WONDER WOMAN 2 directed by Patty Jenkins (11/1/19) 3 3

[Gatsby77]

36 minutes ago, Xenosmilus said:

You must be a MD/DC/VA local too? I got a kick out of seeing the DC Metro. I was trying to figure out what stop they were at when they were in the underground...

Metro platform was L'Efant Plaza. It's the only one where the Green/Yellow line (lower level, where they were) intersects with the Blue/Orange/Silver lines (clearly shown in signs leading to the upper level).

Of course, the Silver Line didn't exist in 1984 but whatever...

I also was perplexed re. how Diana could work as an archivist at the Smithsonian Natural History Museum but afford an apartment at the Watergate.

[Crimebuster]

I meant to mention in my review the fact that she lives at the Watergate, which I think is a very intentional decision to subtly set up some of the tone of the film. 

If anybody wants to watch me talk for a half hour about the film, here's my YouTube review of it:

 

[ExNihilo]

2 hours ago, Bosco685 said:

Someone described best for me: this was Raiders of the Lost Ark with superhero and villain influences.

I dunno, I got Tomorrow Never Dies meets superhero vibes.

[paperheart]

56 minutes ago, Gatsby77 said:

Metro platform was L'Efant Plaza. It's the only one where the Green/Yellow line (lower level, where they were) intersects with the Blue/Orange/Silver lines (clearly shown in signs leading to the upper level).

Of course, the Silver Line didn't exist in 1984 but whatever...

I also was perplexed re. how Diana could work as an archivist at the Smithsonian Natural History Museum but afford an apartment at the Watergate.

side hustle of taping open office doors

[Bosco685]

30 minutes ago, ExNihilo said:

I dunno, I got Tomorrow Never Dies meets superhero vibes.

With the search for an artifact while going from location to location focusing on the two main leads with mixed comedy and adventure, it felt more Indy than Bond for us.

I'd give the film a one-time viewing to pass personal judgment. But this 'mess' and 'wreck' is some mixed baggage with those statements. It's not that. But it certainly didn't go for the repeat viewing encouragement.

[Bosco685]

1 hour ago, Gatsby77 said:

Metro platform was L'Efant Plaza. It's the only one where the Green/Yellow line (lower level, where they were) intersects with the Blue/Orange/Silver lines (clearly shown in signs leading to the upper level).

Of course, the Silver Line didn't exist in 1984 but whatever...

I also was perplexed re. how Diana could work as an archivist at the Smithsonian Natural History Museum but afford an apartment at the Watergate.

I guess you missed one of the scenes in BVS where Diana had some heirlooms on the hotel bed that many on this forum would relate to. Now I'll make you go back and research it on your favorite film topic.

[Gatsby77]

1 minute ago, Bosco685 said:

With the search for an artifact while going from location to location focusing on the two main leads with mixed comedy and adventure, it felt more Indy than Bond for us.

I'd give the film a one-time viewing to pass personal judgment. But this 'mess' and 'wreck' is some mixed baggage with those statements. It's not that. But it certainly didn't go for the repeat viewing encouragement.

I dunno - I thought "Tomorrow Never Dies" was an apt comparison (after "Goldeneye"), or...for Indiana Jones, it's far more "Temple of Doom" than "Raiders."

As in, a highly anticipated but ultimately lackluster and shockingly mediocre sequel to a masterpiece. 

And if it's getting this trashed among us - the comic book faithful, who have every reason to want it to succeed, I can't imagine the general public thinking it's much better...

[Bosco685]

3 minutes ago, Gatsby77 said:

I dunno - I thought "Tomorrow Never Dies" was an apt comparison (after "Goldeneye"), or...for Indiana Jones, it's far more "Temple of Doom" than "Raiders."

As in, a highly anticipated but ultimately lackluster and shockingly mediocre sequel to a masterpiece. 

And if it's getting this trashed among us - the comic book faithful, who have every reason to want it to succeed, I can't imagine the general public thinking it's much better...

I'd like to take your opinion serious. But telling people not to see it is like your Batman v Superman rants where you trashed the movie repeatedly to protect other board members.

