Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
I suspect the various comments attempting to manufacture outrage about theoretical other manufactured outrage.
We find comfort among those who agree with us - growth among those who don't. - Frank Howard Clark
The wise man doubts often, and changes his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubts not; he knows all things but his own ignorance.
The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!” Professor Brian Cox
Azreal13 wrote: I suspect the various comments attempting to manufacture outrage about theoretical other manufactured outrage.
I mean, I wasn't gonna say anything but it's good to know I'm not the only one who noticed XD
You weren't. I've seen a thread on a different forum that had the same thing--
"If the genders had been reversed, everyone would be criticising the movie for it!"
"They ARE criticising the movie for it."
"Yeah, but they'd be....criticising it a bit harder or something!"
"The 75mm gun is firing. The 37mm gun is firing, but is traversed round the wrong way. The Browning is jammed. I am saying "Driver, advance." and the driver, who can't hear me, is reversing. And as I look over the top of the turret and see twelve enemy tanks fifty yards away, someone hands me a cheese sandwich."
There's a subtle difference between graphically depicting violence towards women (especially in ways that happen in reality, rather than movies. This is also true of minority groups, fyi), and a villainous character casually killing people.
No, wait I'm wrong. It isn't subtle.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/01/12 18:01:07
I think maybe the real issue is that insinuating that people would be angrier if the male character had been female does nothing to actually contribute to the discussion people are having and one could say that the sole point of dredging it up is the flame bait the thread and send it spiraling off topic.
I'm actually quite pleased that plenty of people have actually apparently spotted that some posters were, wittingly or otherwise, casually tossing landmines into the thread and have chosen not to indulge it.
We find comfort among those who agree with us - growth among those who don't. - Frank Howard Clark
The wise man doubts often, and changes his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubts not; he knows all things but his own ignorance.
The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!” Professor Brian Cox
Eh, I *do* think there would have been a bigger outcry if the roles were reversed and if the director had been a man. However it is unfair to say there isn't any reaction to it. Personally I'd have appreciated seeing it addressed in the movie, it could have made an interesting plot point and it could have driven some of the core movie.
If there's one thing the film doesn't need it's more plot points, regardless of how interesting or worthy they may be.
We find comfort among those who agree with us - growth among those who don't. - Frank Howard Clark
The wise man doubts often, and changes his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubts not; he knows all things but his own ignorance.
The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!” Professor Brian Cox
creeping-deth87 wrote: My morbid curiosity is super high, just not high enough to blow $30 to rent it!
Apparently Canada got a bad deal as here, and seemingly other places, it is just part of HBO Max which is $15 for a month and includes all their other movies/shows. A free trial might even still exist. The only film I have heard of costing that much to rent was the awful Mulan live action Disney film on Disney+.
I do believe it leaves HBO Max at the end of the month but haven't seen anything to say it would be an overpriced rental at that point.
30 bucks seems like a lot but I watched it trick is I did it with my family, we even had my sister over (she's in our bubble no tsking people) so it wasn't that bad as it was basicly "instead of the movie theatres" 30 bucks spread among 4 people is 7.50 a pop? I WISH movie tickets where that good. (and my couch is infantely more comfortable then a theatre seat)
Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two
Azreal13 wrote: If there's one thing the film doesn't need it's more plot points, regardless of how interesting or worthy they may be.
I've seen that issue addressed in multiple places by people that would typically excuse a female director. The idea that it's being ignored is absurd. Maybe it would be slightly bigger if it was a male director and male lead is accurate, but it's far from being ignored. The reaction to WW84 is such that people I know who haven't seen it are mentioning that they heard it was bad.
Right now the like rating for WW84 per Google is lower than The Last Jedi and The Rise of Skywalker and TROS wasn't well received by critics.
For Google Users:
Birds of Prey: 81%
Justice League: 80% (what?!)
BVS: 75%
Suicide Squad: 81% (also what?!)
Wonder Woman (2017): 87%
Wonder Woman 1984: 67%
I think people are ignoring claims about WW84 being liked or tolerated because they're simply false. It's 1 of 2 films under 80% on Google Users and also the lowest one by a wide margin.
The only way we can ever solve anything is to look in the mirror and find no enemy
Azreal13 wrote: If there's one thing the film doesn't need it's more plot points, regardless of how interesting or worthy they may be.
No true, I didn't mean in addition to I meant in place of.
The whole "Wonder Woman losing her powers because of a man +regaining them and being able to soar once a man stopped holding her back" subtle thread could have been replaced with the moral dilemma of immortal vs mortal morals and the wrongness of using people for your own pleasure and even addressing the social issue of preferred (pro) nouns. The original guy could have started breaking through and she could have seen what her wish was doing to *other people* as opposed to just herself. Handled right it could have been more fitting to this.... Period drama? Than the poor excuse for an action movie it was. And not disrupted continuity by breaking canon as it did.
As a movie I'd give it like a 3/5. As a Wonder it gets like a 3/10. As part of a DCEU it get a 3/2.
Edited for way too many typos.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2021/01/13 09:52:05
Azreal13 wrote: If there's one thing the film doesn't need it's more plot points, regardless of how interesting or worthy they may be.
No true, I didn't mean in addition to I meant in place of.
