Spoiler Alert :
The thing that bothers me (as a person that likes to write and develop story) is WW1984 does what most superhero films do in the second story - play around with 'the abilities'. In Superman 2 starring Chris Reeve, the lead character loses his abilities and gets them back in time for the third act. In Spiderman 2 starring Tobey McGuire, the lead hero abilities diminish for a time. He gets them back in time for the third act. And in WW1984.... you get the idea. It bothers me that this 'trend' is the go-to for storytellers in the second superhero story. I've seen it before. Do something new. That's my only grievance (pain in the rump wannabe writers like me.....)
Yeah, the real problem is Superheroes who are too powerful to begin with. The clip I saw of WW snatching a bullet out of the air with her lasso after it had whizzed past her head, and pushing a big military truck sideways down the road at highway speed - that level of power is just stupid. It's not just that those feats are impossible, it's that it makes the hero unbeatable. That's boring. The whole problem with Captain Marvel is that she's too powerful. You can't get invested in a fight scene when the hero can't be beaten. Stupid.
Spoiler Alert :
The thing that bothers me (as a person that likes to write and develop story) is WW1984 does what most superhero films do in the second story - play around with 'the abilities'. In Superman 2 starring Chris Reeve, the lead character loses his abilities and gets them back in time for the third act. In Spiderman 2 starring Tobey McGuire, the lead hero abilities diminish for a time. He gets them back in time for the third act. And in WW1984.... you get the idea. It bothers me that this 'trend' is the go-to for storytellers in the second superhero story. I've seen it before. Do something new. That's my only grievance (pain in the rump wannabe writers like me.....)
Yeah, the real problem is Superheroes who are too powerful to begin with. The clip I saw of WW snatching a bullet out of the air with her lasso after it had whizzed past her head, and pushing a big military truck sideways down the road at highway speed - that level of power is just stupid. It's not just that those feats are impossible, it's that it makes the hero unbeatable. That's boring. The whole problem with Captain Marvel is that she's too powerful. You can't get invested in a fight scene when the hero can't be beaten. Stupid.
I suppose it can sometimes be fun just to see a superhero show off their power in some spectacular way. Like that scene in Superman Returns where he walks through the minigun fire completely unhurt. But, of course, if every action scene is like that then yeah, that's dull.
Re: Wonder Woman 1984 (2020)
Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2021 10:22 am
by Bert
Spoiler ahead: Spoiler
I've seen the White House fight scene from WW 1984. There's a bit where a weakening WW gets roughed up pretty good by one aggressive security dude with a handgun. It's awesome - and so much more believable. It makes her victory against the guards so much more satisfying because it's difficult for her.
Spoiler Alert :
The thing that bothers me (as a person that likes to write and develop story) is WW1984 does what most superhero films do in the second story - play around with 'the abilities'. In Superman 2 starring Chris Reeve, the lead character loses his abilities and gets them back in time for the third act. In Spiderman 2 starring Tobey McGuire, the lead hero abilities diminish for a time. He gets them back in time for the third act. And in WW1984.... you get the idea. It bothers me that this 'trend' is the go-to for storytellers in the second superhero story. I've seen it before. Do something new. That's my only grievance (pain in the rump wannabe writers like me.....)
Yeah, the real problem is Superheroes who are too powerful to begin with. The clip I saw of WW snatching a bullet out of the air with her lasso after it had whizzed past her head, and pushing a big military truck sideways down the road at highway speed - that level of power is just stupid. It's not just that those feats are impossible, it's that it makes the hero unbeatable. That's boring. The whole problem with Captain Marvel is that she's too powerful. You can't get invested in a fight scene when the hero can't be beaten. Stupid.
Yeah, if all they did was kick ass all the time, it would be really boring. They need to have some sort of adversity to overcome.
Re: Wonder Woman 1984 (2020)
Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2021 2:16 pm
by Mr. X
Fully powered to me didn't seem to be a problem.
