Author Topic: WW84  (Read 5700 times)

Re: WW84
« Reply #30 on: December 28, 2020, 07:30:48 PM »
Heh, that's flattering, but I haven't watched any of the DCEU films since Justice League more than sixteen times.

Dr Rock

  • The BEST of luck!
Re: WW84
« Reply #31 on: December 28, 2020, 10:36:27 PM »
It should've been called 'Wonder Woman 2 - Be Careful What You Wish For.'


Mister Six

  • Golden Member
  • *****
  • Ridiculously teacakes
Re: WW84
« Reply #32 on: December 29, 2020, 09:42:11 PM »
As ever, Walter Chaw has written a very good take on all this.

Why did WW's wish have to involve borrowing somebody else's body (without consent and all that)

Boring answer: almost certainly because of rewrites. I'm guessing an early draft of the film didn't have either Lord or Cheetah, and there was more focus on WW's relationship with Trevor, and at the end she has to unmake her wish because she knows she can't let a man die just to keep her sexy pilot man around, but the producers wanted either more scale to the threat (Lord) or a female/more physical opponent (Cheetah) and the script became so bloated something had to go, and it was that aspect of the WW/Trevor relationship. Except because this came amid a flurry of other changes and rewrites, they kind of lost track and left the possession angle in while forgetting how it would look to someone who hasn't read 30 versions of the script over the last three years.

Re: WW84
« Reply #33 on: December 29, 2020, 11:56:15 PM »
I just watched the first film and it was much worse than I remembered. A couple of good scenes but they were buoyed by the rest of it being crap so everyone cheers when something exciting happens. The end is classic DC: bombastic, confused, overlong, barely meaningful, failing to dramatise its ideas, far too much mediocre CG on flat roofs and wastelands.

Re: WW84
« Reply #34 on: December 30, 2020, 09:17:23 PM »
I have a lot of very minor quibbles, but the big one for me was, why turn into Cloud-Spider-Woman half way through the film? Yes, we know as we just had that big speech about flying being somewhat cool and now she's doing it, and even Rides the lightning! but like, I dunno, use THE FUCKING INVISIBLE JET THAT WE'VE JUST ESTABLISHED NOW EXISTS AND IS PART OF HER CHARACTER AND SAVE SOME RATHER DULL CGI EFFECTS?
I had guessed given the tone of the first film, that something set in 1984 would have to involve nukes, and I was partially correct I guess?
Was it ever established what cat-lady loses? Why would she give it up?

Re: WW84
« Reply #35 on: December 30, 2020, 09:48:26 PM »
The end is classic DC: bombastic, confused, overlong, barely meaningful, failing to dramatise its ideas, far too much mediocre CG on flat roofs and wastelands.

I feel that I have this issue with superhero movies in general (although I enjoy them overall). Once I'm past the origin stories I get a bit bored. But I think the first WW is as good as the MCU stuff.

Butchers Blind

  • Adios pantaloons!
Re: WW84
« Reply #36 on: December 31, 2020, 10:21:01 AM »
Good points - Pedro Pascal.
Bad points - the rest of it.

why did woman want to be a cat?

Dex Sawash

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Upphängningspunkterna
Re: WW84
« Reply #37 on: December 31, 2020, 01:04:53 PM »
Good points - Pedro Pascal.
Bad points - the rest of it.

why did woman want to be a cat?

  Well, little lady, let me elucidate here
Everybody wants to be a cat
Because a cat's the only cat
Who knows where it's at
Tell me, everybody's pickin' up on that feline beat
'Cause everything else is obsolete
A square with a horn makes you wish you weren't born   


A better CaBber would do an Aristocrats gag

Re: WW84
« Reply #38 on: January 04, 2021, 12:15:36 PM »
Thought this was awful. Over-long and yet lacking in explanation for the main thrust of the film. Wasted the 80s setting. Terrible CGI and character design. I enjoyed the first one but this is back to BvS levels of shit for DC after a few decent films that seemed to have re-set the DCU (Shazam and Birds of Prey, which by no  means great was at least snappy and fun).

