Sci-Fi & Fantasy Girlz discussion

The Weird, Fun, & Miscellaneous > Wonder Woman movie

Comments Showing 1-47 of 47 (47 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by Gary (new)

Gary | 1472 comments So, at the risk of all my Girlz group streetcred, I still haven't seen the Wonder Woman movie. Anybody checked it out yet?

message 2: by Mae (new)

Mae McKinnon (maemckinnon) | 12 comments Haven't seen it either - though I certainly plan to. Yet another thing on an increasingly long list of 'things to do' lol.

message 3: by Yoly (new)

Yoly (macaruchi) | 795 comments Mae wrote: "Yet another thing on an increasingly long list of 'things to do' lol."

Lol, I know what you mean.

I want to go see it this week. I've heard many positive things about the movie so far.

message 4: by Amber (new)

Amber Martingale | 659 comments Considering I'm almost out of cash and don't wanna use my debit card for a movie only showing after sundown at my local theater, I'll wait until it comes out on DVD and borrow it from my library to watch.

message 5: by Gary (new)

Gary | 1472 comments I've seen good reviews. I'll probably pop out of the house at some point this week/weekend and see it.

message 6: by Amber (last edited Jun 06, 2017 11:00AM) (new)

Amber Martingale | 659 comments This is a link to a story about the most sexist review of Wonder Woman. Thanks to Daily Kos.

message 7: by Amber (new)

Amber Martingale | 659 comments If you've seen the movie, I'd like your opinion on this WaPo story:

Brenda ╰☆╮    (brnda) | 39 comments Hoping this weekend!

message 9: by Leonie (new)

Leonie (leonierogers) | 152 comments Amber wrote: "If you've seen the movie, I'd like your opinion on this WaPo story:"

Great story. I agree that the gas shrouded scened was powerful. I found it fascinating that (view spoiler)

I think one of the strong points of the movie was the starkness of the imagery, despite the super hero nature of the story.

message 10: by Amber (last edited Jun 17, 2017 08:35AM) (new)

Amber Martingale | 659 comments I won't have the money to go see it before it leaves the local theaters, so thank you for hiding your spoiler. Leonie.

message 11: by Leonie (new)

Leonie (leonierogers) | 152 comments No worries, Amber - I wouldn't want it spoiled for me!

message 12: by Gary (last edited Jun 18, 2017 09:28PM) (new)

Gary | 1472 comments Interesting take on the WW movie compared to other DCEU products in this article:
The DCEU has a problem — everybody likes Wonder Woman

Though commercially successful, Man of Steel, Batman vs. Superman, and Suicide Squad were not quite as successful as The Avengers (all three were also critically panned), and patience seemed to be fading after a Justice League trailer that looked to be more of the same.

It’s therefore unsurprising that Warner Bros. has been quick to cash in some of the goodwill it earned with Wonder Woman. The studio promptly announced that Robin Wright’s Antiope and Connie Nielsen’s Hippolyta would both be reprising their roles in the upcoming Justice League, and while that was probably always the case, the timing of the announcement seems significant. With several months to go, the Warner Bros. marketing team is eager to associate Justice League with the one movie that people liked instead of the three they didn’t.
Full article:

message 13: by Leonie (new)

Leonie (leonierogers) | 152 comments I have to confess to never seeing Superman vs Batman, and not particularly liking Superman (on this latest iteration) - I mean, really, how many times can one story be rehashed? And why would you bother? Surely there are more stories to explore - ones that are more original and new.

Wonder Woman is fresh, new, and much more thoughtful. It is hopeful. which is such a nice change from the frustrating boringness of (in my opinion) of Superman.

message 14: by Gary (last edited Jun 30, 2017 09:50AM) (new)

Gary | 1472 comments Leonie wrote: "Wonder Woman is fresh, new, and much more thoughtful. It is hopeful. which is such a nice change from the frustrating boringness of (in my opinion) of Superman."

Agreed. I find the more recent incarnation of Superman problematic on a range of levels, not the least of which was the one illustrated in that article. Most of the issues I have with the way they are interpreting the character do seem to come from directorial choices. I can't argue with the casting or the effects; the movies look great (though these days the cinematography and computer tech have advanced so much that a major studio film that didn't look great would be pretty tragic. I never saw it for various Orson-Scott-Card-is-a-Sad-Little-Wingnut reasons, but even Ender's Game looked great in the previews I saw) but it does seem like they've gone with a particularly dour character concept.