It's great to post our opinions to share with others. But assuming you are their entertainment protector - come on now. Seriously?

[ashsaytr]

Spoiler

not sure why riding the lightning was way more believable then riding the RPG LOL 

Loved the first movie... finished this one with a "meh"... fairly forgettable 

[D84]

Though it wasn't a great movie, just okay, I don't get the vitriol some are spewing at the movie.

[Gatsby77]

11 minutes ago, Bosco685 said:

I'd like to take your opinion serious. But telling people not to see it is like your Batman v Superman rants where you trashed the movie repeatedly to protect other board members.

It's great to post our opinions to share with others. But assuming you are their entertainment protector - come on now. Seriously?

Seriously?

I *never* advised anyone not to see it.

I posted my honest opinion of the film - both positives and negative, but ultimately a view not as negative as at least a dozen other posters here.

And you go and liken it to Raiders of the Lost Ark - not only one of the best films of the entire decade of the 1980s, but literally on AFI's list of the top 100 American films ever.

And for the record, WW84 wasn't *nearly* as bad as BvS or Suicide Squad.

Edited December 27, 2020 by Gatsby77

[Xenosmilus]

1 minute ago, D84 said:

Though it wasn't a great movie, just okay, I don't get the vitriol some are spewing at the movie.

As in steaming pile of poo? I don’t fault anyone for liking it just not my thing. Unlike Siskel and Ebertt my ratings are Awesome, thumbs up, meh, poo and steaming poo.

[Bosco685]

14 minutes ago, Gatsby77 said:

Seriously?

I *never* advised anyone not to see it.

I posted my honest opinion of the film - both positives and negative, but ultimately a view not as negative as at least a dozen other posters here.

And you go and liken it to Raiders of the Lost Ark - not only one of the best films of the entire decade of the 1980s, but literally on AFI's list of the top 100 American films ever.

And for the record, WW84 wasn't *nearly* as bad as BvS or Suicide Squad.

No. You actually kept coming back to the BVS thread stating how bad it was. To including you and I having disagreements over it. But in your mind, you probably thought it was just a couple of times. Yet the first thread got locked because it became so excessive.

Now - if you took the time to pay attention to BVS you would know how Diana could afford where she lived. She had these collectibles spread out on the hotel bed. You'd instantly recognize them.

[media_junkie]

37 minutes ago, Bosco685 said:

 

I'd give the film a one-time viewing to pass personal judgment. But this 'mess' and 'wreck' is some mixed baggage with those statements. It's not that. But it certainly didn't go for the repeat viewing encouragement.

Normally you and I are pretty in sync (Bye, Bye, Bye...sorry) with how we rate various movies from what I've read of your posts and what I have posted as well.  However this time I am going to have to respectfully disagree with you, this was a mess of a movie and a total wreck.

At one point I was actually cursing at the TV while watching this.

Spoiler

When Steve and Diana went to the Smithsonian to steal a plane (and it was the Smithsonian in the film because the guards that chased them on the runway had "Smithsonian Police" painted on the doors of the trucks/cars).  Like the Smithsonian has fueled up flight ready jets sitting out back, as was portrayed in the film.  Also when Steve, a pilot that died in 1916ish was able to jump in a supersonic jet flip 2 buttons and knew how to fly the jet.

I get it, it is a comic book movie, but seriously is that is the best the writers can come up with don't bother.  That is just insulting.

Those are just 2 of the things that had me face palming and cursing.  I loved Wonder Woman in BvS.  I loved Wonder Woman's first film.  I wanted to love this film, but honestly it is a turd.

 

[Bosco685]

7 minutes ago, media_junkie said:

Normally you and I are pretty in sync (Bye, Bye, Bye...sorry) with how we rate various movies from what I've read of your posts and what I have posted as well.  However this time I am going to have to respectfully disagree with you, this was a mess of a movie and a total wreck.

At one point I was actually cursing at the TV while watching this.

