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.

It wasn't "kind of intended" - it was the specifically chosen impact of that scene. - EG in that same montage. "Human beings have a horrible track record of following people with great power down paths that have led to huge human atrocities."

It's all about the framing / lighting / design of the scenes and the choices made.

EG, compare and contrast the: "I certainly hope this little incident hasn't put you off flying, miss. Statistically speaking, of course, it's still the safest way to travel."

Now I'm not saying that version is my preferred (I do find the 1978 Superman actually a bit too saccharine, to be honest. I'm always for a bit more of a midground, where an Injustice style situation isn't going to happen to the main Superman character but it's not an irrational worry to question... What if?) However, it's a good example of how essentially the same character can be portrayed in different ways depending on how you want him to be portrayed. Snyder chose one way, Donner chose another.

However, being a Wonder Woman thread. I have no concerns about how they portrayed Wonder Woman in the film - There can be more than 1 heroic, inspiring character in a universe. And Wonder Woman certainly should (and is) one.

My main sort of issue with the film is more a wider universe thing of:

Went to go see it a second time and I noticed that it has some strong core themes shared with The Fifth Element, character is the ultimate living weapon against the ultimate evil, speaks a million languages and has an extensive knowledge despite never being in the human world before. Crisis of faith when she sees the horrors of humanity revealed but swayed back to action by belief that the value of love surpasses all the horrible things we do to each other.

OOOH good points!

Also helped by a secret agent who would normally be the main liner with strong abilities and charisma but fluctuates between lead and second chair as the heroine develops her strengths and struggles with moments of self doubt. Provides her support without out shining her when his character would be equally well qualified as the sole character in an action role.

I like the idea that in some versions of the setting, Clark and Diana are actually a good match for each other. But man, that could never happen in the current movie universe, lol! I don't think that even after all these years Diana is half as jaded as Clark started out.

But that's the fault of the director. So far, Supes has been set up to be super depressed and pitiable. I blame the current situation where at least half the heroes in books and movies are flawed, sad, reluctant heroes with tons of baggage.

In any sane setting, Superman would have gone public with his intentions and feelings towards his "purpose" in life to save and help people, and he and Bruce would never have been enemies, either (at least from his side; Bruce is always crazy paranoid about everything). There's a reason he's The Boyscout. But then again, Jon Kent basically screwed him up bad in this iteration.

I think that's why Wonder Woman was refreshing. Her whole purpose from the start was to be a force for good.

I'm not a fan of New 52 Clark and Diana from the animated movies. It just feels plain wrong.


However, the Kingdom Come style Clark and Diana, that's kind of interesting. Or a far future Clark and Diana, the immortals finding themselves together after their mortal loves have passed away. That I can get behind.

Finally managed to see this. Thought it was quite good, very enjoyable, and perhaps the first good DC film of their new universe.

I was very surprised at Chris Pine's performance. Probably the best I've ever seen him give.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I was very surprised at Chris Pine's performance. Probably the best I've ever seen him give.

I really liked him in Hell or High Water. And I think the only things I've seen him in are Wonder Woman, Hell or High Water and the Star Trek movies. So it's possible he's a good performer who just isn't a very good Kirk.

Yes he was excellent in that film.

I think what I liked about the film most was actually twofold:

Steve Trevor, and especially his sacrifice. It was very reminiscent of Steve Rogers putting the Hydra super plane down... except it actually made sense, and was a real sacrifice. The way he pulls that pistol, then just pauses as he realises what he's about to do, then does it anyway.

Diana's complete refusal to do what everyone else is doing when they're at the front. Basically her whole "This is ridiculous! Why won't any of you do something about this? I'm doing something about it!!!" before jumping into the No Man's Land and, eventually, leading the charge.

Finally got to seeing it, top notch stuff. Only real complaint (and it's a minor one) is the overuse of slo-mo taking a lot of the oomph out of a few of the action scenes, but other than that, very competently put together, an excellent example of the classic superhero film. While I particularly like the DCU's version of Superman (the further you get from that version of the character, the less interesting I tend to find him), this universe needed a 'proper' hero, and WW fills that role nicely.

Also, the new DC title sequence thing is just awesome. Very reminiscent of the JLTAS opening credits, and a joy to see after Marvel switched theirs from the traditional flick-book comic panels to the far inferior selection of shots from their own movies.

 Paradigm wrote:
Finally got to seeing it, top notch stuff. Only real complaint (and it's a minor one) is the overuse of slo-mo taking a lot of the oomph out of a few of the action scenes.
.

To this day the park bench scene in Bourne Identity remains the definitive "this guy/girl is a bad ass" fight. I think Watchmen went for something similar with the Ozymandias fight...

Unless it's brilliantly choreographed (Duel of the Fates) and opponents on equal footing, less is more.

 sebster wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I was very surprised at Chris Pine's performance. Probably the best I've ever seen him give.