Frankly, that might be capturing more of the zeitgeist than anything else. A more 70s Christopher Reeves interpretation would probably seem more than a little naive in the Lex Luthor-esque Trump kleptocracy in which we find ourselves. However, Superman as a character has always had a particular role in the American literary mythology, and this current version is kind of like giving Mickey Mouse a mohawk and having him sing Sex Pistols covers. They've mis-read the character's basic premise and core purpose, and even "the times in which we live" doesn't make sense. The point of the character is to find a way through to that core set of values despite the period on which he finds himself. Hell, the character fought Nazis and mafioso without his interpreters losing track of who/what he represents. Truth, Justice and the American Way have taken a beating lately, but if you're going to put a guy in that red, white, and blue outfit, he shouldn't be a bitch about it.

And don't even get me started on Batman....

message 15: by Amber (new)

Amber Martingale | 659 comments Leonie, Epic Lloyd and Nice Peter of Epic Rap Battles of History addressed your question about rehashing the Superman story with one between Superman and Goku:

message 16: by Leonie (new)

Leonie (leonierogers) | 152 comments Amber wrote: "Leonie, Epic Lloyd and Nice Peter of Epic Rap Battles of History addressed your question about rehashing the Superman story with one between Superman and Goku:"

That was hilarious! Thanks, Amber!

message 17: by Leonie (new)

Leonie (leonierogers) | 152 comments At the moment I'm toying with blogging about Wonder Woman. Just waiting for things to coalesce in my mind, and then I'll get to it. Wouldn't it be great to see more super heroes who have a different perspective on things?

I've always wished that we'd seen more of The Black Widow in Avengers. (Mind you, the whole lack of action figure thing really got me wound up last time round...)

message 18: by Amber (new)

Amber Martingale | 659 comments You're welcome, Leonie. Although it's not on topic, they also did a fabulous job on the three fights between Adolf Hitler and Darth Vader:

message 19: by Brenda (new)

Brenda Clough (brendaclough) | 301 comments I saw WW yesterday and it was great! My review is here:

They did a couple of quite interesting things in this -- I haven't seen the 'new girl arrives in Man's World' thing before and it was quite funny. Worth the ticket price, to see Diana taste her first ice cream!

The other really great thing they did was to flip the usual dynamic between the (nearly always male) protagonist and the (almost always female) Love Interest/Sidekick. Since Diana is now the protagonist, Steve Trevor takes over the secondary role, supplying eye candy, humor, sex, and, eventually, the ultimate destiny of characters in this slot..

message 20: by Gary (new)

Gary | 1472 comments Interesting story about the reception/marketing of WW and an analysis of how that's worked:
Why 'Wonder Woman' Is Catching on More Slowly Overseas

Already, Wonder Woman has become the top-grossing live-action movie directed by a female director with north of $657 million in global ticket sales through June 27.

Revenue in the U.S. and Canada accounts for $322 million, or 49 percent of the bottom line, compared with roughly $336 million to date internationally, or 51 percent of total revenue (hardly a poor showing). Still, in many cases a Hollywood tentpole collects 60 to 65 percent of its total take from the international box office.

So why is Wonder Woman following a different course?
Full article:

message 21: by Gary (last edited Jun 30, 2017 01:37PM) (new)

Gary | 1472 comments I finally went and saw it last night. It's good. I give it a "thumbs up" or whatever the current movie reviewer recommendation is.

There are a few glaring plot holes, some of which we can put down to "comic book adaptation" thinking, and some we have to just go... well, that just takes me out of the movie. Getting from somewhere in the Eastern Med to London in a few hours of night sailing because Steve managed to "hitch a ride" makes less sense than an invisible jet, for instance, and there's just no getting around that one in a way that adds up. That the German officers' costumes were all slightly cartoonish with strategically placed, oversized medals is more "Well, that's supposed to look like it might on the page..." even though we're in an era when things like military uniform/awards are often portrayed with a lot of accuracy. They didn't go retro-70s with the clothes or equipment, but props are still props, so WW's shield and the "Godkiller" sword look much more like the product of a good 3D printer than something that came out of the forges they used to arm hobbits in New Zealand.

I thought the villains a little flat. Though the red herring-villains are suitably despicable ("They don't know that....") none of them really scared me, so the last third of the movie or so was pretty predictable as far as reveals are concerned. Lots of CGI with CGI and some CGI on the side, which is fine, I guess, but at a certain point with so much computer graphics, I have to wonder if I shouldn't just be watching this on a laptop.

