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

[Buzzetta]

2 hours 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.

Only reason Diana took a real interest to her was because of the artifacts.  The friendship came afterwards.  I just rewatched.   Why wasn't the joke stated?  Because the joke did not matter.  It did not matter to Diana either because she is using Minerva.  

[Buzzetta]

36 minutes ago, Bosco685 said:

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.

And you chose...'here', the CGC boards to recuperate and rest and relax to heal after surgery... 

What's next?

Are you going to do the grand tour and stop over in the main section of comics general and start a thread inviting Calamerica to give an end of the year review? Or maybe the water cooler.  I hear that the Covid thread is just hopping again.   Wait... go to the moderation thread... that will be relaxing. 

 

Get well soon. Feel better. 

[Buzzetta]

19 minutes ago, the blob said:

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

Yes, only one wish seemed to be reversed.  The one that made her into the hyped up WW but losing her goodness seemed to remain. 

[the blob]

11 minutes ago, Buzzetta said:

Yes, only one wish seemed to be reversed.  The one that made her into the hyped up WW but losing her goodness seemed to remain. 

The wish he granted went away. She never recanted the wish she made before meeting him. But she clearly needs to team up with some other baddies next time. Of course, what has she been up to for 35 years?

[Straw-Man]

On 12/26/2020 at 11:24 PM, Qalyar said:

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.

no faster way to lose me than to reveal you think steve rogers stars in a wonder woman movie.

[bentbryan]

1 hour ago, Bosco685 said:

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.

Geez hope all went smoothly and you’re good man! 

[Roger66]

IMO WW84  was a lifeless, banal, uninspired movie full of silly clichés and a juvenile plotline.  What a huge let down this follow-up was after the 1st one, which I loved.  There was no reason to set this movie in the 80s other then to try and garner some cheap laughs (I found nothing funny btw) and creating her arch villain via a wishing stone is by far the dumbest way to show an origin.  Why would perhaps the strongest and most independent of female heroes still be moping around over her dead boyfriend 60+ years later (pathetic) and then sleep with him knowing he has stolen another's body and mind?  Gal Gadot deserved much better than this ill conceived cringe filled trash. These weren't characters as much as soulless puppets reading an awful --script. This disaster of a movie needs to be forgotten fast.  It adds nothing positive to this amazing character but in fact detracts if not demotes her.  At about the 54 minute mark it was too painful to watch and I turned it off.  I believe the bar has been set so-so low on DC movies that some mistake this trash for tongue and cheek entertainment.  At a reported cost of 200 million you would think they could do measurable better then this.  I could go on and on but I made my point.   To each his own.  My 2cents. 

Edited December 29, 2020 by Roger66

[Gatsby77]

44 minutes ago, Buzzetta said:

Only reason Diana took a real interest to her was because of the artifacts.  The friendship came afterwards.  I just rewatched.   Why wasn't the joke stated?  Because the joke did not matter.  It did not matter to Diana either because she is using Minerva.  

Interesting take. I thought Diana’s first overture to her - dinner after discovery that the mystery artifact was just cittroline (sp.) was genuine - and perhaps a bit out of guilt for blowing her off earlier.

Either way - agree that the exact joke didn’t matter - it was their dynamic already in progress that enabled the characterization in the lunch scene.

[Larryw7]

I think the chemistry between Diana and Minerva was intentional, if only on a subtextual level. I think Minerva was in love with Diana and if she couldn't have her, she wanted to be her.

[Red84]

2 hours ago, Larryw7 said:

I think the chemistry between Diana and Minerva was intentional, if only on a subtextual level. I think Minerva was in love with Diana and if she couldn't have her, she wanted to be her.

I saw it as pity from Diana and envy from Minerva. 

