|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Jan 20, 2022 22:31:03 GMT 1
The oddest thing that doesn’t get mentioned about this film, is that Diana doesn’t really ever start losing her powers. I mention that because it comes up in reviews that this is the cost she pays, but I really think that’s only because the film says so. I don’t feel it ever shows this to be the case. Sure she gets nicked a little bit by one bullet, but hang on, nobody ever said she was bullet proof. In fact that’s why she blocks bullets with her bracelets. They’ve made a huge point of showing that. And we still see her pushing a massive truck sideways down the road faster than the other trucks are driving. Cheetah taking round one is normal super hero fair, and her slipping in the rope wouldn’t be out of the realm of normal either. So, she isn’t losing her powers. I am pretty convinced this was a fallback plan after the real cost she paid wasn’t testing well, and I suspect that I has a lot to do with how Steve came back, which would also explain why that whole situation is never addressed. But she isn’t losing her powers in this film.
|
|
|
Post by Chalice_Of_Evil on Jan 21, 2022 11:33:11 GMT 1
The oddest thing that doesn’t get mentioned about this film, is that Diana doesn’t really ever start losing her powers. I mention that because it comes up in reviews that this is the cost she pays, but I really think that’s only because the film says so. I don’t feel it ever shows this to be the case. Sure she gets nicked a little bit by one bullet, but hang on, nobody ever said she was bullet proof. In fact that’s why she blocks bullets with her bracelets. They’ve made a huge point of showing that. And we still see her pushing a massive truck sideways down the road faster than the other trucks are driving. Cheetah taking round one is normal super hero fair, and her slipping in the rope wouldn’t be out of the realm of normal either. So, she isn’t losing her powers. I am pretty convinced this was a fallback plan after the real cost she paid wasn’t testing well, and I suspect that I has a lot to do with how Steve came back, which would also explain why that whole situation is never addressed. But she isn’t losing her powers in this film. Apart from seeing that she's unable to break open a lock on a door with ease, there's the fact that she's not able to easily beat Barbara or display the powers she did at the end of the first WW movie when fighting Ares. As for the getting hit by the bullet, I think they already established in the first movie that Amazons could be killed by bullets as Diana's mentor/trainer died from one. I think in this instance it was showing her fading powers since she wasn't able to stop the bullet. There were more than enough examples of her losing her powers.
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Jan 21, 2022 13:31:42 GMT 1
The oddest thing that doesn’t get mentioned about this film, is that Diana doesn’t really ever start losing her powers. I mention that because it comes up in reviews that this is the cost she pays, but I really think that’s only because the film says so. I don’t feel it ever shows this to be the case. Sure she gets nicked a little bit by one bullet, but hang on, nobody ever said she was bullet proof. In fact that’s why she blocks bullets with her bracelets. They’ve made a huge point of showing that. And we still see her pushing a massive truck sideways down the road faster than the other trucks are driving. Cheetah taking round one is normal super hero fair, and her slipping in the rope wouldn’t be out of the realm of normal either. So, she isn’t losing her powers. I am pretty convinced this was a fallback plan after the real cost she paid wasn’t testing well, and I suspect that I has a lot to do with how Steve came back, which would also explain why that whole situation is never addressed. But she isn’t losing her powers in this film. Apart from seeing that she's unable to break open a lock on a door with ease, there's the fact that she's not able to easily beat Barbara or display the powers she did at the end of the first WW movie when fighting Ares. As for the getting hit by the bullet, I think they already established in the first movie that Amazons could be killed by bullets as Diana's mentor/trainer died from one. I think in this instance it was showing her fading powers since she wasn't able to stop the bullet. There were more than enough examples of her losing her powers. The lock not breaking, interesting. Yeah that might seem to count, although I don’t really count the Cheetah loss because that’s what you’d expect from an unexpected first encounter against a being who also wished for her powers. IDK, my take is more that it’s so undefined and minimal that it doesn’t appear to affect the plot, and I’m still suspicious this was added as part of the reshoots and wasn’t the original cost of her wish. I don’t really want to harp on it for those who love and enjoy this film. I’ve just been reviewing this one again recently and these are the types of things that define it for me.