But, overall, I think that article I put in the first post is on to something. The got more right in this one than they got wrong, which you can't say about the other DC movies, and that's almost certainly because of a few core leadership roles behind the camera.

message 22: by Amber (new)

Amber Martingale | 659 comments If I can get there, I'm watching it today.

message 23: by Gary (new)

Gary | 1472 comments Amber wrote: "If you've seen the movie, I'd like your opinion on this WaPo story:"

Well, I absolutely did NOT think of Syria when watching WW, personally. I think that article makes a valid point about the nature of heroism, and how this film (rather than the other DC products) addresses that concept in a more measured way, but Assad was on my radar like an invisible jet.

That's not to say I can't see the analogy. Poison gas and poison gas. Civilian casualties and civilian casualties. The director's father's experience and the latter half of the 20th century bleeding (literally and figuratively) into the 21st bridging back to the beginning of that 20th century. However, those comparisons strike me as being weighty in their importance, but strangely superficial in their association. It's tough to do something like make a comic book movie that isn't rooted in some sort of real world analogy, but turning that around to compare the real world horrors to the comic book seems like a diminution of the reality by comparison, and I'd prefer the platform not be built on that kind of soapbox. So, I don't object to the message, but I'm leery of the medium.

message 24: by Amber (new)

Amber Martingale | 659 comments Interesting analysis of the article, Gary, but I can't actually either agree or disagree with it as I didn't get a chance to see it. It left theaters before I had the money to watch it, as of Friday of last week.

message 25: by Gary (last edited Aug 24, 2017 06:42PM) (new)

Gary | 1472 comments James Cameron blew up the internet with a few comments about Wonder Woman. Those comments get edited quite a bit when presented to make them as inflammatory as possible (it's the internet...) so in the interest of full disclosure here's what he said in more detail:
“All of the self-congratulatory back-patting Hollywood’s been doing over Wonder Woman has been so misguided. She’s an objectified icon, and it’s just male Hollywood doing the same old thing! I’m not saying I didn’t like the movie but, to me, it’s a step backwards. Sarah Connor was not a beauty icon. She was strong, she was troubled, she was a terrible mother, and she earned the respect of the audience through pure grit. And to me, [the benefit of characters like Sarah] is so obvious. I mean, half the audience is female!”
Now, personally, that reads to me like more egoist than anything else. It's a "Yeah, sure, that was a good movie... but I'm much better!" level of snide, rather than anything serious commentary about film or any sort of social issues. Aside from the fact that I think he attributes a hell of a lot more feminist profundity to T2 and Aliens than I think they really have, he's also missing being more than a little selective of his own career. He is, after all, also the guy who made this:

And also the guy who, while accepting an Academy Award for his romance novel-ization of the sinking of the Titanic, asked for a moment of silence for the 1,500 dead in that disaster then yelled, "Now let's party 'til dawn!"

So, he's probably not the embodiment of Hollywood forward thinking and artistic depth that he now apparently likes to consider himself.... Yeah, he does have "strong women" in his movies, but they're strong in the way that Rambo is strong: in a vapid, physical way. That is, they are strong physically, but essentially broken emotionally and spiritually, and their characterization is more along the lines of what men would do if they were walking around with breasts and vaginas rather than something conceptually female. So, sure, he has Sarah Connor deliver a kind of post-Apocolyptic version of a Feminist screed...
Yeah. Right. How are you supposed to know? Fucking men like you built the hydrogen bomb. Men like you thought it up. You think you're so creative. You don't know what it's like to really create something, to create a life, feel it growing inside you. All you know how to create is death and destruction...
...but without any sort of sense that that also works as a pretty good description of all his own action movies. Sarah Connor is a feminist icon in the way a Hollywood director imagines stage parenting to be parenting. So, if we were going to apply the same rigor to his characters as he applies to others then, sure, Sarah Connor is tough and ruthless... when it comes to assuring the success of her son's future career. That doesn't make her a feminist icon so much as James Cameron's interpretation of a paramilitary version of Mama June. Yes, Ripley does kick ass with the Space Marines, but

A. that's not actually his creation so much as Ridley Scott's, and if you watch those two movies Scott's version of Ripley is a lot cooler and objective than Cameron's.

B. her character development does boil down to a high-tech momma-cat-fight complete with eye-rolling "Get away from her, you bitch!" level dialogue.

