|
Post by robeiae on Jun 9, 2017 14:32:42 GMT -5
I've heard the movie is the best DC one yet. That's not saying much... But yeah, best thing from DC since The Dark Knight. By far. The fact that it's watchable puts it way above the last three (or more) DC installments. I thought it was pretty good, but nowhere near the caliber of Mavel's stuff. Imo, DC needs to get over this dark and dreary narrative. Also, the ending was just too fucking big. Ridiculously so (kinda like Batman v. Superman). And I was pissed there was no reference to the TV series. I so wanted the theme song in the end credits.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Jun 26, 2017 12:11:58 GMT -5
Okay, I'm going back and quoting Cass because of the article she cites, which notes something of vital importance to what I'm about to say next... rant/ I've effing had it with the witless cheerleading of this film as if it were making some kind of bold statement about women, as if it were showing a "strong woman" as a hero, and as if such a thing had never been done before. SPOILER ALERT! She's not a "strong woman," she's a god. Seriously. This new version--which, btw I did enjoy, as did my 10 year old daughter--portrays Wonder Woman as not just an Amazon but as the daughter of Zeus. A god (or demigod). And not just that, she's also still a princess. And really, when I think about it, that does rob the movie of some of its magic for me, so I try not to think about it (if I did, then I'd think--in taking in the totality of what happens, her bullet-deflecting arm guards are superfluous, as I don't think bullets could hurt her, given what she goes through). But this constant barrage of people talking about the movie as somehow revolutionary and singularly important...gah! Does no one remember the Alien franchise at all? Was that not a strong woman? Oh, but this movie was directed by a woman, therefore it's more important. Why? I thought the director did a good job, to be sure. But let's get real, it's no Selma. Or Hurt Locker. For that matter, it's no Point Break (director-wise), imo. And really, I think Monster is far better than Wonder Woman. /rant
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Jun 26, 2017 13:03:06 GMT -5
Well, literal goddess or not, Wonder Woman has always been superhuman and therefore silly to use as a model for real women.
But you are right, a lot of fandom is geeking out as if this is the first time ever that a kick-ass woman who can throw tanks has ever appeared on film. That said, none have ever been quite this successful before.
Wonder Woman may be the first huge summer blockbuster starring a superheroine (Supergirl didn't do nearly as well) and a lot of fans are understandably hopeful that it will pave the way to Captain Marvel and Black Widow movies. (Yes, they are Marvel characters, but the theory goes that WW will prove that a female hero can pull her own weight in a feature film.)
As a movie? Kind of unfair to compare it to Oscar-bait like Selma and Hurt Locker. They are comparing it to other superhero movies. I think the fact that it was a superhero movie directed by a woman is kind of significant. Let's face it, if WW had bombed, no woman would ever direct a superhero movie again (nor would we likely see another superheroine starring in her own feature film for a long time).
|
|