Wonder Woman

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Wonder Woman

    I came from a showing and I enjoyed it, from beginning to end. Gadot, who's remarkable in the title role, and Fine has good chemistry and Houston's impressive as a bait and switch villain (No spoilers). It's more of a period piece adventure film than a typical superhero film. Nice prequel to the DCEU.
    "A screenwriter is much like being a fire hydrant with a bunch of dogs lined up around it.- -Frank Miller

    "A real writer doesn't just want to write; a real writer has to write." -Alan Moore

  • #2
    Re: Wonder Woman

    SPOILERS:





    It's fairly okay -- not quite a classic, but neither is it insufferably annoying (as nearly all the Marvel films have been).

    It commendably takes at least a few steps toward averting the "eeeeevil Germans" cliché -- at least as far as one could, while still taking the Allied side in the war (which is inevitable in a Hollywood pic). I fully expected the movie to basically feature Nazi stereotypes dressed in WWI uniforms, which would have been ridiculous, but even Ludendorff (the only real attempt at crafting an "evil German" cartoon character) is at least shown to be under Ares's influence, and not a coward or a hypocrite. Even the German General Staff is shown to legitimately desire the Armistice -- as grotesque as that diplomatic travesty was -- due to the suffering of the ordinary German people. So no great criticism on the political score.

    (Still, it is sobering to think that the many ordinary German grunts whom Diana and her team kill would have gone back to their ordinary lives just a month later, when the Armistice was signed.)

    Oh, and speaking of Ares, I note with approval that (a) the movie lets him present his point of view fair and square, and (b) does not undercut this as a lie.

    The film also doesn't wallow in feminist man-bashing, as I dreaded it might, and instead speaks of flaws in humanity as a whole.

    The bait-and-switch villain is obvious, but the audience is surely expected to figure it out right away, which gives Diana's execution of Ludendorff solid dramatic irony, even while it's happening. ("This is not the victory that she thinks it is, and we all know it.") It also functions as an effective send-up of neocon/neoliberal U.S. interventionism, which sold the fiction, "Just remove Dictator [X], and Nation [Y] will immediately become a peaceful democracy."

    In some ways, the film reminds me of the "magical girlfriend" flicks of the '80s, like Splash and Date with an Angel and the like -- which I somewhat enjoy, at least on their own terms. Adapting that fish-out-of-water situation to an action film works very well, in this case.

    The period look is generally quite convincing. Top marks to production design, costuming, etc. etc. Great visuals all around.

    Best of all, like its Nolan and Snyder predecessors, it takes itself seriously, and generally avoids Marvel-ish tongue-in-cheek campy, cynical banality. It's a DC production all the way, in the "house style" that has been defined since Batman Begins. Big kudos for that.

    On the down side, the Themyscira segment is by far the worst portion of the movie and goes on WAY too long, though Doutzen Kroes is very striking and appealing in her Amazon cameo. The initial Amazon/Germans battle is ludicrously unfounded: Why do the Amazons immediately start murdering all these soldiers? (How about at least a "Get off our land or we'll kill you" warning?) The "young Diana" child actress is Jake Lloyd levels of awful -- seriously horrible. Giving every Amazon Gadot's accent is just stupid. Nothing worthwhile happens until Steve Trevor shows up -- and yes, Chris Pine is outstanding in his part, coming as close to stealing the movie as Anne Hathaway did as Catwoman in TDKR. Even so, the cave-bath and sailboat scenes are labored and not particularly funny. Also, the other rogue-mission team members are neither interesting nor useful.

    As for Gad Gadot, well, while I will always wish that the movie could have been made with a young Catherine Zeta-Jones, Gadot turns out to have been a good choice, as was already evident in her previous outing in the part. Warner Bros. was wise to cast an attractive actress (whereas some of the more recent animated DC versions have made Diana outright ugly), with a feminine figure rather than a steroid-pumped physique. Gadot plays the naive, innocent moments of the character especially well, which are in many ways Diana's most important scenes in the films: Diana doesn't know as much as she thinks she knows, and she doesn't know what she doesn't know.

    All in all, worth the price of admission, at least by comic-book-movie standards.
    Last edited by karsten; 06-03-2017, 02:53 AM.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Wonder Woman

      Originally posted by karsten View Post

      Warner Bros. was wise to cast an attractive actress (whereas some of the more recent animated DC versions have made Diana outright ugly), with a feminine figure rather than a steroid-pumped physique...
      I'm not trying to nitpick and your thoughts make me want to see the movie even more but...