So... meh. Cameron is probably a really good film maker to listen to when it comes to the mechanics (particularly the technology) of making films, but probably not such a great voice when it comes to what they mean.

message 26: by Amber (new)

Amber Martingale | 659 comments We seem to have forgotten the music of the movie, too, Gary. Here's a clip of her theme as performed by 331Erock:

This rendition was based on when the theme was introduced in BATMAN V SUPERMAN: DAWN OF JUSTICE

What do you guys think? About the music, I mean?

message 27: by Gary (last edited Aug 25, 2017 08:27PM) (new)

Gary | 1472 comments I don't mind the music in particular, but I don't think it stands out all that much, and might be a bit redundant given that they appear to be using the same thing for the whole of the DC Universe. Maybe my ear isn't developed to the extent necessary to pick out the Wonder Woman leitmotif versus the Batman leitmotif versus the Superman leitmotif (and, admittedly, I haven't worked real hard at picking them out) but it seems like the principals could, at least, get their own variations of that electric guitar riff given the size and scope (and budget) of these movies.

Like several aspects of that particular endeavor, though, it looks like later incarnations are going to be stuck with a few early stylistic look (and soundtrack) choices that were made by the studio and Zack Snyder, and as they get further along a lot of those decisions are wearing a little thin. So, things like the look of WW's costume, (which I mentioned above) and by extension that of the Amazons, were all determined when they were focusing on Batman and Superman, which has its merits in terms of visual continuity, but it isn't necessarily a good thing for a particular character like WW, nor will it, I suspect, quite do justice for the Flash or Aquaman. The Marvel Universe movies seem to have a continuity, but remain distinct. The Iron Man movies don't look/sound exactly like the Thor movies, which don't look/sound exactly like the Captain America movies, but they are similar enough that it doesn't look/sound like a hodgepodge when they come together in an Avengers movie.

While the soundtrack for WW didn't seem particularly off given the nature of that project, it wasn't quite a fit either, and I hadn't really considered it, but it does interact with the formulaic nature of the DC movies negatively. That is, the Big Bad denouement tends to be a sort of throwaway villain. In the Superman movie we at least get some development for Zod, but in the BvS film, the villain was literally a monstrous byproduct that popped up out of nothing. He (it?) had no backstory of his (its?) own, was not developed in any way and existed for a single (long...) fight scene. I think that was the case for the WW movie in which Ares turned out to be something of a "meh" villain, and substantially less developed than even the red herring villains.

And in that fight scene we heard that soundtrack refrain a lot. Duh-nuh-Nuh-nuh-Nuh-nuh. Duh-nuh-Nuh-nuh-nuh-Nuh-nuh-nuuuuuuh! Rinse. Repeat.

It's not bad, exactly. It's just that at a certain point I think I got it, and it keeps going after that to the point where I as an audience member was just starting to get sick of it.

message 28: by Amber (new)

Amber Martingale | 659 comments I haven't heard the rest of the music for either movie but I do know that most people who were raised on the Chris Reeves version of Superman still think of the John Williams music for him:

I grew up with Lynda Carter's Wonder Woman: I actually think that the version from BvS is actually a better fit than that one! You really canlt hear much dofferenmce between Season 1 and Season 2... .

message 29: by Yoly (new)

Yoly (macaruchi) | 795 comments Amber wrote: "We seem to have forgotten the music of the movie, too, Gary. Here's a clip of her theme as performed by 331Erock:

I think the theme is awesome, but it's Hans Zimmer, so of course it would be awesome! I also like this performance you linked very much.

I haven't watched Wonder Woman yet (waiting for the BluRay), so I don't have too much to add to the conversation other than I'm looking forward to reading this Wonder Woman: Warbringer.

message 30: by Amber (new)

Amber Martingale | 659 comments Which link? 331Erock or the 1970s TV WW theme, Yoly?

message 31: by Amber (new)

Amber Martingale | 659 comments Gary wrote: "James Cameron blew up the internet with a few comments about Wonder Woman. Those comments get edited quite a bit when presented to make them as inflammatory as possible (it's the internet...) so in..."

WONDER WOMAN director claps back! From Global Citizen:

message 32: by Yoly (new)

Yoly (macaruchi) | 795 comments Amber wrote: "Which link? 331Erock or the 1970s TV WW theme, Yoly?"