The whole "Wonder Woman losing her powers because of a man +regaining them and being able to soar once a man stopped holding her back" subtle thread could have been replaced with the moral dilemma of immortal vs mortal morals and the wrongness of using people for your own pleasure and even addressing the social issue of preferred (pro) nouns. The original guy could have started breaking through and she could have seen what her wish was doing to *other people* as opposed to just herself. Handled right it could have been more fitting to this.... Period drama? Than the poor excuse for an action movie it was. And not disrupted continuity by breaking canon as it did.
As a movie I'd give it like a 3/5. As a Wonder it gets like a 3/10. As part of a DCEU it get a 3/2.
Edited for way too many typos.
I think you are giving this movie WAY too much credit for having "themes". There is only one, maybe 2 themes. 1) there are no short cuts. 2) Be careful what you wish for. Everything else in this movie is a set up in service to those 2 messages. Steve trevor needs to come back from a wish both so WW can suffer the monkey's paw curse and have to be careful what she wishes for and so that her wish can act as her short cut she can ultimately refuse. Thats it. There is no more depth to anything in this movie than that. There isn't an underlying gender message here because the movie doesn't have enough depth to even begin to touch on any of that. Steve exists purely to be WWs plot device and any scene with him is circumstantial at best in service to those 2 messages.
People compare Maxwell Lord to Trump? Superficial at best. He just needs to be careful what he wishes for and suffer for taking short cuts.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/01/13 11:10:40
These are my opinions. This is how I feel. Others may feel differently. This needs to be stated for some reason.
Lance845 wrote: . Thats it. There is no more depth to anything in this movie than that. There isn't an underlying gender message here because the movie doesn't have enough depth to even begin to touch on any of that. Steve exists purely to be WWs plot device and any scene with him is circumstantial at best in service to those 2 messages.
People compare Maxwell Lord to Trump? Superficial at best. He just needs to be careful what he wishes for and suffer for taking short cuts.
Not sure I agree with you. Yeah sure the movie lacked depth, which I think better plot points would have given it depth. Was my plot point going to do that? I dunno. I'm not a screenwriter. I could be very wrong.
But I do think the thinly veiled virtue signalling is there. Even if it isn't meant to be there the allegory of getting rid of the man who's draining your powers to be a Wonder Woman and being able to *literally* spread your wings once he's no longer holding you back is a little on the nose to be unintentional or accidental.
And getting your superpowers back is a shortcut to victory. Ask Logan. He had to pay dearly for his final victory after losing his powers.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/01/13 12:35:20
Compel wrote: For what it's worth, I think the intention was more about stop looking backwards to the past, than anything gendery.
I don't think its any good at teaching that lesson though.
1) Everything depends on the idea that she only remembers shortcuts/easy roads are bad because she's still hyper-focused on an eleven minute lecture she got for cheating once when she was a brat.
2) She was hung on up this guy she knew for maybe a couple weeks for almost 70 years.
3) She digs out the armor of some past heroine because... something, something. (plus end credits cameo)
Sure she has a moment where she shrugs out of the armor, walks away from her hangup and painfully retells the childhood lecture to get people give up on their dreams, but even then it still seems painfully past focus (something the dusting of 80s 'nostalgia' reinforces). Even at the end there's still a sense of wallowing in the dreams of the past, and looking forward to the future with hope, dreams and fantasies is somehow wrong or for other people.
The messaging is (probably unconsciously, because nothing seems well thought out) pretty depressing, overall. The past is something you're stuck with, but aspirations are damaging.
The suit of armor, wings and all, only exists because Alex Ross painted it that one time when he did Kingdom Come. Again, I don't think there is meant to be any message here. Consider how much "dumb" WW gak they put in there with sometimes entire scenes dedicated just to showing you that they put it in the movie. The Invisible Jet. The Tiara boomerang. Tat horrible looking armor. They just took things that were "cool" and smashed them in over the a bloated plot that had a lot of nothing going on with a couple VERY simplistic messages that were better related to the audience in episodes of the original Twilight Zone.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/01/13 21:22:35
These are my opinions. This is how I feel. Others may feel differently. This needs to be stated for some reason.
Just can’t bring myself to pay for it. Spesh as I found the first “meh” at best. Just like her appearance in BvS, it was more The Least Worst Thing about a series of jobbies.
Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?
Just can’t bring myself to pay for it. Spesh as I found the first “meh” at best. Just like her appearance in BvS, it was more The Least Worst Thing about a series of jobbies.
Kal-El, no! How could you not be willing to purchase the best film since Citizen Kane? /s
People compare Maxwell Lord to Trump? Superficial at best. He just needs to be careful what he wishes for and suffer for taking short cuts.
there are some similaries to trump, the hair (seriously go look at a pic of trump in the 80s, he looks quite similer to how Lord was designed) the guy pretending to be richer then he is to sell himself as the master of a life style etc. he's obviously differant but the similarites are there eneugh that it's easy to see why people think trump given how on our mind the man has been
Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two
Yeah I get it. Sleazy 80s business man. Cheating his way to the top. I am just saying there is no message there. If they ARE intending to design Max Lord to be a Trump stand in then they did nothing with it to any effect or theme. Which leads me to think any similarities are either paper thin or coincidental. Like everything else in the movie.
These are my opinions. This is how I feel. Others may feel differently. This needs to be stated for some reason.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Either you’ve got a really good memory for my (admittedly few) criticisms, or we’ve a similar ear for flatly delivered lines.
I’m always slightly baffled when folk praise her acting, because I’m just not seeing it.
She's a model in a metal bikini, there were far better choices to play Diana out there. Hell, Alexandra Daddario basically played her in Percy Jackson and the Lightning Thief.