      She worked out 6 hours a day for 6 months to gain 17 pounds of muscle for that "feminine figure" so... most regular "feminine" women have body fat that she absolutely does not.

      http://people.com/bodies/gal-gadot-w...l-to-superhero

      Haven't seen the movie yet, but it looks great. Glad people seem to be liking it.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Wonder Woman

        Originally posted by figment View Post
        I'm not trying to nitpick and your thoughts make me want to see the movie even more but...

        She worked out 6 hours a day for 6 months to gain 17 pounds of muscle for that "feminine figure" so... most regular "feminine" women have body fat that she absolutely does not.
        Fair enough, but her physique still looked more natural than those of many of the other Amazons, and certainly more natural than recent DC animated depictions of the character, which have gone halfway towards female-bodybuilder/MMA-fighter grotesquerie.

        IMO, DC made a good choice not going for a Diana with that kind of extreme look, or making Gadot turn herself into that, but rather keeping to a more broadly appealing, vaguely Classical physique.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Wonder Woman

          Good film, the best comic book one in a while. It would have been better if she had hairy armpits. If men got up in arms about a women only screening imagine the uproar over hairy pits. Immense.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Wonder Woman

            Originally posted by TheConnorNoden View Post
            Good film, the best comic book one in a while. It would have been better if she had hairy armpits. If men got up in arms about a women only screening imagine the uproar over hairy pits. Immense.
            See, that's kind of what I was getting at in my comments. The film could have gone either way: it could have drilled down into identity politics to get the SJW crowd, along with doing things like you suggest. Or it could have gone broad. It went broad, and that was the smart move, because with a movie called "Wonder Woman," the SJW audience is a lock anyway, so it made itself appealing to other audiences as well by not being so in-your-face with a certain kind of political agenda.

            Originally posted by TheConnorNoden View Post
            If men got up in arms about a women only screening imagine the uproar over hairy pits. Immense.
            I think such a screening is fine. So long as a theater owner can likewise limit screenings to any identity group, and exclude any other identity group, without fear of a lawsuit. Either one can exclude/include anyone, or no one. Fair's fair.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Wonder Woman

              Nah, I was being mostly serious. Why should women have to shave their pits when I don't? It's no wonder boys grow up thinking female body hair doesn't exist.

              This Wonder Woman does serve as a good symbol of feminism and hope though, so refreshing after two Superman films where he's just a horny douche. I still think there are too many superhero films but when done right they mean so much. The great heroes give children something to believe in and aspire to. The Christopher Reeve Superman made kids believe in truth, justice and the American way back when the American way was something to aspire to. I'm glad that the young girls of a new generation got a hero they could aspire to.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Wonder Woman

                Originally posted by TheConnorNoden View Post
                Nah, I was being mostly serious. Why should women have to shave their pits when I don't?
                I don't even consider that a point worth taking seriously. Regardless, there are lots of other places to have that kind of debate. Like, most of the Internet, these days.

                My point, in this context of this forum, is that, from a movie-making and -promoting perspective, this film could have made a "statement" like that, and lots of similar agenda-based statements, to try to drum up "earned media" via manufactured controversy. Sometimes that sort of thing works.

                Or, it could have tried to reach skeptical viewers by specifically avoiding the poke-a-stick-in-the-eye impulse that you describe, and broaden its appeal.

                Either approach is a gamble. It did the latter. Which was the smart-money bet for this film -- based on what kind of audience would have seen it anyway, and what kind of audience might have been fence-sitters.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Wonder Woman

                  Originally posted by TheConnorNoden View Post
                  Nah, I was being mostly serious. Why should women have to shave their pits when I don't? It's no wonder boys grow up thinking female body hair doesn't exist.

                  ...
                  Why should men in movies wear eyeliner, when most men in real life don't? Because it's a show, you know like make believe. Maybe in future movies they can make Wonder Woman more like the real daughter of Zeus? Who says the real daughter of Zeus keeps her pits hairy?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Wonder Woman

                    OMG you guys are f*cking screenwriters and your comments about Wonder Woman are about her body and her armpits?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Wonder Woman

                      Originally posted by TheConnorNoden View Post
                      Nah, I was being mostly serious. Why should women have to shave their pits when I don't? It's no wonder boys grow up thinking female body hair doesn't exist.