The one quoted on my comment, the 331Erock video.

message 33: by Gary (last edited Mar 17, 2019 06:24PM) (new)

Gary | 1472 comments Amber wrote: "WONDER WOMAN director claps back! From Global Citizen:"

Yeah, it figures she'd come back with a pretty level-headed response. Personally, I don't think people should expect a lot from Hollywood when it comes to any particular social commentary. At best, they can give people the broad strokes, but even those broad strokes are all filtered through the abject and total need of the studio to turn a profit, and that studio system sees its profits as based on a few very specific criteria. Those criteria are based on an awful lot of research/development, so they may very well be accurate when it comes to making money, but they mean, effectively, that anyone wanting to make a movie in Hollywood that has a Feminist agenda—or a Civil Liberties agenda, or who just wants to make a Reagan-era-Commie/survivalist-paranoia-war-porn film like Red Dawn—winds up with a message that goes through that system. In some cases, that makes for seriously watered down message. When it comes to something like a Feminist agenda for a film, that means the film-makers wind up espousing all the rights and freedoms of all the ridiculously hot women all over the world.... Just be born having won the genetic beauty lottery, dedicate your entire life to the details of translating that beauty onto film (including any number of surgeries and chemical treatments) and work that ass in Pilates class like you're training for some sort of glute-based Olympics, and then, sure, you can make a movie about the importance of equality... that will speak with total rectitude for all the beautiful people with $200 haircuts, wearing a short skirt and a push-up bra, and with a CGI team ready to erase any of the zits that the makeup squad can't quite cover up. Because Feminism.

Even the aforementioned movie Red Dawn falls prey to this issue with its wildly different agenda (which also has weird strains of Feminism in it if you watch it....) I like to cite that movie because it's such an amazingly good counter-example to the argument so often made about "Leftist" Hollywood and "liberal" celebrities. Even Reagan (himself a moviestar...) made comments about how much that movie did to fight the Cold War. A project like that does mesh more smoothly with the profit/populist agenda of a film studio, but in the abstract it falls prey to the same issue. That is, the You! Ess! Ay! Yoo! Ess! Ay! all falls down on the fact that if the only good Commie is a dead Commie, then the only good American is a pretty-boy Patrick Swayze-type, 10 minutes into his 15 minutes. (Seriously, look at that entire cast. Any veteran actor is supporting. It's like they raided a casting call for a soap opera and kept telling Powers Boothe to stop blocking the shot....) The rest of you fat middle American fucks are going to fall to an ideology that literally won't exist in a few years, and you'll go down like bitches lining up for your own execution and pathetically singing "God Bless America" because you didn't play football in high school like the *real* 'Merikanz!

(Apparently, they did a 21st century remake of Red Dawn which I haven't seen. My understanding is that now the North Koreans are the Bad Guys, which strikes me as less scary than the original, but YMMV.)

Yes, there is absolutely a broad-strokes value of film presentation when it comes to any particular agenda. I'm not saying that means one shouldn't bother with that particular medium, but we do have to see it for what it is. Any major studio film will always have financial and populist agendas that comes first and second (and, really, probably third and fourth...) which means that any other agenda is going to be secondary if not tertiary (or somewhere in the upper single digits) to the project.

That's the nature of the beast. That's the basis of artistic integrity in a studio film.

To a lesser extent that's the case with a TV show (depending on the length of its run) and any other work of commercial art. Generally, the more money involved, the more diluted the ancillary, not-money agenda. Joss Whedon's "fake" Feminism also blew up this last week or so, with various folks chiming in with their own agendas intact. Here's one that I think makes the best sense when it comes to actually looking at him, his work, and the culture at large:

(Thanks to my Facebook/blogging pal, writer Danae Wulfe Jones for plucking that one from the Internet-aether.)

(Also, I'm going to mention a kind of trigger warning, with a couple of steps removed, in that that article does not go into details itself, but it mentions Marion Zimmer Bradley and that's a whole hellish nightmare of sexual violence. Personally, I was unaware of the details so I looked them up after reading that piece, and it's upsetting enough that I feel obliged to trigger warn. Again, the article itself is fine, but further research isn't suitable for everyone.)

Point being, even in a medium like TV with maybe 18-22 hours/year of screen time, and lead by a guy who espouses them—with or without all the flaws, frailties and hypocrisies of that person—any Feminist concepts in that product wind up being "equal rights for cute chicks!" on its best day.