Spoiler
The problem was the slow ramp up and the nothing appearance of Cheetah. They could have had a full powered Cheetah from the start and she pulls tactics on WW that WW didn't expect. Plus add WW would pull her punches cause it was her friend. The other glaring problem is Diana does not look significantly different from Wonder Woman so EVERYONE knew who she was the moment they saw her. Manerva, diet Trump, everyone. At least Carter Diana Prince wore glasses and down dressed. The whole alter ego thing was pointless.
Re: Wonder Woman 1984 (2020)
Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2021 2:39 pm
by Femina
I mean..... Diana has NEVER looked significantly different from Wonder Woman... All Superman does is wear glasses. I don't see this as any kind of basis for real criticism.
If that's a SERIOUS complaint now, then DC is gonna have to throw out basically the entirety of their secret identity storyarcs. Like ALL of them. Most people REALISTICALLY can identify a person by their voice alone. DC universe secret identities have ALWAYS been high fantasy. All the 'batman voice changey' stuff is NEWFORM based on the Nolan 'gritty realistic' Gotham take and should not be considered a baseline for DC heroes globally.
With Secret Identities you have to either accept it or not, but complaining about it 50 years later after the precedents are hardboiled in isn't a fair basis for complaint after 49 years of acceptance. (or... idk, however long DC has been a thing)
I mean..... Diana has NEVER looked significantly different from Wonder Woman... All Superman does is wear glasses. I don't see this as any kind of basis for real criticism.
If that's a SERIOUS complaint now, then DC is gonna have to throw out basically the entirety of their secret identity storyarcs. Like ALL of them. Most people REALISTICALLY can identify a person by their voice alone. DC universe secret identities have ALWAYS been high fantasy. All the 'batman voice changey' stuff is NEWFORM based on the Nolan 'gritty realistic' Gotham take and should not be considered a baseline for DC heroes globally.
With Secret Identities you have to either accept it or not, but complaining about it 50 years later after the precedents are hardboiled in isn't a fair basis for complaint after 49 years of acceptance. (or... idk, however long DC has been a thing)
Maybe the thing is just, like, consistency? So if people magically don't recognize her fine, but then NO-ONE should recognize her. Or if we're doing away with the magical secret identity, then we should COMPLETELY do away with it. I guess the complaint is, like, "well, are we on 'don't think about it' comic book logic or not?"
I mean..... Diana has NEVER looked significantly different from Wonder Woman... All Superman does is wear glasses. I don't see this as any kind of basis for real criticism.
If that's a SERIOUS complaint now, then DC is gonna have to throw out basically the entirety of their secret identity storyarcs. Like ALL of them. Most people REALISTICALLY can identify a person by their voice alone. DC universe secret identities have ALWAYS been high fantasy. All the 'batman voice changey' stuff is NEWFORM based on the Nolan 'gritty realistic' Gotham take and should not be considered a baseline for DC heroes globally.
With Secret Identities you have to either accept it or not, but complaining about it 50 years later after the precedents are hardboiled in isn't a fair basis for complaint after 49 years of acceptance. (or... idk, however long DC has been a thing)
Yes WW over the years always down dressed and wore glasses or didn't look like her WW counter part. Pony tail, glasses, dumpy dress or uniform. I think now she's just Diana and everyone knows anyway.
Its a minor nit pick. Never argued it was a 4 alarm fire.
For superman nobody looks at superman and says "oh you're clark kent" even though its just henry Cavill. They never notice. Now if Diana did exactly the same things in the movie but nobody noticed it was her as WW then fine with me, we can chalk it up to the Clark Kent effect.
Even emotional entertainment has to have some consistency. It can't just be a series of emotional porn moments. The plot and rules have to mean something. If not then don't bother with a plot and just have people crying and screaming for 2 hours. The heroes journey is not a social construct.
Yes WW over the years always down dressed and wore glasses or didn't look like her WW counter part. Pony tail, glasses, dumpy dress or uniform. I think now she's just Diana and everyone knows anyway.
Its a minor nit pick. Never argued it was a 4 alarm fire.
For superman nobody looks at superman and says "oh you're clark kent" even though its just henry Cavill. They never notice. Now if Diana did exactly the same things in the movie but nobody noticed it was her as WW then fine with me, we can chalk it up to the Clark Kent effect.