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Jan 21, 2022 16:23:21 GMT 1
Apart from seeing that she's unable to break open a lock on a door with ease, there's the fact that she's not able to easily beat Barbara or display the powers she did at the end of the first WW movie when fighting Ares. As for the getting hit by the bullet, I think they already established in the first movie that Amazons could be killed by bullets as Diana's mentor/trainer died from one. I think in this instance it was showing her fading powers since she wasn't able to stop the bullet. There were more than enough examples of her losing her powers. The lock not breaking, interesting. Yeah that might seem to count, although I don’t really count the Cheetah loss because that’s what you’d expect from an unexpected first encounter against a being who also wished for her powers. IDK, my take is more that it’s so undefined and minimal that it doesn’t appear to affect the plot, and I’m still suspicious this was added as part of the reshoots and wasn’t the original cost of her wish. I don’t really want to harp on it for those who love and enjoy this film. I’ve just been reviewing this one again recently and these are the types of things that define it for me. I'm not hating for hate's sake, but in the final estimation, the decision to weaken Wonder Woman's powers in WW84 was very lazy. Everyone is free to love WW84, but it must be acknowledged that the film's plot mechanics constantly take the viewer out of the story. If you love the film, you likely love it based on an affinity for the character and/or the actress who plays her. It feels like they chose to solve a very conspicuous problem in WW84. By the end of Wonder Woman, it is established that she is beyond OP. Based on the first film's ending, Wonder Woman could have easily beat Lord and Cheetah with minimal effort in WW84. This statement is closer to a fact and less like a hypothesis. Using the Dreamstone to diminish her powers inexplicably was clearly done to level the playing field. Therein lies the wonder wub… The Dreamstone is clearly inspired by the Monkey's Paw legend (as Steve is quick to point out in the film); however, the Dreamstone completely lacks the irony of a true Monkey's Paw. Per the original story, a monkey's paw wish comes with a price to pay related to the initial wish. For example, you wish for $10 M, and the next day your wife dies in a traffic accident. You then receive that exact sum of money in a settlement. Because the writers imposed a random consequence on Diana for her wish, they were then forced to use those rules on everyone else's wishes in the film. This, of course, created a lot of chaos that could be used to construct an exciting third act, but it severely undercuts the thematic weight they were clearly going for with the wishes in the first place. The Dreamstone inflicts a random consequence and forces the viewer to ask why thus immediately taking us out of the story. What does Steve's resurrection have to do with Diana's powers? I've been told that the Dreamstone takes something important away from the wisher. If that is the case, the most important thing to Diana would be her strength, which seems shallow for a superhero known for her integrity.
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Jan 21, 2022 16:54:45 GMT 1
The lock not breaking, interesting. Yeah that might seem to count, although I don’t really count the Cheetah loss because that’s what you’d expect from an unexpected first encounter against a being who also wished for her powers. IDK, my take is more that it’s so undefined and minimal that it doesn’t appear to affect the plot, and I’m still suspicious this was added as part of the reshoots and wasn’t the original cost of her wish. I don’t really want to harp on it for those who love and enjoy this film. I’ve just been reviewing this one again recently and these are the types of things that define it for me. I'm not hating for hate's sake, but in the final estimation, the decision to weaken Wonder Woman's powers in WW84 was very lazy. Everyone is free to love WW84, but it must be acknowledged that the film's plot mechanics constantly take the viewer out of the story. If you love the film, you likely love it based on an affinity for the character and/or the actress who plays her. It feels like they chose to solve a very conspicuous problem in WW84, which was created by the events depicted at the end of the first film. By the end of Wonder Woman, it is established that she is beyond OP. Based on the first film's ending, Wonder Woman could have easily beat Lord and Cheetah with minimal effort in WW84. This statement is closer to a fact and less like a hypothesis. Using the Dreamstone to diminish her powers inexplicably was clearly done to level the playing field. Therein lies the wonder wub… The Dreamstone is clearly inspired by the Monkey's Paw legend (as Steve is quick to point out in the film); however, the Dreamstone completely lacks the irony of a true Monkey's Paw. Per the original story, a Monkey's Paw wish comes with a price to pay related to the initial wish. For example, you wish for $10 M, and the next day your wife dies in a traffic accident. You then receive that exact sum of money in a settlement. Because the writers imposed a random consequence on Diana for her wish, they were then forced to use those rules on everyone else's wishes in the film. This, of course, created a lot of chaos that could be used to construct an exciting third act, but it severely undercuts the thematic weight they were clearly going for with the wishes in the first place. The Dreamstone inflicts a random consequence and forces the viewer to ask why thus immediately taking us out of the story. What does Steve's resurrection have to do with Diana's powers? I've been told that the Dreamstone takes something important away from the wisher. If that is the case, the most important thing to Diana would be her strength, which seems shallow for a superhero known for her integrity. This leads right into why think they original consequence was Steve’s appearance in this other body and that just being wrong. I’ve also heard it suggested that this guy possibly wished for Diana and gets her but also doesn’t. That is more monkeys pawish, but I’m feeling that much too late in the process they realized how awkward this was for the character and did a last minute paint job to make it seem as though her powers were the price instead. Yeah the first film does establish she should have been able to beat Cheetah, but I also feel she has one of the most wildly inconsistent power sets I’ve ever seen. I mean she’s shown to be so fast she can lasso lightening but that speed is never relevant to anything else. The randomly appearing invisibility power is another example. She is always just exactly as powerful and capable as she needs to be from scene to scene consistency be damned. So I’m still pretty convinced the whole “losing her powers” thing was a last minute afterthought. It just doesn’t pop in the film. You have no idea what she is or isn’t capable of. If it was the intended consequence, I think you would make such a thing pretty specific, a la Clark becoming a perfectly normal human in Superman.
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Jan 21, 2022 17:31:09 GMT 1
I'm not hating for hate's sake, but in the final estimation, the decision to weaken Wonder Woman's powers in WW84 was very lazy. Everyone is free to love WW84, but it must be acknowledged that the film's plot mechanics constantly take the viewer out of the story. If you love the film, you likely love it based on an affinity for the character and/or the actress who plays her. It feels like they chose to solve a very conspicuous problem in WW84, which was created by the events depicted at the end of the first film. By the end of Wonder Woman, it is established that she is beyond OP. Based on the first film's ending, Wonder Woman could have easily beat Lord and Cheetah with minimal effort in WW84. This statement is closer to a fact and less like a hypothesis. Using the Dreamstone to diminish her powers inexplicably was clearly done to level the playing field. Therein lies the wonder wub… The Dreamstone is clearly inspired by the Monkey's Paw legend (as Steve is quick to point out in the film); however, the Dreamstone completely lacks the irony of a true Monkey's Paw. Per the original story, a Monkey's Paw wish comes with a price to pay related to the initial wish. For example, you wish for $10 M, and the next day your wife dies in a traffic accident. You then receive that exact sum of money in a settlement. Because the writers imposed a random consequence on Diana for her wish, they were then forced to use those rules on everyone else's wishes in the film. This, of course, created a lot of chaos that could be used to construct an exciting third act, but it severely undercuts the thematic weight they were clearly going for with the wishes in the first place. The Dreamstone inflicts a random consequence and forces the viewer to ask why thus immediately taking us out of the story. What does Steve's resurrection have to do with Diana's powers? I've been told that the Dreamstone takes something important away from the wisher. If that is the case, the most important thing to Diana would be her strength, which seems shallow for a superhero known for her integrity. This leads right into why think they original consequence was Steve’s appearance in this other body and that just being wrong. I’ve also heard it suggested that this guy possibly wished for Diana and gets her but also doesn’t. That is more monkeys pawish, but I’m feeling that much too late in the process they realized how awkward this was for the character and did a last minute paint job to make it seem as though her powers were the price instead. Yeah the first film does establish she should have been able to beat Cheetah, but I also feel she has one of the most wildly inconsistent power sets I’ve ever seen. I mean she’s shown to be so fast she can lasso lightening but that speed is never relevant to anything else. The randomly appearing invisibility power is another example. She is always just exactly as powerful and capable as she needs to be from scene to scene consistency