And, again, none of that is to say these things aren't Feminist at all, or that they shouldn't be made, or that we must view them cynically. My point is that we should view them realistically and rationally for what they are, why they are made and how impactful they can really be.

In any case, here's some interesting behind the scenes footage of the filming of the beach battle in WW:

message 34: by Amber (last edited Aug 30, 2017 10:50AM) (new)

Amber Martingale | 659 comments Gary wrote: "Amber wrote: "WONDER WOMAN director claps back! From Global Citizen:"

Yeah, it figures she'd come back with a pretty level-headed response. Personally, I d..."


Your remark about Hollywood and social commentary made me laugh, because there's one scene in a 1950s scifi film that actually DID deliver a "talk first, don't shoot first" message in the middle of Cold War tensions. Here's the review video: The part about the social commentary starts at the 1:26 mark. "...pastor who braves the death rays of Hell." Here's the whole scene from that movie:

message 35: by Gary (new)

Gary | 1472 comments Amber wrote: "YMMV"?

Your Mileage May Vary.

Kind of old school discussion forum lingo for "this might be different for others."

message 36: by Amber (new)

Amber Martingale | 659 comments Really old school. I hadn't heard it until yesterday.

message 37: by Yoly (last edited Sep 02, 2017 08:47AM) (new)

Yoly (macaruchi) | 795 comments So, I finally watched the movie, and I was disappointed.

I was so ready to love this movie. I’m not obsessed with super heroes, in fact I think at this point I may be suffering from superhero fatigue, but Superman and Wonder Woman have always been my favorite superheroes since I was a child, so of course a movie about Wonder Woman sounded like a dream come true. I even watched Batman vs Superman just to see her!!!

I had a couple of issues with the movie, some tiny spoilers ahead:

People say it’s a feminist movie.
I’m sorry, but I don’t agree. Firstly, the choice of having an actor like Chris Pine be her “sidekick” turned Wonder Woman into the sidekick. I think the movie studio blew that up. Secondly, even if the “dude” weren’t Chris Pine, she was still the sidekick. She didn’t feel like the main character in the movie to me. Thirdly, Chris Pine’s character was basically patronizing the silly woman throughout most of the movie. The same goes with the “bad guy” the mad scientist who created the gas was a woman, but the “bad guy” was a man. So here we have a man getting all the glory because of a woman’s work? So, where was the feminist part again? And the one thing that bothered me the most, the “romance”, a classic from “who the hell are you” to “I love you” in 78 minutes romance that we see in every action movie. I was expecting something else.

The visual effects
Oh man, they looked cheap :D

The story
The first act of the movie was amazing, while personally I felt the movie dragged after that. After all the novelty wore off about Diana doing silly things, I was just bored. The movie also felt like a “female Captain America wannabe” so many times. I wish we could have gotten to know more about Themyscira, that we would have seen the dynamics of a place like that for at least half the movie, not just 10 minutes. Would it have been so terrible to have the first two acts of the movie happen in Themyscira and then something would have forced her to go into “the real world”? Since this is her origin story, and we’ll probably get another Wonder Woman movie I doubt we will get to see much more on Themyscira on film, so that kind of sucks.

I'm not saying the movie is terrible, I just don't think personally it's as awesome as the internets say it is. I don't think the fact that it's a female superhero movie directed by a woman is enough to make all this noise. Yes, it is a good start, and yes I want to see more female superhero movies, but I think we can do sooooo much better than this.

message 38: by Gary (new)

Gary | 1472 comments This news is a few days old, but it seems Patty Jenkins will be directing the sequel:

message 39: by Yoly (new)

Yoly (macaruchi) | 795 comments Gary wrote: "This news is a few days old, but it seems Patty Jenkins will be directing the sequel:"

Yikes, so we'll probably be getting more of the same...

message 40: by Gary (last edited Sep 16, 2017 07:51PM) (new)

Gary | 1472 comments Yoly wrote: "People say it’s a feminist movie.
I’m sorry, but I don’t agree."

True story: a couple of weeks ago I walked into a comic book store and there was a woman with her daughter (a 6yo, I'm guessing) browsing through the comics. The clerk behind the counter was a gal, so my friend and I were outnumbered 3:2 in the shop. The complete seriousness with which the kid was going through the comics was very pleasant to see.

I think the movie gets a lot of "feminist cred" off of a few tidbits. Her line that, "What I do is not up to you" and her talk about not being able to move and fight during the whole shopping sequence, for instance.