Even emotional entertainment has to have some consistency. It can't just be a series of emotional porn moments. The plot and rules have to mean something. If not then don't bother with a plot and just have people crying and screaming for 2 hours. The heroes journey is not a social construct.
What I'm saying is. DC comics secret identities are SUCH a plot gimmick and have been for so long that it really barely matters how consistant it is or not. When a character needs to know that Clark Kent is Superman, they Just DO, and otherwise his disguise is foolproof. It's ALWAYS been stupid, it's TO LATE to make that a complaint now unless the complaint is 'Secret Identities as a concept don't work anymore with today's skeptical audience'
Which might be why Marvel's done away with them almost entirely.
Re: Wonder Woman 1984 (2020)
Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2021 5:24 pm
by Mr. X
Actually the identity secret is a key point in both BvS and Justice League. Diana wanted privacy and that's why she wanted that picture back, that and nostalgia. And in WW84 she smashes all the cameras in the mall. Yes its part of the story. And nobody says "hey clark" when they meet superman. Perry White doesn't say "hey that's clark".
At least have consistency across movies for the same version of the character. But yeah why bother, its not about plot or story, its about moments.
Re: Wonder Woman 1984 (2020)
Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2021 6:40 pm
by Dazzle1
I have no problem with the secret identity, I thought it worked well for D.C
Actually the identity secret is a key point in both BvS and Justice League. Diana wanted privacy and that's why she wanted that picture back, that and nostalgia. And in WW84 she smashes all the cameras in the mall. Yes its part of the story. And nobody says "hey clark" when they meet superman. Perry White doesn't say "hey that's clark".
At least have consistency across movies for the same version of the character. But yeah why bother, its not about plot or story, its about moments.
OOOH. Okay I see what you're saying now. People going 'Diana!' when talking to Wonder Woman. I've seen a lot of that lately it feels like... I think often enough it's partially the actors making script mistakes since they've been calling a character a certain thing and editors/directors not catching it. Which of course, still lands on the film makers shoulders as 'brunt of blame'. It always reminds me of like, Power Rangers when the rangers are like, screaming each others names xD
WW1 was a better film by a pretty significant margin. I don't have as many problems as many do with the sequel here, but I can see very clearly where valid criticisms are coming forward... I still personally just see the 'secret identity' thing as very gimmicky in DC films and works on par with how Spider-Man kept ripping his mask off to emote in the old Raimi films yet somehow New York still didn't know who he was... So to me, a secret identity in a film boils down to 'there if the plot deems its needed/gone when the plot is done with it.' You can ordinarily nit pick any superhero film and declare 'this doesn't work because Secret Identity', and most of the time we forgive it because we liked the story overall. I guess I just usually would rather focus on the deeper fault of a thing that is making me dislike a story rather than the surface level quirk's I'd ordinarily forgive.
I mean, Wonder Woman saved whole towns of human beings in WW1 complete with photographic evidence and yet nobody seems to have any clue who or what she is whenever she turns up in any of the later DC films, complete with apparently retirement stints from superhero work from WW1 to 1984 and then from 1984 to 2012 or whatever when suddenly she decided to help out against mutant Zod... but NOT when Zod was ravaging New York in Man of Steel? *Shrug* It's kinda like, you either accept the comic book cheese or you don't.
Re: Wonder Woman 1984 (2020)
Posted: Thu Jan 07, 2021 12:45 am
by Mr. X
So one thing that puzzles me Spoiler
Why the r@pe? Specifically why the soul take over of "handsome guy" which he is called in the credits. They didn't even give him a name. The magic manifested missiles, cows, cars, past loved ones etc but in this case Trevor's soul hijacks some other guy then Diana has sex with that man's body (AGAINST HIS CONSENT). Why not just manifest Trevor. Give him a body. The stone created a solid wall around a country. Why this angle at all? And the guy is treated as a complete sex object. He has NO NAME in the credits. They could have easily had Trevor fade away when she denounced her wish. In fact WHY did they not do this in front of her?
So I have to wonder if she even had a wish granted at all. If she has other magical powers like flight and making things invisible and a lasso of truth that can manipulate people then perhaps Trevor was of her own creation. BTW this "hijacking" is par for the course for the Zeus family. Daddy did it all the time.
