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

[▫️]

4 hours ago, Bosco685 said:

But each time you are answering your own question. That's what's confusing.

1) Roku and Amazon Fire users now have access to HBO Max

2) With that ability, they now just need to subscribe

My family has Amazon tablets. The HBO Max app was not available to them until the Amazon Fire agreement was reached. Now they have it because we have HBO already.

There were people here on the boards complaining that it wasn’t available through Roku at the time. They want everything consolidated through Roku for simplicity (or maybe OCD) despite being able to access HBO through other means. I can understand that, I want everything running through AppleTV.

Edited December 28, 2020 by Oddball

[Larryw7]

I don't get the hate. And I'll leave it at that.

[Buzzetta]

It's not as bad as people are making it out to be.  

Was I entertained?  I was entertained.

I've seen people saying it is 'political'

Nah... I did not see it as a political rehash of anything to be honest.  It was written by Jenkins and Geoff Johns... right there you know you are getting a comic book scribe... I don't think the reviewer's 'get it'.  So we are seeing a comic book adaptation of the 80's.  When you think of the 80's what do you think of? 

• Russia vs the United States
• Arms race
• nuclear weapons 
• TV evangelism 
• "Wall Street" / Gecko / Greed is Good.
• The materialism 

So all of that is on front display.  That does not make it political.  It clutters the plot a bit, but it does not make it political.  It's a basic comic adaptation of the monkey's paw tale, and they straight up tell you this in the narration of the plot.  I honestly felt that people looking for a political message will find one.  But, it's straight up a reflection of the caricature of the 80's.

 

Plot:  It was busy at times.  One of my friends on Facebook said that it was crowded and she even went as far to say that Pedro Pascal's part could have easily been cut out.  I didn't see that.  I felt that all four leads were essential to the plot.   They all had a part and if you take out Pascal's part then Wiig is not the tragic villain that she becomes and is more of a one on one I want power thing.  I thought that by adding Pascal's character there was an extra layer to the motivation of all of the characters. 

Did I like it?  I watched it.  I don't think I would have paid to see it but I watched it.  To be fair, at this point, I don't think I will be going to the theaters as much anymore even after all of this has ended*.  (Side note at the end)... I actually liked it more than the first one as I always felt the ending of the first one was a shadow of Captain America, with Jenkins even recently saying that the ending was forced upon her by the studio. 

Here we have an "original story" in superhero lore.  I thought Kristin Wiig was well cast in this role and like seeing studios throwing her some opportunity.  She was one of the most talented cast members of her class during her SNL days.  Gal Gadot shines.  The mid credits scene was charming and I hope we see more of that wayward Amazonian whose armor they used. 

3/5 

* Maybe it was the show or maybe it is because my living room is not equipped for movie surround sound.  I felt the sound mixing was a bit crowded at the end of the film when it is just Gadot and Pascal in the final sequence.  Maybe the movie was not mixed well for HBO Max and we heard the 'theater mix'.  If that is the case I liked being home because for that once sequence I instantly put on the subtitles to see what the dialogue was at certain elements of the sound were 'crowded.'

Again though...wasn't bad.  Give it a chance. 

 

Edited December 28, 2020 by Buzzetta

[the blob]

Wow, I loved age of ultron. More than the 1st avengers.

[the blob]

11 hours ago, drotto said:

I feel the same way about WW84 that I felt about Avengers Age of Ultron.  I loved the first Avengers, I was very much looking forward to the next one. I had set the bar very high for the sequel. I am glad I saw the sequel. I was entertained, but ultimately it was a disappointment.

The tonal change from the first film was also very jarring. Despite most of the primary team being kept in tact from the first film, it felt like it was made by a completely different group of people.

I thought Age of Ultron was great.. more specifically, James Spader, but yeah, I think a lot of marvel fans were rightly pissed off that they tried to rewrite the histories of scarlet with and bro as genetic experiments and that may have subconsciously irked them through the whole movie

[Buzzetta]

1 hour ago, the blob said:

I thought Age of Ultron was great.. more specifically, James Spader, but yeah, I think a lot of marvel fans were rightly pissed off that they tried to rewrite the histories of scarlet with and bro as genetic experiments and that may have subconsciously irked them through the whole movie

They had mentioned at the time that they were not allowed to even allude to them being mutants due to FOX retaining the rights to that.  I would not be surprised though if they now reveal / retcon that the infinity stone awoke their latent mutant powers rather than gift them with those powers. 