be damned. So I’m still pretty convinced the whole “losing her powers” thing was a last minute afterthought. It just doesn’t pop in the film. You have no idea what she is or isn’t capable of. If it was the intended consequence, I think you would make such a thing pretty specific, a la Clark becoming a perfectly normal human in Superman. I tend to agree with your thoughts on the original consequences of Diana's wish. The monkey's paw effect was likely Steve returning in another man's body, but even that seems odd and random. At least it is more closely related to the wish. I'm not even going to touch on the power levels and abilities of the character (lest I start WW III). Storytellers with an affinity for the genre tend to be more consistent with that sort of thing (e.g., Joss Whedon). For Jenkins, consistency in depicting abilities and levels is not a priority. She leans more on drama and character to get her through. I will say that Wonder Woman probably represents the most conspicuous case of a superhero with ill-defined and inconsistent powers. That said, even the most knowledgeable and detail-oriented writers will bend the rules of a character's powers set for the story's sake. Inventing new ones out of the blue does strain logical consistency, though. It does seem like Superman II was a storytelling influence on WW84. That film has some wild inconsistencies with the Kryptonian powerset, but the "becoming human" gag makes a lot more sense than Diana's wish consequences. Patty Jenkin treats the superhero genre more like a hardcore fantasy (which it is). That said, the genre has always worked better for me and has more appeal when the world-building and rulesets are treated as if they were somewhat speculative.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2022 2:09:54 GMT 1
wow....you guys are still talking about this
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Jan 23, 2022 2:28:05 GMT 1
wow....you guys are still talking about this LOL! Yeah, I heard a couple of lames are still arguing who shot first too? The nerve...
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Jan 23, 2022 3:23:29 GMT 1
wow....you guys are still talking about this lol. TBH I do actually enjoy discussing and breaking down what didn’t go so well with the production of certain films. It’s the idea of how certain decisions were made, what the intent was and reality vs perception. It can actually be quite fascinating to discuss what makes a good production vs a troubled one or how ideas weren't received as intended. It’s not a situation of where if you don’t enjoy it just move on. There is a lot of genuinely interesting discussion to be had about how things ultimately play out. I just happened to be reflecting on this one recently. I even follow several reviewers and seek out troubled production videos. I like to hear behind the scenes analysis and things.
|
|
|
Post by Grandmaster on Jan 23, 2022 15:49:42 GMT 1
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2022 19:08:40 GMT 1
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 21, 2022 8:37:11 GMT 1
Wow I didnt know this or I just forgot. Holy crap this film flopped hard. WTF. Ok so it wasnt what people expected it to be but to make that little money...embarrassing..feel sorry for everyone involved. It wasnt thaaaat bad
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Mar 21, 2022 11:53:16 GMT 1
Wow I didnt know this or I just forgot. Holy crap this film flopped hard. WTF. Ok so it wasnt what people expected it to be but to make that little money...embarrassing..feel sorry for everyone involved. It wasnt thaaaat bad I agree and disagree. It wasn’t thaaaat bad on the surface. But then almost nothing about it makes any sense. It’s genuinely brain dead And what’s frustrating for me is I was saying there were serious “this shows a lack of writing competence” moments in the original, and sure enough another DC sequel becomes as disaster as predicted. I really wish they’d hire me to give it to them straight
|
|
|
Post by taylorfirst1 on Mar 21, 2022 16:24:49 GMT 1
Wow I didnt know this or I just forgot. Holy crap this film flopped hard. WTF. Ok so it wasnt what people expected it to be but to make that little money...embarrassing..feel sorry for everyone involved. It wasnt thaaaat bad Well it was the middle of COVID hysteria and it was released on HBO Max at the same time so it's hard to really judge the box office.
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Mar 21, 2022 17:47:53 GMT 1
Wonder Woman 1984 is the lowest grossing film in the history of the DCEU franchise.
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Mar 21, 2022 18:02:14 GMT 1
Wow I didnt know this or I just forgot. Holy crap this film flopped hard. WTF. Ok so it wasnt what people expected it to be but to make that little money...embarrassing..feel sorry for everyone involved. It wasnt thaaaat bad Well it was the middle of COVID hysteria and it was released on HBO Max at the same time so it's hard to really judge the box office. This is very true and extremely fair. There’s just no way to fairly compare that box office. It existed in a unique time.