But this whole issue is not addressed. Its glossed over at best. So why this peculiar way of manifesting her wish?
Why the r@pe? Specifically why the soul take over of "handsome guy" which he is called in the credits. They didn't even give him a name. The magic manifested missiles, cows, cars, past loved ones etc but in this case Trevor's soul hijacks some other guy then Diana has sex with that man's body (AGAINST HIS CONSENT). Why not just manifest Trevor. Give him a body. The stone created a solid wall around a country. Why this angle at all? And the guy is treated as a complete sex object. He has NO NAME in the credits. They could have easily had Trevor fade away when she denounced her wish. In fact WHY did they not do this in front of her?
So I have to wonder if she even had a wish granted at all. If she has other magical powers like flight and making things invisible and a lasso of truth that can manipulate people then perhaps Trevor was of her own creation. BTW this "hijacking" is par for the course for the Zeus family. Daddy did it all the time.
But this whole issue is not addressed. Its glossed over at best. So why this peculiar way of manifesting her wish?
Spoiler
It's a really weird plot point. I get this feeling that they were trying REALLY HARD to make us 'buy' that Steve Trevor was back and did not want us to feel the old Superhero 'nobody ever dies' fatigue. I think they were so scared of that audience response that they invented a whole slew of weird magical hurdles to the return... and then totally spaced on what it meant otherwise... then spaced for long enough that there was no changing it when somebody inevitably pointed out 'uh this is weird'... and then hoped that just never mentioning that it was strange and making it so little of a plot point that viewers wouldn't notice... and this mildly worked. I didn't even THINK about it while I watched it specifically because it was hardly treated as a thing... but it IS weird and it's all the more strange a choice since everyone else's wishes just happen as they ask for them anyway... so all the effort to somehow make Steve's return feel palatable to the audience has actually gone all the way around to being actually disturbing instead of just incidentally meme-able. To avoid joining every other comic book film in the 'nobody ever really dies' department, they instead accidentally raped a guy.
So like... I sort of feel like Diana has SOME leeway for excuse in that she might be so overwhelmingly shocked to her emotional core that Steve was back that she was willing to just accept it for a time and space on the extraneous details for a little while... I mean it doesn't make it GOOD... but one could argue there's at least an element of 'understandable' in the short term response... but it feels like a TRUE FAILING of the film that this particular plot point was so spectacularly mishandled because yes. Frankly, that dude got raped. He doesn't know he got raped, but he did! Arguments can be made; where was his consciousness while Steve was hijacking? Maybe the fact his mind was somewhere else softens the blow for HIM? Maybe he wasn't 'psychologically raped' He'll at least never KNOW he got raped...... but he got f'kin raped and even the FILM doesn't seem to realize it... and it's DAMN CONFUSING, it doesn't need to be there... and like, you know what, its sexist! I wouldn't accept this kind of shit if it was happening to a female character. I'm gonna stand on my laurels! 'Handsome Guy' deserved better and this movie is bullshit!
Re: Wonder Woman 1984 (2020)
Posted: Thu Jan 07, 2021 12:04 pm
by sneakly
I prefer my women trapable. The nice thing about golden age WW was she could be defeated by bondage. Mary Marvel a nice fat gag would leave her helpless. Batgirl, well, just let her get her darted or nabbed from behind or simply out numbered. Linda Carter was great because she lacked superpowers when not WW and in costume she could still get chloro’d or gassed.
Superman was just too bullet proof for my likes. On the upside Lois was eminently capturable and made fine bait... Her outfits in the TV version were really dowdy. When I was little I thought she was too old to be hot. And she was kind of annoying in a stilted sort of way.
I suppose it can sometimes be fun just to see a superhero show off their power in some spectacular way. Like that scene in Superman Returns where he walks through the minigun fire completely unhurt. But, of course, if every action scene is like that then yeah, that's dull.