[sagekilz]

Saw it Friday and wanted to love it but alas I found myself distracted by boredom.  I DON'T want a CGI laden movie with michaelbayexplosions but I do want action.  If there is a lull I'm fine with that as it usually means the plot is being dissected, however it felt like there was 40-50 minutes of lull throughout this movie.  Didn't HATE it but far from loved it. .  

[the blob]

29 minutes ago, Buzzetta said:

They had mentioned at the time that they were not allowed to even allude to them being mutants due to FOX retaining the rights to that.  I would not be surprised though if they now reveal / retcon that the infinity stone awoke their latent mutant powers rather than gift them with those powers. 

Yes, now they can fix it, they were already this way and hydra was messing with them. of course, they're going to have to figure a lot of stuff out when they blend the universes as quicksilver is one of the more popular mutants in the x-men universe nowadays (one of the characters they changed, but didn't screw up in the process...)... the problem is if the infinity war saga's conclusion blended the universes they probably needed to explain that in spiderman or the end of avengers... they would have known by then... but they can figure this out, by the end of spiderman i guess we're only a few months into the restored universe? this does seem like something that dr. strange probably needs to be in on, but are they really going to wait until mid 2022 to get into multiverses (and I know, x-men are not supposed to be in a different multiverse, but this is probably the only way to work this out)... thing is, between deadpool and x-men they've kind of developed a pretty intricate world in the x-end of things (deadpool is supposed to be after the events of dark phoenix, so it all works out)... of course, if they do merge things, then the whole Logan timeline is wiped out.

 

[the blob]

13 minutes ago, sagekilz said:

Saw it Friday and wanted to love it but alas I found myself distracted by boredom.  I DON'T want a CGI laden movie with michaelbayexplosions but I do want action.  If there is a lull I'm fine with that as it usually means the plot is being dissected, however it felt like there was 40-50 minutes of lull throughout this movie.  Didn't HATE it but far from loved it. .  

It could have used some editing. Even my fabulously gay friend who worships Linda Carter thought it needed some editing (but still loved it, but he's a choreographer and theatre guy).

My wife did not fall asleep on it despite (1) drinking most of a bottle of wine;  (2) drinking coquito spiked with even more run; (2) eating about 2 pounds of prime rib; (3) eating 4000 calories of Italian pastries (my wife is 5' 7" and weighs 125 pounds, so this is a lot of food and booze for her); and (4) us not starting until about 11 pm, and did not complain that this was the worst movie she had ever seen (and she generally can't watch super hero movies, but WW is different)...so for regular non-comic nerds who have some 80s nostalgia going and nostalgia over the TV show, maybe it wasn't horrible to them. (My wife falls asleep on nearly everything other than these 1700s/1800s English period dramas she loves.)

Edited December 28, 2020 by the blob

[Buzzetta]

2 minutes ago, the blob said:

Yes, now they can fix it, they were already this way and hydra was messing with them. of course, they're going to have to figure a lot of stuff out when they blend the universes as quicksilver is one of the more popular mutants in the x-men universe nowadays (one of the characters they changed, but didn't screw up in the process...)... the problem is if the infinity war saga's conclusion blended the universes they probably needed to explain that in spiderman or the end of avengers... they would have known by then... but they can figure this out, by the end of spiderman i guess we're only a few months into the restored universe? this does seem like something that dr. strange probably needs to be in on, but are they really going to wait until mid 2022 to get into multiverses (and I know, x-men are not supposed to be in a different multiverse, but this is probably the only way to work this out)... thing is, between deadpool and x-men they've kind of developed a pretty intricate world in the x-end of things (deadpool is supposed to be after the events of dark phoenix, so it all works out)... of course, if they do merge things, then the whole Logan timeline is wiped out.

 

One of the reasons I am holding onto my UF4s is because I agree with you that the multiverse will allow for them to drop characters back into the Marvel Universe. (like Miles)  I would not be shocked to see that they offer Evan Peters a contract to drop into the Marvel Universe once Spider-man 3 does it's thing...  If not the Evan Peters quicksilver then perhaps someone else from the X-Men Fox franchise.  

