? How did that become... like.... every sequel ever? It was fine, the movie was fine. I guess.

[Coola Yagami]

Originally Posted by IMJ

Saw it tonight. It was fine. The strongest thing that franchise has going for it is an endlessly respectable and lovable Gal Gadot. Jenkins is good at that sort of over-arching thematic buildup that can choke you up emotionally, but beyond that both of these flicks really linger on in some moments, and this one had some really strange plot contrivances that sort of just happen. And, like the first one it ends on a note of extreme melodrama.

And seriously? Another super hero movie where the superhero loses her/his powers and has to endeavor to get them back? How did that become... like.... every sequel ever? It was fine, the movie was fine. I guess.

I guess every hero has to go through that 'its not the powers that make the hero, it's the man/woman themselves' phase.

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by Coola Yagami

I guess every hero has to go through that 'its not the powers that make the hero, it's the man/woman themselves' phase.

Green Lantern writers have loved that since forever. Hal keeps losing his ring, etc..

[ZariusTwo]

Originally Posted by IMJ

Saw it tonight. It was fine. The strongest thing that franchise has going for it is an endlessly respectable and lovable Gal Gadot..

Honestly, had it not been for the final scene between her and Pine, I probably would have written Gal off as a one trick pony who's stoic performance in the first film got an easy pass because Diana had the "fish out of water" angle going for her. She wasn't that particularly impressive in Justice League either, and she's not all that impressive here. Her performance in the climax against Barbara and Lord needed more empathy and emotional weight, but every line she utters is basic and emotionless.

[Leo656]

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

Green Lantern writers have loved that since forever. Hal keeps losing his ring, etc..

"Guy Gardner: Reborn" is truly a masterpiece. Definitely the best of the "lost/regained powers" stories in the Green Lantern mythos, for my money. Actually, the whole first 10 or so issues of his solo book were a really clever riff on that type of story, what with his yellow ring constantly running out of power at strange times and him having no idea how to recharge it until way later on. It's like they set him up to be a supreme unstoppable badass by giving him the most powerful weapon in the DC Universe, so it's like "Okay, he's literally stronger than anybody except maybe Superman, now," and you wonder how they're gonna put any conflict in his stories. But then they immediately subvert it by having the yellow ring be completely unreliable, at first, so he's forced to rely on his wits and cunning rather than his powers to get himself out of trouble. That was beautiful stuff. Especially that one issue where he had to fight friggin' Lobo without any powers, and just refused to give him the ring or give up even though he got beat nearly to death. That was some great stuff, right there. Stuff like that is why he's one of my all-time favorite characters.

On the Superman front, "Krisis of the Krimson Kryptonite" was pretty great, too.

Outside of those couple I find the general story a bit redundant, most times. It's been done and RE-done with every character you can think of, and a lot of them end up being very predictable. At least those two stories were creative and had a lot of twists and turns a reader wouldn't expect. Like Superman's lost his powers a hundred times but that's like the only story about it that really jumps out. When you know going in how the story's going to end, the "A-B-C" of the actual plot had better be damn good. And most of the time they're pretty paint-by-numbers, for me.

[Shark_Blade]

“Wonder Woman 1984 broke records and exceeded our expectations across all of our key viewing and subscriber metrics in its first 24 hours on the service"—Andy Forssell, Executive Vice President and General Manager, WarnerMedia Direct-to-Consumer

https://twitter.com/warnermedia/stat...986311680?s=21
https://t.co/zPBPeNAgfx?amp=1

[ZariusTwo]

[Leo656]

I have to say I'm rather surprised at the beating this thing's taking.

First off, I figured the critics/media would do anything to uphold and defend their "feminist icon" from any and all criticism, especially since they "need" Wonder Woman in that space since so many other "feminist" movies and franchises in recent times have done poorly, but no... Nobody's holding anything back as far as what didn't work or could have been better. "The story is bad. The CGI is inconsistent. The villains are weak and one-dimensional. The 'Boss Fight' with the main villain is a scolding finger-wag lecture about not being greedy and selfish. There are lots of plot holes which the movie does nothing whatsoever to address. There is absolutely no reason for this movie to be set in the '80s." And so on. And they're just as prevalent in the "positive" reviews (which seem to top out about 7/10), so it's not like this can be dismissed as sour grapes.

Furthermore, I thought for sure that the comments sections would be full of the usual "Screw the critics/haters" stuff from apologists, like with "Birds of Prey", but again, no. It's almost exclusively, "Man, I really WANTED to love this movie, but..." stuff, with the second half of the sentence either "Instead I just thought it was alright" or "It was total junk" depending on the individual.

It really does seem like the only people who LOVE it are little kids (and, of course, their like-minded "adult" counterparts). I'm seeing a lot of "My daughter loved it; she just thought it was funny and she liked seeing Diana swing around on lightning bolts and stuff like that. She doesn't care about plot holes or badly-written villains; she's also 7."

I admit, I fully expected a lot of apologist cheerleading for this movie from The Usual Sources, but aside from a very small number of individuals, it simply isn't there. For once, it seems like fans and critics are in full agreement that this movie could have and should have been a LOT better. And they even agree on specifically WHAT doesn't work, which is even more rare.

Gotta admit, I'm stunned. I'm not shocked that it's not great because I read the Spoilers almost two years ago, so I knew most of what was coming and I knew that the only thing saving it were the visuals. I AM shocked that it's so "not-great" that people are willing to be honest about it and SAY that it's not great, though.

Goes to show you never can tell, I guess.

EDIT: Once again, partly out of spite because I normally refuse to post links and that apparently annoys people, and also since I just happen to have it open right now, here's an example of what I mean.

https://411mania.com/movies/wonder-woman-1984-review/

A middling review in which the reviewer insists that "it's Fine" despite not being able to hold back on all the negatives, and a pretty strong consensus of "This thing sucks" in the Comments from (mostly) people who liked the first one.

[NinjaPug]

Originally Posted by TigerClaw

The settings. Like the Mall look like your typical 80s mall. You see a couple of dudes breakdancing. All that stuff

This movie had extremely minimal connections to the 80s. I don’t understand why it was called WW84 if you’re not going to lean into that decade. Throw out the wardrobe and the mall scene and this could’ve been called WW64, WW74, WW94, etc.

[CyberCubed]

I assume it was also in the 80's to show Ronald Reagan as president, the Saudi oil crisis, and the Soviet Union Cold War with the west? I mean the climax of the film deals with Russia and the U.S. launching missiles at each other.