DC really seem to have no idea how to make these films. Long stretches with no action or interesting plot, tired mcguffins, a trite resolution that left so much to answer (what happened to Wiig's character? Did Lord suffer any consequences? Did they world just forget it was on the brink of war? Did everyone renounce their wishes? etc.)

Also, after two films of her own and major roles in other films I have no idea about Wonder Woman as a character. You would think she was like the female Superman in terms of purity but a) the DCU Superman is completely fucked and b) a pure hero wouldn't have taken so long to give up their wish when they knew it was fucking up their ability to solve the problem.

TLDR; and ugly, boring, badly shot and designed film with crap CGI that wasted its main selling point and fucking up its main character, as DC have done with Superman and Batman

Shameless Custard

  • PAUSE FOR THE JET
    • LastFM
Re: WW84
« Reply #39 on: January 04, 2021, 01:56:34 PM »
Not making excuses for this film as I'm very much in the didn't like it camp, but apparently Cheetah's fate was left open as Wiig is expected to be back in the next one

Re: WW84
« Reply #40 on: January 04, 2021, 05:07:49 PM »
Not making excuses for this film as I'm very much in the didn't like it camp, but apparently Cheetah's fate was left open as Wiig is expected to be back in the next one

I wouldn't have minded them leaving her fate open but they just didn't mention her at all. It would have been easy to have a montage of her and Lord being locked up or whatever and that would still have left room for her in a sequel. Surely though, her arc is played out as she seemed to be repentant at the end, though that bit was so badly done I am not sure if she was or not.

Shameless Custard

  • PAUSE FOR THE JET
    • LastFM
Re: WW84
« Reply #41 on: January 10, 2021, 11:01:18 PM »
This is properly dying on its arse, critically. Currently sits at 5.5 on IMDB, and if that doesn't sound too bad, then it's worth noting that Justice League is a 6.3 and Man Of Steel is a 7.0

Oof

Povidone

  • We wanted to try and raise awareness for Ashburton
Re: WW84
« Reply #42 on: January 10, 2021, 11:23:44 PM »
This is properly dying on its arse, critically. Currently sits at 5.5 on IMDB, and if that doesn't sound too bad, then it's worth noting that Justice League is a 6.3 and Man Of Steel is a 7.0

Oof

I wonder what bold new direction WB will scurry frantically at in light if this latest critical failure. That Snyder fella seems to be on the up again, maybe get him back?

Re: WW84
« Reply #43 on: January 11, 2021, 09:06:43 AM »
I just watched the first film and it was much worse than I remembered. A couple of good scenes but they were buoyed by the rest of it being crap so everyone cheers when something exciting happens. The end is classic DC: bombastic, confused, overlong, barely meaningful, failing to dramatise its ideas, far too much mediocre CG on flat roofs and wastelands.

Came here to smugly point out that I slated the first one at the time too. Clearly bobbins; a cheesy mst3k / rifftrax b-movie on a high budget. Shite acting all around, poor attempts at humour, a romance subplot cringey enough to rival Attack of the Clones, and the most laughable CGI villain I think I've ever seen. So it's no surprise at all that the sequel is getting ripped apart.

There was a similar phenomenon with the first Amazing Spider-Man: for some reason, the general consensus was that it was good, even though it had an unlikeable cast; a cunty peter parker who ends the film smirking into camera at the thought of breaking the oath he's made to Gwen's dad on his death bed; a nonsense plot about an army of lizards which are never actually shown on screen; early 90s set design; a skateboarding montage set to Coldplay; and on and on. Then the sequel comes out and that one gets slated.

Maybe it's because the intervening years take the new sheen off these things, but in both cases they were poorly thought out films to begin with, so there was no chance the sequels weren't going to be awful too.

Re: WW84
« Reply #44 on: January 11, 2021, 09:56:52 AM »
But it's about honesty and truth and looking in your heart and something

Dr Rock

  • The BEST of luck!
Re: WW84
« Reply #45 on: January 11, 2021, 10:01:40 AM »
Yeah even if you wish for something good, it's cheating, it's not true and the world is beautiful as it is, even if there is terrible suffering which a wishing rock could fix. So magic stones should not be used to get an easy fix.