|
|
|
Post by Chalice_Of_Evil on Mar 21, 2022 23:12:49 GMT 1
Here's the list of the 10 highest-grossing DCEU films... screenrant.com/highest-grossing-dceu-movies-box-office-mojo-ranked/WW84 may be at the bottom...but TSS is right after it, so I guess if you're saying that money-making = quality then TSS must be terrible film too? And the top 3 highest-grossing films? Aquaman, followed by BvS, then WW - so does that mean all of these are HIGH QUALITY films because they're the biggest money-earners? I'll never understand the logic of 'whatever makes the most money is THE BEST' - when there have been plenty of high money-earners that sucked and just as many so-called 'flops' that were actually really good/excellent. Whatever movies earn the most money are not automatically the best quality ones, all it means is they're the ones people bothered to get off their arses to go see at the theatre (doesn't mean they enjoyed them when they *did* see them, but by that point they've already handed over their money so their opinions on the film are moot). Then there are extenuating circumstances which also contribute to 'box office failure' (like, as others have mentioned, opening during Covid and being released on HBO max at the same time it's released in the theatre) and 'box office success' (increased prices of movie tickets will help a movie earn more money, obviously).
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Mar 21, 2022 23:59:10 GMT 1
Wonder Woman 1984 has an RT score of 58%. The Suicide Squad holds a 90% rating. The Suicide Squad is tied with Shazam and bested by only two other DCEU productions. The first is Wonder Woman (which has a 93% rating). And while not a movie, the second property is Mr. Gunn's own Peacemaker Season 1 (holding a 94% rating).
Peacemaker currently holds the distinction of being the highest-rated live-action DCEU property per Rotten Tomatoes.
|
|
|
Post by Chalice_Of_Evil on Mar 22, 2022 0:15:24 GMT 1
I'll never understand people letting one website where other people vote for things dictate whether a movie/show is 'good' or not. Like...do people actually require being told by a site that something's good or not to make up their minds for them instead of deciding for themselves? So a site has people on the internet vote for things...and? It's not like that's everyone in the world voting there, it's just a percentage of people. I imagine there's more people not voting on - what about all those people's opinions? One website and the votes it gets for things is not something that indicates a movie's quality. It's just a bunch of people who gather in one place to vote for stuff. Just because a website says something 'good'/'great' doesn't make it so, nor does it saying something's 'bad'.
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Mar 22, 2022 1:01:55 GMT 1
Said in defense of the problematic body swap trope featured in the film, and endorsed by Wonder Woman 1984 Director, Patty Jenkins.
"…the movie implies that if you revoke your wish, than much of the impact of your wish is revoked. Hence, even the sex Diana had with the guy possessed with Steve may have actually been eradicated from the movie's fabric of reality."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 22, 2022 2:32:11 GMT 1
I'll never understand people letting one website where other people vote for things dictate whether a movie/show is 'good' or not. Like...do people actually require being told by a site that something's good or not to make up their minds for them instead of deciding for themselves? So a site has people on the internet vote for things...and? It's not like that's everyone in the world voting there, it's just a percentage of people. I imagine there's more people not voting on - what about all those people's opinions? One website and the votes it gets for things is not something that indicates a movie's quality. It's just a bunch of people who gather in one place to vote for stuff. Just because a website says something 'good'/'great' doesn't make it so, nor does it saying something's 'bad'. Yes but it is generally accepted as kind of an "authority" when it comes to movie ratings
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Mar 22, 2022 2:37:06 GMT 1
Said in defense of the problematic body swap trope featured in the film, and endorsed by Wonder Woman 1984 Director, Patty Jenkins. "…the movie implies that if you revoke your wish, than much of the impact of your wish is revoked. Hence, even the sex Diana had with the guy possessed with Steve may have actually been eradicated from the movie's fabric of reality." lol. Oh come on Patty. So she’s tried to retroactively excuse it by saying it didn’t really happen? I call bullshit, because nobody is shown forgetting anything. They all seem to clearly remember what just happened. Nice try Patty. Good luck with your indefinitely postponed rogue squadron film that I’m sure has nothing at all to do with your competence as a filmmaker.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 22, 2022 2:38:38 GMT 1
Are we still talking about this movie? LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 22, 2022 2:41:17 GMT 1
Are we still talking about this movie? LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Mar 22, 2022 2:41:26 GMT 1