[the blob]

13 minutes ago, Buzzetta said:

One of the reasons I am holding onto my UF4s is because I agree with you that the multiverse will allow for them to drop characters back into the Marvel Universe. (like Miles)  I would not be shocked to see that they offer Evan Peters a contract to drop into the Marvel Universe once Spider-man 3 does it's thing...  If not the Evan Peters quicksilver then perhaps someone else from the X-Men Fox franchise.  

Cable's time travel watch may malfunction and  be a multiverse travelling watch.  Who knows. Maybe Tom Halland peter parker needs to hide in the Miles universe while the legal team of Jennifer Waters and Matt Murdock clears his name....

[@therealsilvermane]

3 hours ago, the blob said:

15 hours ago, drotto said:

I feel the same way about WW84 that I felt about Avengers Age of Ultron.  I loved the first Avengers, I was very much looking forward to the next one. I had set the bar very high for the sequel. I am glad I saw the sequel. I was entertained, but ultimately it was a disappointment.

The tonal change from the first film was also very jarring. Despite most of the primary team being kept in tact from the first film, it felt like it was made by a completely different group of people.

I thought Age of Ultron was great.. more specifically, James Spader, but yeah, I think a lot of marvel fans were rightly pissed off that they tried to rewrite the histories of scarlet with and bro as genetic experiments and that may have subconsciously irked them through the whole movie

I believe the general consensus is that Avengers: Age of Ultron was a drop-off from The Avengers. I agree. I thought there were too many battle scenes that didn't necessarily move the plot or character development along. There were like six major battles in the movie. I was kinda numb by the last battle in Sokovia, which took too long and seemed to be a remake of the Battle in New York. I personally wasn't a fan of Aaron Taylor Johnson's Quicksilver, either. He came off a little too d**chy to me. The film's saving grace for me was Vision.

[@therealsilvermane]

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/petty-jenkins-warner-bros-took-140540784.htm

" While “Wonder Woman 1984” did not receive the level of critical acclaim that greeted its 2017 predecessor, most reviewers were in agreement that Patty Jenkins’ sequel started strong with back-to-back action-driven set pieces: The Themyscira flashback depicting the Amazon Olympics and the thwarted Washington D.C. mall heist in 1984. Jenkins was a fan of this double-opening story structure, but she told JoBlo during a recent interview that Warner Bros. was not a supporter of the decision and wanted one of the sequences cut to keep the film’s total runtime down.

 

“It was not always written in,” Jenkins said of the Themyscira flashback. “It was the success of the first film, but it was also something else. I wouldn’t have jammed it in there because of the success of the film, because it actually made the movie too long. We have two openings in our movie and we would talk about it with the studio all the time and they would say, ‘You’ve got to cut the mall and the Eighties, or you’ve got to cut the Amazon.’ I was like, we can’t, we can’t cut either.”

“The reason I ended up realizing that you need the Amazon is because…you do that thing where you’re like, wait, you have to remember all the people that haven’t seen the first ‘Wonder Woman’ who watch this on a plane,” Jenkins continued about protecting the double-opening structure. “And suddenly it’s like, oh, it’s super hard to understand who Diana is and what’s going on without touching base there.”

Jenkins added, “I love the fact that you hear all of the ‘being a great hero takes your whole life,’ you know? So there was this wisdom there that they were trying to tell her which is not about being the strongest or the fastest, it’s about these complex observations you have to make during life in order to become a true hero. I love that she doesn’t understand that until that final speech.” "

[Red84]

I enjoyed it. I thought it was more consistently good throughout than Wonder Woman 1, but Wonder Woman 1 had a much better high point with the crossing no man's land scene.

I enjoyed Max Lorde as the villain. I thought Cheetah was a little lame.

I thought it was fun and I'm looking forward to the next one.

[@therealsilvermane]

17 hours ago, Buzzetta said:

Again though...wasn't bad.  Give it a chance. 

"We" did give it a chance. It's not great.

I noticed the missing creative element from the excellent first movie was writer Allan Heinberg. He's a pretty good writer. That might have been the difference because the writing was not good for WW84.

For example: Diana asks fawning Dr Minerva if she wants to have lunch while I'm getting weird misplaced lesbian vibes from their "friendship." CUT TO: Diana and Dr. Minerva laughing over lunch, Diana exclaiming "You are so funny! I haven't laughed like that in years!" (or something). So what was so funny? Are the filmmakers going to leave the audience out in the cold, not let us in on the joke and thus feel the warmth and humor of Minerva that Diana says she lost later in the film?