But isn't Wonder Woman a kind of magic rock going around fixing shit?

Re: WW84
« Reply #46 on: January 11, 2021, 12:02:30 PM »
Came here to smugly point out that I slated the first one at the time too. Clearly bobbins; a cheesy mst3k / rifftrax b-movie on a high budget. Shite acting all around, poor attempts at humour, a romance subplot cringey enough to rival Attack of the Clones, and the most laughable CGI villain I think I've ever seen. So it's no surprise at all that the sequel is getting ripped apart.

There was a similar phenomenon with the first Amazing Spider-Man: for some reason, the general consensus was that it was good, even though it had an unlikeable cast; a cunty peter parker who ends the film smirking into camera at the thought of breaking the oath he's made to Gwen's dad on his death bed; a nonsense plot about an army of lizards which are never actually shown on screen; early 90s set design; a skateboarding montage set to Coldplay; and on and on. Then the sequel comes out and that one gets slated.

Maybe it's because the intervening years take the new sheen off these things, but in both cases they were poorly thought out films to begin with, so there was no chance the sequels weren't going to be awful too.

Don't think that's true. Both Amazing Spider-Man films are rated about the same (and I personally like them a lot more than the Tobey Maguire ones, I thought he was an awful Peter Parker) and Wonder Woman and WW84 are leagues apart. I can't imagine any circumstance where not liking a sequel has made me realise the previous film wasn't good, that doesn't make any sense.

Bad Ambassador

  • Sit down, Mario!
Re: WW84
« Reply #47 on: January 11, 2021, 01:43:18 PM »
I watched WW again over Christmas and liked it as much as the first time.

Dr Rock

  • The BEST of luck!
Re: WW84
« Reply #48 on: January 11, 2021, 02:17:28 PM »
I don't mind that Patti Jenkins wanted to make a more innocent, child-friendly Wonder Woman movie, less Snyderverse and more like the spirit of the Christopher Reeves Superman films. It could've worked, the movie could've been much better and far less problematic, and here's how:

First, don't have Chris Pine come back by stealing someone else's body, unless you address that (and have WW and Steve-Trev immediately think it's wrong, unless the borrowed body somehow consents), but really just make Steve Trevor just reappear.

Keep the wishing rock, let Mando get his hands on it, and he starts small, wishing to be a successful businessman etc. He gets infinite wishes I guess, like anyone holding the stone does.

Drop Cheetah. Use her in another movie.

Diana and Steve are all happy to be together again. But soon we see WW is losing her powers a bit. cos there's a price to pay for every wish. They face the dilemma of whether their love is more important than WW helping people.

But no time to think about that as some idiot has used their wish to make dinosaurs come back to life - cue exciting WW vs dinosaurs action scene.

They track down Pedro and WW says he doesn't know what he's playing with, but he's already being seduced by his powers. He wishes they WW and Trev were on the other side of the planet, and off they pop. Then you have Wonder Woman finding a jet and turning it invisible, that bit was alright.

Meanwhile Maxwell Lord is thinking bigger. He's president or ruler of america or something. It's creating world-wide unrest. His son is around but he is neglecting him, poor little kid. He runs off crying.

WW and Steve-Trev get back in super-fast time because WW can make the jet go faster somehow.They find Lord, and again beg him to stop, but he wishes for some 80s time-period army (He-Man and his mates?) to fight them. More fun action.

Lord says his plan is to wish to reach everyone in the world and give them a wish (he's going bonkers). WW tells him what chaos that would be, what if someone wished for nuclear war or the death to their enemies...Lord must be stopped before he can do that, but WW and Steve-Trev are powerless to get close to him, with all the 80s shit he's attacking them with.

WW has an idea, defeats the last of the living toys, and rushes off - returning with Lord's son.

"He hasn't had a wish - give him whatever he wants' - Lord sees no reason why not, until the kid says 'I wish my daddy was normal again, and he never found the wishing rock, and none of the wishes worked, etc.'

The world goes back to normal. Yay! But this means Steve Trevor is going to soon disappear too. Though very upset, WW can give that speech about no short cuts in life, and finally accept that Steve is gone, and move on with her life.