[Joshua33]

5 hours ago, Roger66 said:

IMO WW84  was a lifeless, banal, uninspired movie full of silly clichés and a juvenile plotline.  What a huge let down this follow-up was after the 1st one, which I loved.  There was no reason to set this movie in the 80s other then to try and garner some cheap laughs (I found nothing funny btw) and creating her arch villain via a wishing stone is by far the dumbest way to show an origin.  Why would perhaps the strongest and most independent of female heroes still be moping around over her dead boyfriend 60+ years later (pathetic) and then sleep with him knowing he has stolen another's body and mind?  Gal Gadot deserved much better than this ill conceived cringe filled trash. These weren't characters as much as soulless puppets reading an awful ---script. This disaster of a movie needs to be forgotten fast.  It adds nothing positive to this amazing character but in fact detracts if not demotes her.  At about the 54 minute mark it was too painful to watch and I turned it off.  I believe the bar has been set so-so low on DC movies that some mistake this trash for tongue and cheek entertainment.  At a reported cost of 200 million you would think they could do measurable better then this.  I could go on and on but I made my point.   To each his own.  My 2cents. 

Soooooo..... A- ? 

[Bosco685]

8 hours ago, bentbryan said:

Geez hope all went smoothly and you’re good man! 

Thank you. 

Torn meniscus from a running injury. At least it is on the way to recovery.

[Bosco685]

3 hours ago, Red84 said:

I saw it as pity from Diana and envy from Minerva. 

That was my takeaway. And then they became more friends than just colleagues.

[Bosco685]

 

[@therealsilvermane]

From a brief conversation last night about WW84 between two close female associates of mine: “So let me get this right, this movie that’s supposed to be about strong women, when the two female leads each get a wish, one wishes to be prettier and the other wishes for her dead boyfriend!?” 

[Bosco685]

4 minutes ago, @therealsilvermane said:

From a brief conversation last night about WW84 between two close female associates of mine: “So let me get this right, this movie that’s supposed to be about strong women, when the two female leads each get a wish, one wishes to be prettier and the other wishes for her dead boyfriend!?” 

But of course they based this on your 'unbiased' description of #WW84 which of course helped in the conversation. 

[@therealsilvermane]

12 hours ago, Buzzetta said:

Only reason Diana took a real interest to her was because of the artifacts.  The friendship came afterwards.  I just rewatched.   Why wasn't the joke stated?  Because the joke did not matter.  It did not matter to Diana either because she is using Minerva.  

I don’t buy it. I think Minerva was sincerely supposed to be funny once you got to know her but the filmmakers didn’t really let us get to know her and couldn’t figure out something funny for Kristin Wiig, one of the funniest ladies around, to do or say.

Even then, if what you say is indeed the filmmakers’ intention, that Diana is using Minerva, then Patty Jenkins presents us a hero who is not only a snob, but was a cheater, is a liar and a manipulator, and is selfish to the point of not caring that her wish has wiped out the body and mind of an innocent human being. Some hero.

I wonder if Ms Jenkins is confusing Wonder Woman with Monster?
 

 

[@therealsilvermane]

7 minutes ago, Bosco685 said:

But of course they based this on your 'unbiased' description of #WW84 which of course helped in the conversation. 

No, the one ranting actually watched the movie on her own after the other, who  sort of watched while I had it on, complained how stupid it was. The one ranting thought she was being too kind to the movie. 

Edited December 29, 2020 by @therealsilvermane

[Bosco685]

2 minutes ago, @therealsilvermane said:

I don’t buy it. I think Minerva was sincerely supposed to be funny once you got to know her but the filmmakers didn’t really let us get to know her and couldn’t figure out something funny for Kristin Wiig, one of the funniest ladies around, to do or say.

Even then, if what you say is indeed the filmmakers’ intention, that Diana is using Minerva, then Patty Jenkins presents us a hero who is not only a snob, but was a cheater, is a liar and a manipulator, and is selfish to the point of not caring that her wish has wiped out the body and mind of an innocent human being. Some hero.

I wonder if Ms Jenkins is confusing Wonder Woman with Monster?

Like I said, 'unbiased opinion'. 

[Bosco685]

2 minutes ago, @therealsilvermane said:

No, the one ranting actually watched the movie on her own after the other, who  sort of watched while I had it, complained how stupid it was. The other thought she was being too kind to the movie. 

Of course they did. Of course.

Or did you set up two mirrors and traded out wigs while talking to yourself in different voices? 

Edited December 29, 2020 by Bosco685