Is it a Feminist (capital F) movie, though? Only in the loosest possible sense. I mean, it's got a female lead, and she's comes from the land of, if you will. There are big, bruiser women on her island home, and they can fight WWI not-yet-Nazis with bows & arrows just like the other comic book heroes. (That kind of tech disparity doesn't normally work out all that well in real life with or without the power of Greek mythology as a secret weapon.)

But WW as a project suffers from a lot of the issues that one has to associate with any kind of two hour entertainment product. At best it can be cursory, and referential to real world issues. Maybe, just maybe, it can get a little more in depth, and actually get relevant. At worst it can be a kind of false flag: the bright, shiny object that distracts people from the reality that they are, otherwise, mired in. I lived in London for a while, and it wasn't until after a few months I understood why the family I was staying with all sat down once a week and watched Baywatch. (I'd never actually seen that program until I left the U.S. for a while.) Fantasy California beach life is a lot more attractive under a British sky.

Similarly, there's a danger that a product like WW could make people ignore what they see around them. If you look at first wave Feminism (universal suffrage) versus second wave Feminism (60s civil rights) there was a whole generation between those two when very little movement happened when it comes to Feminist issues. Third wave feminists (the Millennial thereabouts) could find a Pyrrhic victory in a movie like Wonder Woman. The President of the United States is currently eroding a range of women's healthcare rights and medical access. But there's Wonder Woman, at least. Like some fake lifeguard on a beach shot in slow motion: "Oh, look at her run..."

message 41: by Gary (new)

Gary | 1472 comments Here's an interesting development:
Gal Gadot Won't Return for 'Wonder Woman 2' Unless Brett Ratner Is Out

In the wake of sexual harassment allegations against Brett Ratner, Wonder Woman star Gal Gadot is rumored to be refusing involvement in a sequel unless Warner Bros. severs ties with Ratner completely.

The rumor comes from gossip outlet Page Six, citing a Hollywood source that says Gadot doesn't want to be involved with the Wonder Woman franchise if a known harasser is attached.

The move undoubtedly puts Warner Bros. between a rock and a hard place, considering Ratner's RatPac-Dune Entertainment has a deal with the studio that's set to expire in 2018, but is already attached to various projects.

Though Warner Bros. has already announced they don't plan to renew the contract and are severing ties with Ratner, and Ratner himself has said he's stepping away from all Warner Bros. -related projects to distance his name, Gadot wants Ratner's ties to Wonder Woman II to be completely severed or else she won't be involved.
Full article:

message 42: by Amber (new)

Amber Martingale | 659 comments I don't blame her.

message 43: by Yoly (new)

Yoly (macaruchi) | 795 comments Gary wrote: "Here's an interesting development:Gal Gadot Won't Return for 'Wonder Woman 2' Unless Brett Ratner Is Out"

This is refreshing! Let's wait and see what happens.

message 44: by Laz (new)

Laz the Sailor (laz7) WW is the best part of Justice League. Which means she's sort of a lifeboat for viewers.

message 45: by Gary (last edited Dec 31, 2017 03:27PM) (new)

Gary | 1472 comments According to Forbes, Gal Gadot is the 3rd highest grossing actor of 2017 after Vin Diesel and Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson.
Rounding out the top three is Wonder Woman star Gal Gadot, whose movies amassed $1.4 billion worldwide. Her debut as the Amazonian warrior god in Patty Jenkins' superhero flick tallied $822 million worldwide to become the highest-grossing live-action movie ever directed by a woman. The ensemble under-performer Justice League added millions more to Gadot's score.
Full article:

The implication there is that she might have ticked up a notch or even two had Justice League not dragged a bit... but that's a whole 'nother issue.

message 46: by Yoly (last edited Jan 01, 2018 05:05AM) (new)

Yoly (macaruchi) | 795 comments

Her debut as the Amazonian warrior god in Patty Jenkins' superhero flick tallied $822 million worldwide to become the highest-grossing live-action movie ever directed by a woman.

This is good news, but yikes, that movie... I really don't want this movie as an "example" of what movies with female main characters should be.

One movie that I really enjoyed last year was Atomic Blonde. It had a female main character, she was a badass, and she didn't take any crap from men, but apparently it only grossed like $51MM :(

message 47: by Amber (new)

Amber Martingale | 659 comments Because it was about reality, Yoly and reality doesn't sell at the box office... .

back to top