                      This Wonder Woman does serve as a good symbol of feminism and hope though, so refreshing after two Superman films where he's just a horny douche. I still think there are too many superhero films but when done right they mean so much. The great heroes give children something to believe in and aspire to. The Christopher Reeve Superman made kids believe in truth, justice and the American way back when the American way was something to aspire to. I'm glad that the young girls of a new generation got a hero they could aspire to.
                      I haven't seen "Superman Returns", but I didn't get the impression in "Man Of Steel" & "Batman vs Superman" that Clark was a horny douche. To me, he was just lonely.
                      "A screenwriter is much like being a fire hydrant with a bunch of dogs lined up around it.- -Frank Miller

                      "A real writer doesn't just want to write; a real writer has to write." -Alan Moore

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Wonder Woman

                        Originally posted by karsten View Post
                        See, that's kind of what I was getting at in my comments. The film could have gone either way: it could have drilled down into identity politics to get the SJW crowd, along with doing things like you suggest. Or it could have gone broad. It went broad, and that was the smart move, because with a movie called "Wonder Woman," the SJW audience is a lock anyway, so it made itself appealing to other audiences as well by not being so in-your-face with a certain kind of political agenda.
                        A lesson the people that worked on the car crash a.k.a the Ghostbusters 2016 reboot should have learned. Obviously, they didn't.
                        "A screenwriter is much like being a fire hydrant with a bunch of dogs lined up around it.- -Frank Miller

                        "A real writer doesn't just want to write; a real writer has to write." -Alan Moore

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Wonder Woman

                          Originally posted by Madbandit View Post
                          A lesson the people that worked on the car crash a.k.a the Ghostbusters 2016 reboot should have learned. Obviously, they didn't.
                          And the talent is exceedingly more gracious. Double tap

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Wonder Woman

                            Writing-wise (and acting-wise, really), I think the most impressive thing was how they balanced Diana's strength and confidence with her naivete and innocence. That's a tough needle to thread and they did a great job with it.

                            It takes a special kind of skill to create a complex hero without pushing them in a dark/damaged/brooding direction. It's something I've always appreciated about the MCU's treatment of Captain America, and was disappointed by in the DCU's lastest version of Superman. It's great that they were able to find that with Diana.

                            There's a sort of fundamental respect for the character, that they "got" her and were able to avoid the more annoying superhero character missteps AND the worst of the Strong Female Character(tm) tropes.

                            Over all, I thought it was just a pretty good superhero movie (which is no small thing - I like superhero movies). But when you dive into it, the treatment of the character is executed exceptionally well.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Wonder Woman

                              I find nearly all superhero movies insufferable and childish. Most of them offer a fundamentally dishonest take on the world. Most of the people who make them are not talented. You know, I can't really think of one I've ever liked off the top of my head.

                              Having said that, I thought this was a good, not quite great movie.
                              90% of it was really, really good. Could have transcended the genre.
                              10% of it was nonsense.
                              3/4 stars

                              Pros: Gal Gadot was awesome. I've seen so many movies lately where the lead(s) were miscast, I'm almost surprised when the casting decisions are done right anymore. The movie was funny too. There was a nice contrast between the idealism of the girl and the pragmatism of the world she encounters. The slow scenes in the middle never felt slow, they were often funny or endearing without trying too hard. Perhaps best of all, I liked the way the conflict continually progressed in scope as the film moved along.

                              Negatives: There were two huge negatives for me. One, the action scenes often caused the movie to plod. How often can you say that? Some of the action was great, but then there were so many damn slow motion shots of bullets and mortars and whatever else. How many times in one ****ing movie can you stop the camera and zoom in close on someone in slow motion jumping up in the air, bullets whizzing past them, shooting three arrows from a bow? Or take a gun and shoot it sideways without looking? That was by far the most irritating and tilting aspect of the entire movie. Second, the hero doesn't have any weakness. Not a single one--she can do whatever she wants in the entire movie and succeeds from fade in to fade out. To me, Superman is a stupid movie. Almost always these kinds of movies are stupid movies, and kryptonite-as-the-Achilles-heel is the most stupid of all the stupid weaknesses you could ever come up with for a character, because it's not intrinsic to his or her person. It's just a random weakness...but you know what? At least the writer understood that the main character should have a weakness. The main character in this movie does not have one.

                              This happened with Rey in the last Star Wars movie too...how come these badass female leads have no weaknesses? They just succeed at whatever they want to do and nobody is going to stop them. I'm all for having female leads in action movies. And I want to see them kick butt and succeed, I really do. I just want to see them get kicked a little bit first and get dirty. Make them earn it. Then we (the audience) feel like we earned it too. But I'm just not seeing it these last couple movies I've seen. It feels like escapist porn if you ask me.

                              Anyway, those were my two biggest issues with the movie. The "too perfect" characters thing could apply to the male lead too--he could have used more edge.

                              But anyway, it was still a good movie, the 10% of comic book roll-my-eye moments not withstanding. If you want to watch it make sure you watch it on the big screen, because I don't think it would be as fun at home.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X