I really liked him in Hell or High Water. And I think the only things I've seen him in are Wonder Woman, Hell or High Water and the Star Trek movies. So it's possible he's a good performer who just isn't a very good Kirk.

Well to be fair imo only the first of the ST reboot series was good, they got worse with each one. And the last one ST Beyond hit rock bottom....why have the director of fast and the furious direct star trek? What kind of idiot would allow that to even happen...bad script, story, acting. He didn't exactly have good material to work with in star trek.

Eh, well I still haven't seen wonder woman....might see it later tonight.

My family and I finally got to see it. I was a bit surprised by my wife and daughter's reactions.

My daughter found the "fish out of water" scenes really cringy and did not like them at all.

My wife told me she found Imperator Furiousa from Mad Mx: Fury Road to be a more inspiring character for her.

Both of them were not super impressed that her "true" potential was not unlocked until she got angry about what happened to Steve instead of it being unlocke by her realization that humanity was flawed, but she would protect them despite that fact. I guess I would argue it required both things to happen for her to get where she needed to be.

Question: Since Ares is defeated and Ludendorff is also defeated does that mean there is no WWII in the WB 'verse?

Well Hitler wasn't involved so...

Part of the moral of the story was about humanity taking responsibility for its own actions.

Ares didn't cause WW1 and, he ultimately wasn't responsible for the conditions that would cause WW2 and humanity fighting WW2.

Humans were. Or more specifically, mans inhumanity to man was. All Ares did was stoke the flames a little in the direction that he suited his plans.

As for Ludendorrf, well, someone else would have always just stepped into that gap.

 Easy E wrote:
My family and I finally got to see it. I was a bit surprised by my wife and daughter's reactions.

My daughter found the "fish out of water" scenes really cringy and did not like them at all.

My wife told me she found Imperator Furiousa from Mad Mx: Fury Road to be a more inspiring character for her.

Both of them were not super impressed that her "true" potential was not unlocked until she got angry about what happened to Steve instead of it being unlocke by her realization that humanity was flawed, but she would protect them despite that fact. I guess I would argue it required both things to happen for her to get where she needed to be.

Question: Since Ares is defeated and Ludendorff is also defeated does that mean there is no WWII in the WB 'verse?

I saw it finally and thought it was alright, better than most other superhero movies. The action scenes got a little over the top as well. But yeah her naivety and stuff was a bit much at times. Maybe now that she is more developed the next one will be better for it.

 Compel wrote:
Part of the moral of the story was about humanity taking responsibility for its own actions.

Ares didn't cause WW1 and, he ultimately wasn't responsible for the conditions that would cause WW2 and humanity fighting WW2.

Humans were. Or more specifically, mans inhumanity to man was. All Ares did was stoke the flames a little in the direction that he suited his plans.

As for Ludendorrf, well, someone else would have always just stepped into that gap.

Which is why I wish they had completely left Aries out of the movie. Showing him whispering to the antagonists gives plenty of reasonable doubt that he helped push the was despite his claim it's all humanity's fault. Should have left him and that doubt completely out of the equation.

 AduroT wrote:

 Compel wrote:
Part of the moral of the story was about humanity taking responsibility for its own actions.

Ares didn't cause WW1 and, he ultimately wasn't responsible for the conditions that would cause WW2 and humanity fighting WW2.

Humans were. Or more specifically, mans inhumanity to man was. All Ares did was stoke the flames a little in the direction that he suited his plans.

As for Ludendorrf, well, someone else would have always just stepped into that gap.

Which is why I wish they had completely left Aries out of the movie. Showing him whispering to the antagonists gives plenty of reasonable doubt that he helped push the was despite his claim it's all humanity's fault. Should have left him and that doubt completely out of the equation.

What kind of finish would you have replaced it with? As a similar problem with Superman, the hero is so powerful an adequate villain is problematic no?

With the...

 Compel wrote:
Part of the moral of the story was about humanity taking responsibility for its own actions.

Ares didn't cause WW1 and, he ultimately wasn't responsible for the conditions that would cause WW2 and humanity fighting WW2.

Humans were. Or more specifically, mans inhumanity to man was. All Ares did was stoke the flames a little in the direction that he suited his plans.

As for Ludendorrf, well, someone else would have always just stepped into that gap.

Wasn't that the essence of Diana's arc during the film? At first, she's naive enough to believe that war is an outside force, and that killing Ares means an end to it. Hippolyta knows better, and so does Steve. Then Diana sees to man's cruelty to man for herself and learns that it's not as simple as she thought, although her naivete also propels her to take action where others won't. This didn't seem particularly opaque or complicated to me...it was right there in the dialogue.


Regarding the gods, I hope they're not 'dead' in the DCEU. I re-read Azzarello's run on the WW comic recently (which is tremendous, FYI), and it's her interactions with her 'family' from Olympus that really made that book and served to spark some interesting stories.