  Hide contents

When Steve and Diana went to the Smithsonian to steal a plane (and it was the Smithsonian in the film because the guards that chased them on the runway had "Smithsonian Police" painted on the doors of the trucks/cars).  Like the Smithsonian has fueled up flight ready jets sitting out back, as was portrayed in the film.  Also when Steve, a pilot that died in 1916ish was able to jump in a supersonic jet flip 2 buttons and knew how to fly the jet.

I get it, it is a comic book movie, but seriously is that is the best the writers can come up with don't bother.  That is just insulting.

Those are just 2 of the things that had me face palming and cursing.  I loved Wonder Woman in BvS.  I loved Wonder Woman's first film.  I wanted to love this film, but honestly it is a turd.

 

It happens from time to time. Then we come back together like peas and carrots.

When you have a superheroine flying in a film, airplanes at the Smithsonian becomes just another thing.

To the BVS tie-back, I guess these unfamiliar things are forgotten. One hint. But it's a small one.

Spoiler

 

[mdube16]

I read this review on Twitter and I found it explains exactly how I felt about the film.

https://www.vulture.com/article/wonder-woman-1984-review-an-empty-spectacle.html

 

 

[▫️]

11 hours ago, Xenosmilus said:

Seriously, I have no idea what you are talking about. It’s like debating you and oddball about how good/bad WW84 is, a movie neither of you two have seen yet . 

I’m not debating you at all on whether WW is good or bad. I don’t defend movies. I just hope for the best on all comic book movies in general. It’s clear most people here on the boards that have seen it did not like it. Honest reviews are always welcome. I just found it odd how childish some of the posts coming in are to gloat about how it failed. But I forget I’m on the internet and these boards are populated by adults and teenagers. We are all writing on different wavelengths. My fault entirely. I’ll watch WW on HBO here shortly though I’m not as excited to see it now due to a lackluster reception. I love it when I go into a movie where people are raving about it. 

Edited December 27, 2020 by Oddball

[Larryw7]

3 hours ago, Gatsby77 said:

I dunno - I thought "Tomorrow Never Dies" was an apt comparison (after "Goldeneye"), or...for Indiana Jones, it's far more "Temple of Doom" than "Raiders."

As in, a highly anticipated but ultimately lackluster and shockingly mediocre sequel to a masterpiece. 

And if it's getting this trashed among us - the comic book faithful, who have every reason to want it to succeed, I can't imagine the general public thinking it's much better...

I love Temple of Doom.

[▫️]

10 hours ago, Crimebuster said:

I have a lot of thoughts about this film. The short version: it was mediocre. I'd probably give it a B-. 

This film is far more ambitious than the first movie. The first one was trying to do just one thing: present a good version of the character. It succeeded very well at that. Otherwise, it wasn't even trying to do anything else - the plot was literally "let's walk from point A to point B and then hit a guy in the moustache." 

This one, on the other hand, was trying to do way, way too much. It had several overlapping character arcs and plot points going on, and the movie was actually about something (more on that in a moment). So overall, I think it succeeded in doing more than the first movie. It also failed a whole lot more than the first movie. Instead of doing one thing well, it did like 11 things to varying degrees of success and failure. 

The main problem with the movie is that it's not about Diana. Her "arc" is courtesy of a tacked-on ending. Without that, the character doesn't change or grow at all over the course of the movie. Likewise, it's not a Cheetah film either - Wiig is great and the character is really interesting, and her dynamic with Diana probably should have been the focus of the film. But it wasn't, and so we just don't get enough of Dr. Minerva.

No, the film is about Max Lord. It's his movie. HIs plot, and his character arc, are central. Personally, I think they mostly succeeded with his very ambitious storyline, but it's a problem when a Wonder Woman movie isn't about either Wonder Woman or her archenemy, but rather some third dude.

I do think the Lord stuff was really interesting and I personally loved Pedro Pasqual's performance, but I can't believe nobody else has mentioned...