I had a few issues with the first Wonder Woman movie, but overall the movie worked and was a success. For a lot of people, a lot of WW1984 didn't work. I'm not sure if it was bad writing from lack of a truly talented writing team or lazy writing from not tyring hard enough. Maybe both.

Edited December 28, 2020 by @therealsilvermane

[Bosco685]

1 hour ago, @therealsilvermane said:

"We" did give it a chance. It's not great.

I noticed the missing creative element from the excellent first movie was writer Allan Heinberg. He's a pretty good writer. That might have been the difference because the writing was not good for WW84.

For example: Diana asks fawning Dr Minerva if she wants to have lunch while I'm getting weird misplaced lesbian vibes from their "friendship." CUT TO: Diana and Dr. Minerva laughing over lunch, Diana exclaiming "You are so funny! I haven't laughed like that in years!" (or something). So what was so funny? Are the filmmakers going to leave the audience out in the cold, not let us in on the joke and thus feel the warmth and humor of Minerva that Diana says she lost later in the film?

I had a few issues with the first Wonder Woman movie, but overall the movie worked and was a success. For a lot of people, a lot of WW1984 didn't work. I'm not sure if it was bad writing from lack of a truly talented writing team or lazy writing from not tyring hard enough. Maybe both.

Dude. You made more than a few statements about your views on the film after seeing it.

Buzzeta was talking to those that have NOT seen it yet to give it a chance. Go take a walk and clear your head. You'll read better then.

[Gatsby77]

8 minutes ago, Bosco685 said:

Dude. You made more than a few statements about your views on the film after seeing it.

Buzzeta was talking to those that have NOT seen it yet to give it a chance. Go take a walk and clear your head. You'll read better then.

?

Just like I - despite your multiple posts to the contrary - never advised people not to see WW84, neither did Silvermane. 

His opinion’s just as valid as the *many* others on this board who have pointed out the film’s unfortunate mediocrity - and he actually added to the conversation with that post.

More than a few folks on Twitter have pointed out how much stronger the film would have been f they’d leaned into the obvious sexual chemistry between Diana and Barbara rather than (as they did) hinting at it and then ignoring it.

I’ve said it before, but the choice to relegate Cheetah - literally Wonder Woman’s archenemy - to a mere sidekick / enforcer for Lord rather than the true big bad with agency of her own  - was a huge missed opportunity and unforced error.

[Bosco685]

4 minutes ago, Gatsby77 said:

?

Just like I - despite your multiple posts to the contrary - never advised people not to see WW84, neither did Silvermane. 

His opinion’s just as valid as the *many* others on this board who have pointed out the film’s unfortunate mediocrity - and he actually added to the conversation with that post.

More than a few folks on Twitter have pointed out how much stronger the film would have been f they’d leaned into the obvious sexual chemistry between Diana and Barbara rather than (as they did) hinting at it and then ignoring it.

I’ve said it before, but the choice to relegate Cheetah - literally Wonder Woman’s archenemy - to a mere sidekick / enforcer for Lord rather than the true big bad with agency of her own  - was a huge missed opportunity and unforced error.

He responded to Buzzetta suggesting people that haven't seen it to give it a chance to which Silvermane responded 'We gave it a chance'.

So what you're assuming is everyone that participates in this part of the forum has seen it already?

[Bosco685]

I just came out of an operation and half doped up. Yet I can still read intent.

Unfortunately, when you assume your role is to protect other board members from films you disliked, that can cloud your vision. None of us are protectors. We share our likes and dislikes as fans and critics, and forumites make their own decisions.

[the blob]

41 minutes ago, Gatsby77 said:

?

Just like I - despite your multiple posts to the contrary - never advised people not to see WW84, neither did Silvermane. 

His opinion’s just as valid as the *many* others on this board who have pointed out the film’s unfortunate mediocrity - and he actually added to the conversation with that post.

More than a few folks on Twitter have pointed out how much stronger the film would have been f they’d leaned into the obvious sexual chemistry between Diana and Barbara rather than (as they did) hinting at it and then ignoring it.

I’ve said it before, but the choice to relegate Cheetah - literally Wonder Woman’s archenemy - to a mere sidekick / enforcer for Lord rather than the true big bad with agency of her own  - was a huge missed opportunity and unforced error.

She still has her power. She will be back. And she might also be immortal.