Wonder Woman (SPOILERS)

[kunedog]

Killing mind-controlled humans is usually something hero movies DO frown on though, usually in an overly simplistic way. So this was like the worst of both worlds. Also she is against the idea of dealing with a bigger problem to save more people in the long run while sacrificing a few.

That's not the impression I got.  She was raised by the Amazons for war, so she believes in swift decisive victories (and getting her own hands dirty).  She's not making a distinction between Germans and humans, but soldiers and civilians ("What kind of weapon kills innocents?").

And I know she told off the British general because he was willing to let the superweapon gas attack happen, instead of endangering the armistice by taking military action to prevent the attack.  But that was about sacrificing "millions," not a few.

The idea of Ares negotiating a failing armistice makes no sense at all. Why would he want a stop to the war that will later fail?

Dunno if there's consensus (and it's outside the scope of this discussion), but many historians believe the treaties/conditions that ended World War 1 led directly and inevitably to World War 2, which resulted in far more destruction and many more deaths.  And hey, Ares is a god after all, so maybe his foresight is as good our hindsight.


As for Trevor, I think the writers wanted to keep the story contained and maintain the status quo of a secret (to the public) Wonder Woman.  So Trevor's sacrifice is a bit of a contrivance, in that he needs to conveniently die Rogue-One-style to tie up loose ends (note that gassing the rescued town also conveniently disposes of many, many witnesses to Wonder Woman's existence and actions).  If that must happen, then I appreciate him dying as a hero using his established piloting skills, rather than suffering a lame amnesia event, or dying as a damsel in distress (which would represent a heartbreaking failure on Diana's part).  This isn't done to steal WW's glory; Trevor even explicity says he's helpless against Ares.

Having one movie where the male took a backseat doesn't come close to addressing all that came before.

I, for one, am grateful the filmmakers cared more about making a earnest, entertaining film adaptation than atoning for the perceived sins of previous movies/comics/whatever.

[Edward J Grug III]

As for Trevor, I think the writers wanted to keep the story contained and maintain the status quo of a secret (to the public) Wonder Woman.  So Trevor's sacrifice is a bit of a contrivance, in that he needs to conveniently die Rogue-One-style to tie up loose ends (note that gassing the rescued town also conveniently disposes of many, many witnesses to Wonder Woman's existence and actions).  If that must happen, then I appreciate him dying as a hero using his established piloting skills, rather than suffering a lame amnesia event, or dying as a damsel in distress (which would represent a heartbreaking failure on Diana's part).  This isn't done to steal WW's glory; Trevor even explicity says he's helpless against Ares.

What you are describing is poor writing.

And I'm not sure why you think he couldn't keep Wonder Woman's secret. Very odd opinion of his character.

So for you to find a movie entertaining, you have to see an egalitarian approach to men and women being heroes, huh? Mustn't leave you with many films to watch. no wonder you appreciated Wonder Woman so much.

[kunedog]

He'd keep her secret, but having her "settle down" with him would prevent the clean break the writers probably want (yes I'm speculating).  They want the freedom to "flash back" to her past (any time between WW1 and the present) without explaining Trevor's absence (or paying Pine's salary), especially if they need her to romance other men.

IMO the writers did well with the artifical but typical (for a cinematic universe) constraints.  And again, I know we disagree on that (and the film's quality) but numbers show lots of folks are happy about something even if we can't put either of our fingers on it.

So for you to find a movie entertaining, you have to see an egalitarian approach to men and women being heroes, huh?

Nope, can't say that it does much for me (which is why I'm not the one who brought it up).  In this case I thought it was appropriate for Trevor's spy/pilot character to do spy/pilot stuff to save lives (and even then I wouldn't say he's anywhere close to WW's equal).

Doing it for ideological reasons can greatly harm a film (I'll again cite Sony), and doing it for incomprehensible reasons can make everyone scratch their head (there's a goofy scene in BvS where Lois goes to retrieve the Kryptospear (despite having no idea where it is) for Clark, during which they pass the hero/damsel batons back and forth a couple times; I still can't fathom point of it except to pad the film's already-aburd length (but it's clearly memorable!)).

[Edward J Grug III]

He'd keep her secret, but having her "settle down" with him would prevent the clean break the writers probably want (yes I'm speculating).  They want the freedom to "flash back" to her past (any time between WW1 and the present) without explaining Trevor's absence (or paying Pine's salary), especially if they need her to romance other men.

IMO the writers did well with the artifical but typical (for a cinematic universe) constraints.  And again, I know we disagree on that (and the film's quality) but numbers show lots of folks are happy about something even if we can't put either of our fingers on it.

So for you to find a movie entertaining, you have to see an egalitarian approach to men and women being heroes, huh?

Nope, can't say that it does much for me (which is why I'm not the one who brought it up).  In this case I thought it was appropriate for Trevor's spy/pilot character to do spy/pilot stuff to save lives (and even then I wouldn't say he's anywhere close to WW's equal).

Doing it for ideological reasons can greatly harm a film (I'll again cite Sony), and doing it for incomprehensible reasons can make everyone scratch their head (there's a goofy scene in BvS where Lois goes to retrieve the Kryptospear (despite having no idea where it is) for Clark, during which they pass the hero/damsel batons back and forth a couple times; I still can't fathom point of it except to pad the film's already-aburd length (but it's clearly memorable!)).

You keep saying how glad you are they did it, and bagging on another studio for making one gender-swapped movie, so don't try to pretend it's not important to you.

[kunedog]

Then I'll clarify.

When it fits the characters' established traits/skills/motivations, then it makes sense and it's no big deal.  But when it's done to serve a political agenda or "address what came before," then that's exactly what happens: those other interests are served rather than the quality of the film.

[Edward J Grug III]

ie - you feel an agenda when there are women in lead roles.

[Edward J Grug III]

http://www.avclub.com/article/steve-trevor-joss-whedon-and-men-getting-way-wonde-257124

[kunedog]

ie - you feel an agenda when there are women in lead roles.

Wouldn't have seen it twice if so.

[Edward J Grug III]

ie - you feel an agenda when there are women in lead roles.

Wouldn't have seen it twice if so.

*in lead roles without a man hero shoehorned in, as we have been discussing.

[kunedog]

Oh, ok.

Again, I disagree that Trevor's heroics were shoehorned, but whatever.

How about Spy?  I thought Spy was terrific, and you won't get closer to an apples-to-apples comparison with Ghostbusters (same star and director).

[Edward J Grug III]

I have not seen Spy so I cannot comment.

The AV Club link I posted above has the same observation that I did (though they found the movie a lot more entertaining than I did)

[kunedog]

Good news: Wonder Woman is now officially the #1 earning DCEU flick, despite the smallest budget and smallest opening:
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/showdowns/chart/?id=dcuni.htm

Bad news: The good news isn't true, because these are only domestic (US) totals.  It's not likely to catch up to BvS overseas.

Still, if WB can crank out a few more of these, then maybe soon someone can make a DC compilation as good as this Marvel one (without it being 70% Bruce and 20% Clark):