I'll never understand people letting one website where other people vote for things dictate whether a movie/show is 'good' or not. Like...do people actually require being told by a site that something's good or not to make up their minds for them instead of deciding for themselves? So a site has people on the internet vote for things...and? It's not like that's everyone in the world voting there, it's just a percentage of people. I imagine there's more people not voting on - what about all those people's opinions? One website and the votes it gets for things is not something that indicates a movie's quality. It's just a bunch of people who gather in one place to vote for stuff. Just because a website says something 'good'/'great' doesn't make it so, nor does it saying something's 'bad'. I do agree, but I’ll just add that it really should just be treated as an indicator. The idea that they are professional critics gives you an idea of how people who are more inclined to look at a film professionally evaluate it. And then you have CinemaScore which indicates how audiences who are verified to have seen it evaluate it from a non professional perspective. And then you have box office to gauge it’s impact, and of course your own view which is probably all that really matters. But none of them alone tells the whole story, and even collectively it’s still all about you.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 22, 2022 2:44:25 GMT 1
I'll never understand people letting one website where other people vote for things dictate whether a movie/show is 'good' or not. Like...do people actually require being told by a site that something's good or not to make up their minds for them instead of deciding for themselves? So a site has people on the internet vote for things...and? It's not like that's everyone in the world voting there, it's just a percentage of people. I imagine there's more people not voting on - what about all those people's opinions? One website and the votes it gets for things is not something that indicates a movie's quality. It's just a bunch of people who gather in one place to vote for stuff. Just because a website says something 'good'/'great' doesn't make it so, nor does it saying something's 'bad'. I do agree, but I’ll just add that it really should just be treated as an indicator. The idea that they are professional critics gives you an idea of how people who are more inclined to look at a film professionally evaluate it. And then you have CinemaScore which indicates how audiences who are verified to have seen it evaluate it from a non professional perspective. And then you have box office to gauge it’s impact, and of course your own view which is probably all that really matters. But none of them alone tells the whole story, and even collectively it’s still all about you. My experience with RT is that movies scored rotten are usually bad. But many movies scored fresh deserve rotten.
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Mar 22, 2022 2:49:53 GMT 1
I do agree, but I’ll just add that it really should just be treated as an indicator. The idea that they are professional critics gives you an idea of how people who are more inclined to look at a film professionally evaluate it. And then you have CinemaScore which indicates how audiences who are verified to have seen it evaluate it from a non professional perspective. And then you have box office to gauge it’s impact, and of course your own view which is probably all that really matters. But none of them alone tells the whole story, and even collectively it’s still all about you. My experience with RT is that movies scored rotten are usually bad. But many movies scored fresh deserve rotten. my biggest issue is actually the fresh/rotten line. I really just look at it more in terms of 70’s, 60’s, 50’s etc. Geberally, maybe 95% of the time they’re right about where I feel they deserve. Rarely do I think they’re way off. Externals deserved 15-20 better IMO, for instance.
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Mar 22, 2022 3:16:38 GMT 1
Are we still talking about this movie? LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL This is happening.
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Mar 22, 2022 3:20:47 GMT 1
Are we still talking about this movie? LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL dude I love talking about this movie. I’m a sucker lol. It’s such an interesting discussion about why none of it works lol. Like how did they do this, but also have it seem like it works at first glance, it’s amazing! Like I am fascinated by how utterly bizarre this film is.
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Mar 22, 2022 3:28:56 GMT 1
Said in defense of the problematic body swap trope featured in the film, and endorsed by Wonder Woman 1984 Director, Patty Jenkins. "…the movie implies that if you revoke your wish, than much of the impact of your wish is revoked. Hence, even the sex Diana had with the guy possessed with Steve may have actually been eradicated from the movie's fabric of reality." lol. Oh come on Patty. So she’s tried to retroactively excuse it by saying it didn’t really happen? I call bullshit, because nobody is shown forgetting anything. They all seem to clearly remember what just happened. Nice try Patty. Good luck with your indefinitely postponed rogue squadron film that I’m sure has nothing at all to do with your competence as a filmmaker. Rather than justifying Wonder Woman 1984's creative choices, the quote perfectly demonstrates the level that the film operates on. No matter how hard we try to bury the discussion on this film, there's too much mineral in that soil to mine. It's the ultimate CBM case study.
|
|