 Frazzled wrote:

 AduroT wrote:

 Compel wrote:
Part of the moral of the story was about humanity taking responsibility for its own actions.

Ares didn't cause WW1 and, he ultimately wasn't responsible for the conditions that would cause WW2 and humanity fighting WW2.

Humans were. Or more specifically, mans inhumanity to man was. All Ares did was stoke the flames a little in the direction that he suited his plans.

As for Ludendorrf, well, someone else would have always just stepped into that gap.

Which is why I wish they had completely left Aries out of the movie. Showing him whispering to the antagonists gives plenty of reasonable doubt that he helped push the was despite his claim it's all humanity's fault. Should have left him and that doubt completely out of the equation.

What kind of finish would you have replaced it with? As a similar problem with Superman, the hero is so powerful an adequate villain is problematic no?

Make the General and his super soldier gas a bigger fight. Maybe even have the Doctor gas several of the other nearby soldiers with it too. Doesn't need to go full cgi spectacle that her bout against Magneto did. She could still use some powerful finishing move to end it, and then have a mid/after credit scene of someone in some distant land implied to be Aries responding to the shockwave of power released from said finishing move.

I don't think it'd make any in-universe sense that the proto-venom concoction would allow normal humans to tussle with gods and demigods.

More importantly, your ending basically removes the entire birthright component to Diana's arc. There's no point to even making her the daughter of Zeus if she isn't going to confront her heritage and destiny. Personally, I think your ending would land flatter than Smallville, Kansas.

 gorgon wrote:
Personally, I think your ending would land flatter than Smallville, Kansas.

Before, or after Clark flattened it further?

I'm more inclined to blame Magog for that.

 gorgon wrote:
I don't think it'd make any in-universe sense that the proto-venom concoction would allow normal humans to tussle with gods and demigods.

More importantly, your ending basically removes the entire birthright component to Diana's arc. There's no point to even making her the daughter of Zeus if she isn't going to confront her heritage and destiny. Personally, I think your ending would land flatter than Smallville, Kansas.

It's kind of lame when you achieve your destiny in episode one though.

 AduroT wrote:

 gorgon wrote:
I don't think it'd make any in-universe sense that the proto-venom concoction would allow normal humans to tussle with gods and demigods.

More importantly, your ending basically removes the entire birthright component to Diana's arc. There's no point to even making her the daughter of Zeus if she isn't going to confront her heritage and destiny. Personally, I think your ending would land flatter than Smallville, Kansas.

It's kind of lame when you achieve your destiny in episode one though.

Well, based on how the DCEU was being received up to that point, you can't blame the filmmakers for not planning for it to be a 3-movie tale.

There's talk that the sequel may be announced at Comic-Con, as two unnamed movies have been added to the DCEU schedule. One could be WW2, although there's also talk about the Batman movie, JL Dark, Shazam, GL Corps, SS2, Batgirl, etc. If I was WB, I'd be focusing on WW2, Batman, and a freakin' Man of Steel sequel over some of these lesser properties, but what do I know?

 gorgon wrote:

 AduroT wrote:

 gorgon wrote:
I don't think it'd make any in-universe sense that the proto-venom concoction would allow normal humans to tussle with gods and demigods.

More importantly, your ending basically removes the entire birthright component to Diana's arc. There's no point to even making her the daughter of Zeus if she isn't going to confront her heritage and destiny. Personally, I think your ending would land flatter than Smallville, Kansas.

It's kind of lame when you achieve your destiny in episode one though.

Well, based on how the DCEU was being received up to that point, you can't blame the filmmakers for not planning for it to be a 3-movie tale.

There's talk that the sequel may be announced at Comic-Con, as two unnamed movies have been added to the DCEU schedule. One could be WW2, although there's also talk about the Batman movie, JL Dark, Shazam, GL Corps, SS2, Batgirl, etc. If I was WB, I'd be focusing on WW2, Batman, and a freakin' Man of Steel sequel over some of these lesser properties, but what do I know?

Wonder Woman was a major hit with everyone - to not do a sequal would indeed be .....odd.
Batman and Superman were good in the BvS movie (not as good as WW but hey) and I doubt were damaged by the whole Loopy Lex nonsense in that film

Supergirl could be good if they can ride the wave.

Guess alot depends on Justice League

Shazam would be interesting, it's be difficult to strike a balance for but done right it could be somewhat similar in tone to Spider-Man Homecoming.

Green lantern, maybe a John Stewart story would work.

There's also all these tasks about a Rock Black Adam movie too.

The talk is that it'll be 'Green Lantern Corps' and feature Hal Jordan and John Stewart in a 'buddy cop' kind of story.

The situation with the Rock is weird. It seems like they signed him for that role without a script or even firm-ish plans for a film in place. There was some recent rumorage that Black Adam isn't even in the current Shazam screenplay. Meanwhile projects like Batman, Batgirl, Gotham City Sirens, etc. at least have directors attached to them. Hard to know what's going on there.