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.

 chromedog wrote:

 AduroT wrote:
I don’t like that they’re bringing Steve back, but looks quite good otherwise.

It's probably the same trope they used in the old Lynda Carter 70s tv series. It started in WW2, and then moved into the "modern" days, with Steve being a descendent of the older one or something.

Doubt that. She appeared to have to explain modern things to him, like that trash can isn’t an art piece. I think it’s more likely the weird resurrection/fake hearts desire thing by the villain. Well get to watch Steve die all over again.

 cuda1179 wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:

 cuda1179 wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
. Christian Bale is the worst Batman we have ever seen in live action. Yes. Worse than Clooney.

Ouch, that might be going too far. Clooney was horrible as both Bruce Wayne and Batman. Not to mention the feel of that movie was all over the place. And Batnipples.

At least Clooney was in charge of the situation and prepared for what he was dealing with.

Christian Bale is the dumbest batman we have ever seen. He refuses to kill one guy so kills an entire building full of people on accident including the guy he refused to kill. At the end of every dark knight movie the bad guy explains the plot of the movie to him because he still hasn't figured out wtf is going on. He says no guns but shoots rockets at Talia's truck and kills her. He is a literal god damn moron running around in body armor and getting his ass kicked by every person he meets for the 6 hours we watch him. The WORST.

Well, yeah, but unlike Clooney at least Bale's head wasn't bouncing back and forth with every spoken salable like some kind of humanoid bobblehead.

Yeah. When i go watch a batman movie the element i put above all others in terms of batman elements is the motions, or lack there of, that his head makes. We all knows thats what makes or breaks a good batman.

Steve was wearing a fanny pack..... tee hee!

 gorgon wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Turnip Jedi wrote:
"well the near endless flood of edgy misery hasn't really worked out for us...let go silly and 80's, with a hint of Ragnorok"

that'll do DC, that'll do

Sort of - WW1, JL1 and Aquaman were all great Marvelesque movies

The excellent and brutal Atomic Blonde had plenty of great 80s fun / music.

JL was NOT a marvel esc movie. It was a disjointed shallow cgi nothing with mischaracterized nonsense.

Marvels quality is consistently better than that. WW, Aquaman, and Shazam are their only good entries at this point.

I think a little billion-dollar movie called Joker deserves to be included there. I'll also defend Man of Steel to the end...and feel like it's starting to be appreciated more with time.

But JL...well...I'll refrain from commenting and just say that story will be a fantastic read someday when someone spills all the beans on the bonkers stuff around that production. It's insane from the outside and must have been exponentially so on the inside. It's not -- for instance -- what Cavill's lip looked like. It's about the decision process and personalities that led them to that point and approved the film for release in that state.

Edit: Trailer has some style to it. Be interesting to see how much of that carries over to the film.

Don't forget multiple Batman movies.

Could not agree more about how bad the Nolan Batman movies were.

Back to WW.

So is Steve a figment, reborn or is the other guy pretending to be him somehow, the bit where she sees him at the event, he seems to use the watch as a trigger and you donlt see his face until after, he has the same hair style(ish)

 Lance845 wrote:

 cuda1179 wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
. Christian Bale is the worst Batman we have ever seen in live action. Yes. Worse than Clooney.

Ouch, that might be going too far. Clooney was horrible as both Bruce Wayne and Batman. Not to mention the feel of that movie was all over the place. And Batnipples.

At least Clooney was in charge of the situation and prepared for what he was dealing with.

Christian Bale is the dumbest batman we have ever seen. He refuses to kill one guy so kills an entire building full of people on accident including the guy he refused to kill. At the end of every dark knight movie the bad guy explains the plot of the movie to him because he still hasn't figured out wtf is going on. He says no guns but shoots rockets at Talia's truck and kills her. He is a literal god damn moron running around in body armor and getting his ass kicked by every person he meets for the 6 hours we watch him. The WORST.

Wouldn't that be the story's fault and not the actor's fault?

 Mr Morden wrote:
Could not agree more about how bad the Nolan Batman movies were.

Back to WW.