There's a scene in the first Christopher Reeve Superman where some crooks are on a boat, and Supes just picks up the whole boat and takes it to the police station. The crooks pose no threat to Superman at all, but that didn't matter for that scene. It was just a fun spectacle, one of a series of scenes to establish what Superman can do, and how he operates. Of course, by the third act, Lex Luthor puts his scheme in motion and the bad guys eventually do pose a threat to Superman.
Grabbing a speeding bullet with the lasso from behind was spectacular, but it didn't really fit into that entire sequence, which was intended to show that Wonder Woman's powers were reduced. The result was a muddled sequence that didn't clearly convey what was going on.
Why the r@pe? Specifically why the soul take over of "handsome guy" which he is called in the credits. They didn't even give him a name. The magic manifested missiles, cows, cars, past loved ones etc but in this case Trevor's soul hijacks some other guy then Diana has sex with that man's body (AGAINST HIS CONSENT). Why not just manifest Trevor. Give him a body. The stone created a solid wall around a country. Why this angle at all? And the guy is treated as a complete sex object. He has NO NAME in the credits. They could have easily had Trevor fade away when she denounced her wish. In fact WHY did they not do this in front of her?
So I have to wonder if she even had a wish granted at all. If she has other magical powers like flight and making things invisible and a lasso of truth that can manipulate people then perhaps Trevor was of her own creation. BTW this "hijacking" is par for the course for the Zeus family. Daddy did it all the time.
But this whole issue is not addressed. Its glossed over at best. So why this peculiar way of manifesting her wish?
Spoiler
It's a really weird plot point. I get this feeling that they were trying REALLY HARD to make us 'buy' that Steve Trevor was back and did not want us to feel the old Superhero 'nobody ever dies' fatigue. I think they were so scared of that audience response that they invented a whole slew of weird magical hurdles to the return... and then totally spaced on what it meant otherwise... then spaced for long enough that there was no changing it when somebody inevitably pointed out 'uh this is weird'... and then hoped that just never mentioning that it was strange and making it so little of a plot point that viewers wouldn't notice... and this mildly worked. I didn't even THINK about it while I watched it specifically because it was hardly treated as a thing... but it IS weird and it's all the more strange a choice since everyone else's wishes just happen as they ask for them anyway... so all the effort to somehow make Steve's return feel palatable to the audience has actually gone all the way around to being actually disturbing instead of just incidentally meme-able. To avoid joining every other comic book film in the 'nobody ever really dies' department, they instead accidentally raped a guy.
So like... I sort of feel like Diana has SOME leeway for excuse in that she might be so overwhelmingly shocked to her emotional core that Steve was back that she was willing to just accept it for a time and space on the extraneous details for a little while... I mean it doesn't make it GOOD... but one could argue there's at least an element of 'understandable' in the short term response... but it feels like a TRUE FAILING of the film that this particular plot point was so spectacularly mishandled because yes. Frankly, that dude got raped. He doesn't know he got raped, but he did! Arguments can be made; where was his consciousness while Steve was hijacking? Maybe the fact his mind was somewhere else softens the blow for HIM? Maybe he wasn't 'psychologically raped' He'll at least never KNOW he got raped...... but he got f'kin raped and even the FILM doesn't seem to realize it... and it's DAMN CONFUSING, it doesn't need to be there... and like, you know what, its sexist! I wouldn't accept this kind of shit if it was happening to a female character. I'm gonna stand on my laurels! 'Handsome Guy' deserved better and this movie is bullshit!
Spoiler
So like... I sort of feel like Diana has SOME leeway for excuse in that she might be so overwhelmingly shocked to her emotional core that Steve was back that she was willing to just accept it for a time and space on the extraneous details for a little while...
Yes I was thinking this as well that they were somehow giving her an "out" so as not to fall into the same greedy label as everyone else. To keep her more virtuous. One thing is she never says her wish. We only see the gust of air. So we technically don't know what her wish is.
Re: Wonder Woman 1984 (2020)
Posted: Fri Jan 08, 2021 10:16 pm
by Mr. X
This is EXACTLY the movie. Spoiler alert.
<Mod edit. - I moved your warning to the top of the post Mr X rather than after it>
Re: Wonder Woman 1984 (2020)
Posted: Sat Jan 23, 2021 5:15 am
by theScribbler
Watched movie again tonight. Liked it a lot better this 2nd viewing.