  Reveal hidden contents

 

...that he's playing Donald Trump. The movie is about Donald Trump. I don't want to get into any political discussions, as it's against the board rules, but it's pretty clear I thought what they were doing - the 80's setting, the "con man" stuff where desperate people believe in lies, leading to his rise to power and causing the destruction of the world. It's made pretty obvious I think through the visuals - my wife commented more than once about how weird Pasqual looked with his big fake orange/blond hairdo, which is a very intentional choice. Then at the end, they pose him for his insane speech in front of the seal of the President of the United States — he literally usurps power from the rightful president and then goes on a destructive lie-filled rant on international TV in a replica of the White House Press room while his orange bouffant blows wildly in the breeze. 

I thought as an allegory about Trump's cult of personality, the film was really ambitious and well done, and a cinematic success. 

It just came at the cost of literally everything else in the movie. 

 

 

Also, I guess this needs spoilers too,

  Reveal hidden contents

 

For me, I think it would have been better if they had focused on the Diana-Minerva relationship. The arc with Steve, and with her losing her powers, could have been much better done as well as part of that. Diana only really has one flaw - her naivete. It was the central theme of the first movie, but 60 years later, she's still got it in this film in the way she interacts with Cheetah after the wishes. She has no understanding of what Minerva has gone through in her life, because Diana is always the strongest, most powerful, most beautiful, and most self-assured person in any room. So it's super easy for her to ask Minerva to renounce her wish, because she has no clue what it's been like for Minerva. 

This is where Diana losing her powers should have come in. I've heard people mention parallels to Superman III or the Donner version of Lex Luthor, but actually, the movie I thought of immediately was Superman II, because Diana's arc in this movie is exactly the same as Superman's in Superman II. They both renounce their power in order to be with their one true love, a megalomaniac takes over the world in their absence, and they have to sacrifice their love and happiness in order to regain their power and save the world. The key difference is, while Superman is powerless, he learns first hand just how hard it is to be a human being - to be vulnerable, to have fear, to be bullied by stronger people. He also learns that he can't renounce being Superman because its a fundamental part of who he is. Diana, however, doesn't learn either of these things because she never lives without her powers, because the film is too crowded to allow that space. Having Diana go through that and learn what life is actually like for the women of the world who aren't demigods, and contrasting that with Minerva' suddenly discovering what it's like to be on top after a lifetime of powerlessness, would have been much more compelling than what they gave us. 

I wouldn't have allowed them room to do the Max Lord-Trump stuff, though, which is what I suspect was the central building block this whole film was built around.

 

 

I give this film a lot of credit for trying to do things and say things. I just wish it had focused and actually accomplished more of those goals. 

Thank you, obviously a well thought out review. Very helpful.

[Qalyar]

I dislike this film less than a lot of you. I think opinions of it would have been better if it had been some random DCEU character instead of the sequel to inarguably the best film they've produced... That's not to say it's good. I'd put it below Aquaman but above "DCEU films with Superman in them" or (especially) Suicide Squad.

My biggest problem isn't the pacing. Yeah, sure, it's a slower film than WW or most other superhero set pieces, but that's not a bad thing. My problem is... Okay, three of them. No direct spoilers but seriously, at this point in this thread...

1. The Steve Rogers thing is creepy. There's a real problem with denying agency (and bodily consent) to the third party character involved. But honestly, the problems with Rogers arise from a bigger problem, which I'll get to in a couple entries.
2. I've seen reviews complain about all the uses for the lasso. Whatever, it's always been one of DC's greatest multi-tools. On the other hand, the film imbues Diana with a newly minted power... which she uses ONCE, for a throwaway transportation callback that is also promptly forgotten. Screenwriters and directors, please don't do this.
3. Most seriously, the film is not consistent about the rules for the wish power that is the central topic. Can wishes create things ab nihilo? If so, what the hell with Steve Rogers? If not, a major plot point breaks. Worse, when can the stone grant more than one wish to a single recipient? The answer seemed to be "never"... except for a couple plot-significant moments that clearly demonstrate otherwise. Fantasy requires rules; when it doesn't follow its own rules, the fantasy breaks down. And that's the film's most fatal flaw.

Edited December 27, 2020 by Qalyar