So is Steve a figment, reborn or is the other guy pretending to be him somehow, the bit where she sees him at the event, he seems to use the watch as a trigger and you donlt see his face until after, he has the same hair style(ish)

There really is little doubt that the Nolan Batman movies -- 94%/94% RT, 84 MC rating, 'A' Cinemascore, multiple Oscar-winning and nominated, multiple billion dollar earners -- were completely terrible films.

But Thor 2...now that's a fething work of art...isn't that right, Morden?

 gorgon wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
Could not agree more about how bad the Nolan Batman movies were.

Back to WW.

So is Steve a figment, reborn or is the other guy pretending to be him somehow, the bit where she sees him at the event, he seems to use the watch as a trigger and you donlt see his face until after, he has the same hair style(ish)

There really is little doubt that the Nolan Batman movies -- 94%/94% RT, 84 MC rating, 'A' Cinemascore, multiple Oscar-winning and nominated, multiple billion dollar earners -- were completely terrible films.

But Thor 2...now that's a fething work of art...isn't that right, Morden?

I don;t care what others think of a film, They/you don't care what I think (and if so why?) - so whats the issue.... I don;t have to like what you like - and vice versa....

I like Thor 2 - I don't claim its a cinematic masterpiece - but Its enjoyable rather than the crap Nolan churns out - IMO

Back to Wonder Woman maybe?

The Nolan films are still not a patch on Lego Bats

I think we need a Lego WW to embrace some of the stranger (well PG strange) parts of the Mythos, I'm sure at one point Paradise Island had Kangaroos instead of horses...

 Turnip Jedi wrote:
The Nolan films are still not a patch on Lego Bats

I think we need a Lego WW to embrace some of the stranger (well PG strange) parts of the Mythos, I'm sure at one point Paradise Island had Kangaroos instead of horses...

Lego moveis - esp Lego bats were great fun - WW is in that one briefly.

 MDSW wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:

 cuda1179 wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
. Christian Bale is the worst Batman we have ever seen in live action. Yes. Worse than Clooney.

Ouch, that might be going too far. Clooney was horrible as both Bruce Wayne and Batman. Not to mention the feel of that movie was all over the place. And Batnipples.

At least Clooney was in charge of the situation and prepared for what he was dealing with.

Christian Bale is the dumbest batman we have ever seen. He refuses to kill one guy so kills an entire building full of people on accident including the guy he refused to kill. At the end of every dark knight movie the bad guy explains the plot of the movie to him because he still hasn't figured out wtf is going on. He says no guns but shoots rockets at Talia's truck and kills her. He is a literal god damn moron running around in body armor and getting his ass kicked by every person he meets for the 6 hours we watch him. The WORST.

Wouldn't that be the story's fault and not the actor's fault?

Nobody blaimed any one person or thing for how bad it is. Bales name is used to specify that THAT batman is the one we are talking about. But just fyi, Bale thinks Batman is one of the dumbest characters ever made and he played it ridiculous because he thinks the character is ridiculous. So i think its fair to say that it is partially his fault too.


Thor 2 didnt mischaracterize the people in it. While not the best of the mcus offerings its still actually a Thor movie which does make it better at its baseline job than any of the Nolan Batmans.


We simply dont have any data to know why steve is back or in what capacity. Speculation at this point could be in ww head, magic (cause he blew up in a plane filled with gas fueled by magic), time travel, anything...

We will have to wait for more info to find out why.

I wonder how this movie is going to compare with the Black Widow movie.

epronovost wrote:
I wonder how this movie is going to compare with the Black Widow movie.

suspect it'll be a strange reverse the polarity of the neutron flow flip with the DC one being fun and the Marvel one attempting some kind of point (killing is bad m'kay, apart from when its not...)

 Turnip Jedi wrote:

epronovost wrote:
I wonder how this movie is going to compare with the Black Widow movie.

suspect it'll be a strange reverse the polarity of the neutron flow flip with the DC one being fun and the Marvel one attempting some kind of point (killing is bad m'kay, apart from when its not...)

The first WW had "a point": war is horrible and is ultimately a human choice (mostly). Unsurprisingly, it also contained a fair deal of celebration of feminism and its rethoric. The second one seem to point toward a moral based on the rejection of duplicity (especially in politics) and conformism.

Black widow seems to be gunning for a "you can't erase or forget your past" sort of point.

 Lance845 wrote:


Thor 2 didnt mischaracterize the people in it.

Well... it did a bit. Odin certainly flipped entirely from his Thor 1 incarnation (rule with compassion and justice to casual racist with no pity for humans, plus short-sighted warmonger as things develop, exactly what he was railing against in film 1), and then flipped to something completely different for Ragnarok (mellow prophet, abandoning all responsibility), few of which are in-line with comic or mythological Odin, at least not in that short a span.

Voss wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:


Thor 2 didnt mischaracterize the people in it.

Well... it did a bit. Odin certainly flipped entirely from his Thor 1 incarnation (rule with compassion and justice to casual racist with no pity for humans, plus short-sighted warmonger as things develop, exactly what he was railing against in film 1), and then flipped to something completely different for Ragnarok (mellow prophet, abandoning all responsibility), few of which are in-line with comic or mythological Odin, at least not in that short a span.

Which is not actually a mischaracterization of the character.

Odin has always been a manipulative dick in the comics. He preaches a big game about honor and duty and justice and blah blah, but he uses everyone as pawns to his own ends. He says what he needs to say piece by piece to turn each person into the person he needs them to be to do the plans he wants them to do. Every aspect of Odin we have seen in the movies has been an aspect of Odin we have seen in the comics to one end or another.

Just gonna say it. Gal Gadot has way more charisma, charm and emotional expression than a certain someone. At least DC can do that right.

 Lance845 wrote:

Voss wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:


Thor 2 didnt mischaracterize the people in it.

Well... it did a bit. Odin certainly flipped entirely from his Thor 1 incarnation (rule with compassion and justice to casual racist with no pity for humans, plus short-sighted warmonger as things develop, exactly what he was railing against in film 1), and then flipped to something completely different for Ragnarok (mellow prophet, abandoning all responsibility), few of which are in-line with comic or mythological Odin, at least not in that short a span.

Which is not actually a mischaracterization of the character.

Odin has always been a manipulative dick in the comics. He preaches a big game about honor and duty and justice and blah blah, but he uses everyone as pawns to his own ends. He says what he needs to say piece by piece to turn each person into the person he needs them to be to do the plans he wants them to do. Every aspect of Odin we have seen in the movies has been an aspect of Odin we have seen in the comics to one end or another.

Except at no point is he manipulating people. That's the rub. He's having honest emotional reactions that run a random gamut. There isn't any plan, scheme or game involved, everything takes him by surprise (except Hela at his end). 1 & 3 run with the idea that he's really reformed and totally means it.
He wants Thor to be king, but not an 'unworthy' one, despite his own past and frankly terrible reputation. He exhibits genuine rage at the idea of Thor starting another war and not caring about his people.

Voss wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:

Voss wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:


Thor 2 didnt mischaracterize the people in it.

Well... it did a bit. Odin certainly flipped entirely from his Thor 1 incarnation (rule with compassion and justice to casual racist with no pity for humans, plus short-sighted warmonger as things develop, exactly what he was railing against in film 1), and then flipped to something completely different for Ragnarok (mellow prophet, abandoning all responsibility), few of which are in-line with comic or mythological Odin, at least not in that short a span.

Which is not actually a mischaracterization of the character.

Odin has always been a manipulative dick in the comics. He preaches a big game about honor and duty and justice and blah blah, but he uses everyone as pawns to his own ends. He says what he needs to say piece by piece to turn each person into the person he needs them to be to do the plans he wants them to do. Every aspect of Odin we have seen in the movies has been an aspect of Odin we have seen in the comics to one end or another.

Except at no point is he manipulating people. That's the rub. He's having honest emotional reactions that run a random gamut. There isn't any plan, scheme or game involved, everything takes him by surprise (except Hela at his end). 1 & 3 run with the idea that he's really reformed and totally means it.
He wants Thor to be king, but not an 'unworthy' one, despite his own past and frankly terrible reputation. He exhibits genuine rage at the idea of Thor starting another war and not caring about his people.

Remember Thor at the beginning of Thor 1? Remember Thor at the end of Thor 3? Some could argue that Odin is responsible in many ways for the events that caused that growth. Especially if you attribute him some foreknowledge that is Odins classic shtick.

Reviews are rolling in. Not bad so far...90 on RT, 68 on MC. MC score doesn't seem inspiring, although the first film only had a 76 I think. And hey...we all know it's not going to be Citizen Kane.

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/wonder_woman_1984
https://www.metacritic.com/movie/wonder-woman-1984

This is unquestionably the movie I am most excited about this year. I bought a 4K laser projector for this, and I guess this is how we're spending Christmas.

 Ouze wrote:
This is unquestionably the movie I am most excited about this year. I bought a 4K laser projector for this, and I guess this is how we're spending Christmas.

How is that 4K laser projector going for you guys?

Me and my wife are eyeing to get one...

...and yeah WW on Christmas is how we're planning that day.

 gorgon wrote:
Reviews are rolling in. Not bad so far...90 on RT, 68 on MC. MC score doesn't seem inspiring, although the first film only had a 76 I think. And hey...we all know it's not going to be Citizen Kane.

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/wonder_woman_1984
https://www.metacritic.com/movie/wonder-woman-1984

A 76 on MC was more than fair for that first film. It was a competently made movie, but nothing extraordinary.

Looking forward to 84. I love Pedro Pascal and the trailers look fun.

So! Pretty good. Quite enjoyed it. Lasso stunts are incredibly dialed up to 11. Good drama and emotional bits. Lots of little Easter eggs and stuff. Mid credits scene was made me smile. Very enjoyable movie overall I thought.

Was kinda bummed out by it to be honest. It wasn't bad, but it was nowhere near as good as the first one (and that one had some real issues with the boss fight).

-Some of the lasso work honestly seemed a little too much, more Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon than Wonder Woman.
-
-Everything looked too... colorful in some scenes. It was a style choice I didn't love.

The golden eagle armor didn't look as bad as I was worried it might from the trailer. It looked fine.

The 2h30m runtime.... while I don't dislike longer movies, they really have to justify it by filling that time with quality storytelling. Malcolm X made it fly by, but this could easily have been edited down to 2 hours and improved the pacing.

+Cheetah looked good.
+Pedro Pascal
+loved the mid credit cookie.
+I enjoyed some of the other bits of fan service.

I hoped to love it, but it really was pretty meh at best. I saw it had a 59 on metacritic and that seems about right honestly.

 Ouze wrote:
I hoped to love it, but it really was pretty meh at best. I saw it had a 59 on metacritic and that seems about right honestly.

Pretty meh indeed.

Way too long and much campier than the first. The opening mall scene was a whole lot of cringe. From the robbers themselves, to the manufactured danger escalation of that scene, it felt like something from a gakky TV show.

The convoy chase scene was excellent though.

I found myself constantly looking at the clock to see how much longer this would last. Had I been in a theater, I probably would've hated this movie.

While I'd have to hold my hands up and say that whatever seems to have resonated with so many about the first one went over my head, I'm firmly in the meh camp.

The two bright points were the two female leads and Cheetah's arc. I think Gal Gadot is now second to RDJ as Tony Stark for me in the list of actors I can't imagine anyone doing it better list.

I didn’t love it, but Jenkins also clearly tried to make an 80s-styled film - down to the photography and performances. So while camp isn’t my thing, I get that dipping deep into the style of Christopher Reeve Superman films was the point. And I like that she tried to offer something very different from the first.

Biggest issue for me was the length...felt like it could have been shorter. Maybe needed a tighter story for the Max Lord stuff. Brightest spots were the performances IMO...Gadot has really locked in on Diana, and Wiig handled the transformation of Barbara really well. Hard to imagine anyone making Lord work better than Pascal did. It’s a big cheesy 80s villain role that could have gone really wrong in the hands of someone else.

80’s camp? Man, I can’t wait to see this. I’ll probably have to wait another week at least. :(

I honestly thought Birds of Prey was better and WW, Shazam, Aquaman, and Man of Steel were all much better. The main plotline was good conceptually, but executed poorly. Pedro Pascal's performance was wasted. Wiig was surprisingly good. IMO, Gal Gadot was incredibly wooden all film. She doesn't emote at all. Literally every other actor (other than the kid) outperformed her.