Streaming thru Jan 24 on HBO Max, so two more days (Saturday and Sunday), and then it's gone till who knows.
Re: Wonder Woman 1984 (2020)
Posted: Sat Jan 30, 2021 1:44 pm
by Mr. X
Funny. Contains spoilers.
Re: Wonder Woman 1984 (2020)
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2021 2:49 pm
by Deceiver
Just finished watching this. Forgive my ignorance, I haven't viewed anyone else's comments.
**Spoilers ahead**
It started off well. The assault course maybe the best thing in it. I had a little chuckle at the mall scene, as I wrote a vaguely similar one in my current Wonder Woman story. At this point I was enjoying it.
Unfortunately, the whole thing descended into a schizophrenic nightmare. Magic is tricky to write well. I saw parallels with Supergirl - the first ever super heroine feature film - actually made in 1984. It got so bad that I wondered what on earth I was watching; it didn't even seem like Wonder Woman. As with the first movie, the more interesting villain, Cheetah, became nothing more than a sidekick after some build up. The climax was as wet as dishwater, and about as interesting.
I'm guessing the Asteria (or is it hysteria?) outfit got shoehorned in to sell merchandise. Why doesn't she wear it all the time? To think some commentators have the audacity to describe Diana in the TV series spinning transformation as cheesy when in this version her costumes changes aren't even explained, or even needed for that matter.
The movie was so hammy that the dramatic score sounded noticeably out of place. What a turkey. I could go on and on, but what's the point?
Re: Wonder Woman 1984 (2020)
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2021 2:58 pm
by the123
i really enjoyed it and can not wait to get it on 4k with the action figure very excited.
I'm guessing the Asteria (or is it hysteria?) outfit got shoehorned in to sell merchandise. Why doesn't she wear it all the time? To think some commentators have the audacity to describe Diana in the TV series spinning transformation as cheesy when in this version her costumes changes aren't even explained, or even needed for that matter.
Spoiler
True. The changing in the car doesn't make sense. How is she wearing that armor and such under some slacks and a blouse.
Could be the Asteria armor has no poopie door and that its hot on the inside. And he never wore it to take on Doomsday though that could have been due to lack of convenience.
True. The changing in the car doesn't make sense. How is she wearing that armor and such under some slacks and a blouse.
Gadot has appeared as Wonder Woman four times, and they still haven't addressed how she changes into the outfit, which she doesn't even need to wear. The scene you mention, in particular, now makes it almost impossible to explain the speed of her transition without a superpowered solution. Why does she need to bother? The costume is not hiding her identity. It just wastes time. Why not just grab the lasso and tiara?
The Cathy Lee Crosby pilot had the same weakness as Gal Gadot's version. Everyone knew she was Wonder Woman. She spent much of the movie in normal clothing and had no problem using her Amazon skills to defend herself. Later, she's suddenly dressed in her Wonder Woman costume without any explanation to why she thought wearing a flashy blue, red and star striped dress was a good choice at this stage of her mission. Both adaptations make the character faintly ridiculous...
Gadot has appeared as Wonder Woman four times, and they still haven't addressed how she changes into the outfit, which she doesn't even need to wear. The scene you mention, in particular, now makes it almost impossible to explain the speed of her transition without a superpowered solution. Why does she need to bother? The costume is not hiding her identity. It just wastes time. Why not just grab the lasso and tiara?
Every superhero needs a costume. Yes, it doesn't hide her identity, just like with Superman.
Yet, normal people don't know who Wonder Woman is, just like Superman.
She changes her hair a little, is wearing glasses and they don't recognize her....just as with Supergirl.
Diana is her "mask", just like Clark Kent is the "mask" of Superman.
That just how it is, no matter if it is silly or not.
If everyone knows how Wonder Woman is, all the bad guys could just kill her friends (even she doesn't really have friends here before she gets to know..... these 2).
That's why most superheroes have some kind of secret identity.
And that's good.
Don't know how Wonder Woman changes into the costume, but that's not important.
I don't need to know, that's better than make up silly explanations like with Black Scorpion where she uses her Scorpion ring to transform from Darcy into her Black Scorpion costume .
And if I watch something with Superman or Wonder Woman I simply don't question such things. Hey, there are superpowered gods...
With heroes like Batman....it's something different.
P.S.: I'm just talking about the Wonder Woman in the movies....don't know her comics.
Every superhero needs a costume. Yes, it doesn't hide her identity, just like with Superman.
Yet, normal people don't know who Wonder Woman is, just like Superman.
She changes her hair a little, is wearing glasses and they don't recognize her....just as with Supergirl.
Diana is her "mask", just like Clark Kent is the "mask" of Superman.
That just how it is, no matter if it is silly or not.
If everyone knows how Wonder Woman is, all the bad guys could just kill her friends (even she doesn't really have friends here before she gets to know..... these 2).
That's why most superheroes have some kind of secret identity.
And that's good.
Sorry, I don't think that is the case. My understanding is if anyone has seen her as Diana Prince, and later see her again as Wonder Woman, they're going to know Diana Prince and Wonder Woman are the same person.
Don't know how Wonder Woman changes into the costume, but that's not important.
For you. But then there are people who are more interested in emotional high moments than reasons things work. Just the type of audience. Like the Breaking Dawn movies. The audience didn't care about how vampires or werewolves worked, it was just a meager plot point to get to the emotional high points. Same with the last three Star Wars movies.
Again its the type of audience member.
But there is the point that if someone doesn't care how Wonder Woman transforms then why not have her transform in a semi-rational way so that other types of audience members can enjoy the show. Sure someone can make a movie of nonsensical emotional yelling and emo-rollercoasters but then they lose a large percentage of other possible audience members. "its just magic" is not exactly a good response to bad story telling. If all I want in a movie is the emotional high points then that's tantamount to watching a porn flic and not caring if the plumber has the wrong tools.
If story, logic, etc are rejected or ignored in a movie then it just becomes nonsensical porn.
Also if identity does not matter then why did WW break all the cameras in the mall? And Cheetah INSTANTLY recognized Diana as WW. So Diana's mere private personna does no good in disguising she is WW. Its not a mask.
Re: Wonder Woman 1984 (2020)
Posted: Tue Feb 09, 2021 6:30 pm
by Maskripper
I'm just saying that knowing how she changes into costume is one itsy bitsy tiny detail.
I'm interested in a lot of "reasons", but yeah...not this one.
Only watched one Breaking Dawn movie back then....I would care about how the vampire/werewolf thing works as it is somehow important to the movie/plot.
Unlike the costume aspect in WW.
Yeah, she broke the cameras in the mall as she doesn't want the people to know about Wonder Woman. She always stayed in the shadows the whole time.
Spoiler
And yeah, Cheetah recognized her, but they were close friends and I think there was a point where it was explained how Cheetah knows her identity....but not sure right now....watched it only once so far.
And her "secret" identity does matter to her.
Re: Wonder Woman 1984 (2020)
Posted: Tue Feb 09, 2021 11:11 pm
by theScribbler
Spoiler
Pretty sure Barbara M. didn't know Diana was WW until after she made her wish to be like Diana and got stronger and faster and more desirable and put two n two together. "Seems wishing to be like you comes with some surprises," or something like that.
Pretty sure Barbara M. didn't know Diana was WW until after she made her wish to be like Diana and got stronger and faster and more desirable and put two n two together. "Seems wishing to be like you comes with some surprises," or something like that.
That line and the wish storyline wasn't lost on me, but it's hardly conclusive. This shouldn't be an aspect that needs to be debated. It should be clear to the audience in every movie where Diana Prince has real significance.
Presuming there is consistency between the Gal's Wonder Woman appearances, Bruce Wayne was able to tell or guess Diana Prince was Wonder Woman just by looking at an old photograph from WW1.
In Wonder Woman, the Diana Prince persona was crafted with Steve Trevor and Etta Candy. Diana first met her team in the guise of Diana Prince, but later she was dressed as Wonder Woman, and nobody had any trouble discerning she was the same person.
This is why I think they're going for this post-crisis comic idea of Diana Prince / Wonder Woman as someone who is easily seen as the same person. But it shouldn't be this hard to ascertain.
I'm very much with The secret identity with the spin transformation is far superior. They've missed a trick (well, they've missed many). Audiences would likely applaud if they got to see Diana turn into Wonder Woman in such a way...
Re: Wonder Woman 1984 (2020)
Posted: Wed Feb 10, 2021 5:01 pm
by Mr. X
It could be she just doesn't give a flying flip anyone figures it out since she can pretty much slaughter anyone who challenges her however I would imagine lawsuits might be an issue.
What's weirder is she's working for the Smithsonian even in current day and apparently nobody notices she's the same age from 1984. Its not like she got a different job or something.
These details indicate to me more slopping and lazy writing than something inconsequential.
Re: Wonder Woman 1984 (2020)
Posted: Wed Feb 10, 2021 9:07 pm
by theScribbler
Was conclusive to me how Barbara put it together.
Didn't Bruce know Diana was WW pre the photograph, like when they were talking to each other in Smallville after the Doomsday fight and Superman's death. He then found the photo and sent it to her and wrote that she might tell him the story someday. That's how I remember it, but it's been awhile.
In first WW, the team knew her as Diana and then she took off her coat in front of them revealing her costume and then her abilities, so obviously they had no trouble discerning her person.
I agree with the weirdness how she all of a sudden had costume on in the getting out of car scene. Some magic transformation is needed unless she's gonna wear thick clothes all the time over her costume.
--
In 1984 she worked at Smithsonian. In BvS I thought she worked a Louvre Museum in France, I have vague remembering of that pyramid structure. Maybe I missed something, Justice League was pretty forgettable to me.
In 1984 she worked at Smithsonian. In BvS I thought she worked a Louvre Museum in France, I have vague remembering of that pyramid structure. Maybe I missed something, Justice League was pretty forgettable to me.
Didn't Bruce know Diana was WW pre the photograph, like when they were talking to each other in Smallville after the Doomsday fight and Superman's death. He then found the photo and sent it to her and wrote that she might tell him the story someday. That's how I remember it, but it's been awhile.
I've gone back and had a look. It's the photo first and then the funeral. However, Bruce sees Luther had matched Diana's face to the old photograph via facial recognition software. I'd say this supports the theory that the human eye can't tell Diana Prince is Wonder Woman. But it still isn't conclusive, and I'll say it again, it shouldn't need to be debated...
I've gone back and had a look. It's the photo first and then the funeral. However, Bruce sees Luther had matched Diana's face to the old photograph via facial recognition software. I'd say this supports the theory that the human eye can't tell Diana Prince is Wonder Woman. But it still isn't conclusive, and I'll say it again, it shouldn't need to be debated...
I would say this is a feature of Gadot in general. Unless she has her hair in a tight ponytail she isn't that distinctive from other pretty brunettes at least to me, Put her in a line up with 4 other similar brunettes and it would take me a bit to tell the difference.
I would say this is a feature of Gadot in general. Unless she has her hair in a tight ponytail she isn't that distinctive from other pretty brunettes at least to me, Put her in a line up with 4 other similar brunettes and it would take me a bit to tell the difference.
Is that a diplomatic way of putting it, Mr X?
Gal's been lucky. She doesn't physically resemble the depiction of the Diana all that much. In my opinion, she is a limited actress who isn't charismatic enough for my vision of Diana. The best thing I can say about her is she makes a good ambassador for the character off-screen.
To give the writers credit where it's due, introducing Wonder Woman in the way they did during Batman vs Superman was inspired. Reimagining the Wonder Woman in WW1 proved to be a good move. I was against both. I still am really!
Re: Wonder Woman 1984 (2020)
Posted: Thu Feb 11, 2021 3:52 pm
by Mr. X
My only like of Gadot is that she is classy off screen. Lynda Carter level of classy.
Re: Wonder Woman 1984 (2020)
Posted: Sun Mar 21, 2021 1:53 pm
by Lurkndog
FYI, the Blu-Ray of WW84 comes out March 30th, and is available now for pre-order on Amazon.
.