THE END

Mister Six

  • Golden Member
  • *****
  • Ridiculously teacakes
Re: WW84
« Reply #49 on: January 11, 2021, 08:08:12 PM »
That sounds substantially better than this film (although admittedly I can't be arsed watching it and have just surmised the plot through reviews, so basically this entire post is a waste of time).

sirhenry

  • That worked out well...
Re: WW84
« Reply #50 on: January 11, 2021, 08:38:04 PM »
Any idea what the thinking was concerning the looks of our protagonists? WW was pixel perfect, groomed to within a micron of her life, looking like she'd just moved into a mansion in Uncanny Valley while our zombie hero was unshaven, ungroomed and wearing a baggy tracksuit as if he was living in a dumpster.

Other than 'love is blind', what message was that for the youth of today?

Re: WW84
« Reply #51 on: January 11, 2021, 09:08:02 PM »
It's Chris Pine, innit? He seems to be fancied by a lot of people despite looking like a Thunderbird.

Re: WW84
« Reply #52 on: January 12, 2021, 05:46:54 AM »
I like how Diana has apparently spent years lamenting her inability to fly, while she’s had a suit with wings sitting in her spare room the whole time.

Dr Rock

  • The BEST of luck!
Re: WW84
« Reply #53 on: January 12, 2021, 07:54:45 AM »
Which reminds me, her curiosity about how planes manage to fly. It's 1985 Diana,, you can look that up in any book, It's the design of the wings which make air flow in one way underneath the wing, causing high pressure, and another above the wing, causing low pressure, resulting in lift. I don't know if that is relevant to your own desire to fly, but it's also what your zombie boyfriend should've told you instead of that guff about 'feeling the air and the wind.'

Re: WW84
« Reply #54 on: January 12, 2021, 08:11:47 AM »
The whole concept to me doesn't really seem like one that's well suited to a modern superhero formula film to me. Marvel really has always had its plots driven by McGuffins because that allows for quite busy films, stories can be full of drama and lots of different characters/plot elements because your central plot isn't very limiting. When you introduce something like "wishing" though I think you really need to build your entire film around it, it can't just be in the background.

Shameless Custard

  • PAUSE FOR THE JET
    • LastFM
Re: WW84
« Reply #55 on: January 12, 2021, 05:10:08 PM »
Dr Rock, you got the year wrong. It was 1984, silly! And books didn't exist until 1987

Re: WW84
« Reply #56 on: March 27, 2021, 03:52:15 PM »
It reminds me, appropriately, of shitty 80s movies like Superman 4, real Golan-Globus-tier stuff.

Compared to any Marvel movie, the action scenes are shit. And far too many scenes of people talking in offices, written with a 6 year old's view of business and politics. The plot seems entirely random as though "I know someone who owns a shopping mall! Let's go to Tunisia, they'll give us some money! Someone at the Smithsonian liked the last movie!" It even has a dressing up montage, subversively featuring Chris Pine. The cast is mostly ok but still seems assembled at random, with e.g. Wiig not getting much opportunity to be funny. Also lots of attempts to randomly shoehorn small children in once they realised nobody aged over 10 would like it - throw them off balconies, let them play in the road, the opening sequence which was by far the most spectacular part of the film but irrelevant to everything else. But how many kids know the monkey's paw reference from their reading of Edwardian supernatural fiction? Weren't they allowed to mention Aladdin?

The main difference from Superman 4 is, what the fuck did they spend US$ 200m on? It wasn't the special effects, sets, cast, or script.

Re: WW84
« Reply #57 on: March 28, 2021, 03:46:20 AM »
#ReleaseTheGadotCut

chveik

  • OPEN THE PUBS BOYS
Re: WW84
« Reply #58 on: March 28, 2021, 04:03:42 AM »
The main difference from Superman 4 is, what the fuck did they spend US$ 200m on? It wasn't the special effects, sets, cast, or script.

donations to the US military

Re: WW84
« Reply #59 on: March 31, 2021, 11:31:14 AM »
^Maybe it was hush money for victims of DC films. Or to buy off Joss Whedon.

Tags: