I am filled with bitter nerd-rage after seeing Justice League. Not because it was bad, but because for a few brief moments, it was so good. We finally got a glimpse of what the DC movies should have been from the beginning and Henry Cavill FINALLY GOT TO BE THE REAL SUPERMAN! (Unless you live under a rock, that isn't a spoiler) But Justice League was so weighed down by course correcting its cinematic universe that it couldn't reach its full potential. It's a promising house built on the sand foundation of Man of Steel and Batman v Superman.
In Justice League we finally get bright colors, smiling heroes and joyful moments of triumph. There were points in Justice League where the iconic images made me tear up. It takes a while to pull itself out of the grim Snyderverse, but it was a definite pivot in the right direction. This is the first of Snyder's DC films that I'd be ok with taking kids to see in the theatre. You leave the movie feeling good. There is finally the impression that the heroes are the same characters that have inspired four-color comics for decades. This was my favorite recent DC film after Wonder Woman, and was light years more enjoyable than Suicide Squad or Batman v. Superman. It finally feels like we got a film made by someone who LIKES DC COMICS. It was a lot of fun. That said, there are also a lot of missteps.
The biggest problem with Justice League is its split personality. The accepted rumor in Hollywood is that Zach's original vision for the film was terrible and Joss Whedon was brought in to "help fix it". This is why he was already a part of the team when Snyder had to leave the project a while later, due to a tragedy in his family. Joss did a massive amount of reshoots and a lot of the new footage is obvious. The huge amount of trailer footage that ISN'T in the movie hints at how much the vision for the movie has changed in recent months. The final product feels like a filler issue between two big comic book story arcs. Its whole job is to be fun and set up the next story and in that, Justice League met its goal. It has a simple bad guy with predictable motivations, convenient plot devices to keep things moving in the expected direction, Krypton-sized plot holes, and lots of middling quality CGI. There are an overabundance of one-line jokes, but the humor is a big enough step in the right direction that many fans will forgive many large problems with the movie because of its lighter tone. There were some really great moments. There were also some real WTF moments? (No spoilers, but one of those moments is when The Flash and Cyborg are digging together. You will know the moment when you see it. Seriously, W.... T.... F???) Overall, I enjoyed the movie and was grateful for the change in tone. I think that if the project had changed hands sooner we would have ended up with a much better movie, but at least we got something fun.
In all superhero teams, each person fills a different need in battle. Some members are the fighters, others are the thinkers who solve the problem, while still others keep the civilians safe and out of the way. Despite having all the characters to make this work, Justice League's script didn't seem to think this aspect of superhero teams through. Each member of the League is given moments to shine, but we never really get a moment where they are firing on all cylinders as a team. The major battles end up being dominated by specific individuals making the whole "team up" portion of the movie less vital to the world's survival than it should be. There is no telling if this is the fault of the original script or the product of the fights being reworked on the editing floor, but it was a disappointing aspect after seeing how flawlessly Whedon balanced the heroes' talents in The Avengers.
Justice League also has a women problem. Yes, many of the Amazons wear bikinis in their scenes, both modern day and ancient. No, angry fanboys of the internet, there is no logical explanation for their vital organs being exposed. However the issue doesn't stop at a troubling selection of costumes. After the revolutionary screen treatment of women in Wonder Woman, the repeated use of Wonder Woman/Diana's butt to help frame shots in Justice League is obvious and awkward. Her teammates reference her physical appearance repeatedly which makes it feel like the Justice League's next acquisition should be an HR department. It's all jokes that we have seen in other movies and comments that women hear all the time in our daily lives, but that doesn't excuse it. For a movie short on screen time for female characters, it's troubling that the production team decided to spend so much of it focused on Wonder Woman's "assets." Maybe this was acceptable in a pre-Wonder Woman superhero film, but we now know that we can and should expect more, especially in a movie that takes place in the same universe. (I talk more about Wonder Woman's depiction in the movie below in the spoiler section.)
I went in to Justice League expecting to hate it but, despite its numerous flaws and women troubles, ended up walking out excited about the new direction that DC is headed. While not a masterpiece, I feel that the difference in opinion between critics and fans is easily explained. It's clear that this movie depended on prior emotional connections to these iconic characters to make it work. Many critics may not have enjoyed it because their recent connections to Superman and Batman are the other Snyder movies. It's hard to come back from that dark place and understand why the world wouldn't be glad that Superman, the destroyer of Metropolis, is dead. To them, this movie seemed out of joint with the DC world they know but was still trying to be a part of it. To long-time fans however, Justice League seemed like things were finally getting back to normal. We immediately connected with this return to the familiar four-color world that we love, and revel in seeing our heroes stand together on the big screen. There is a lot wrong with Justice League, but if this is the new foundation for DC's cinematic universe, I finally have what these characters should have represented all along... hope.
DETAILED CHARACTER BREAKDOWNS - SPOILERS AFTER THIS POINT!
Batman
Batman is fine in this movie. He isn't great but he is much MUCH better than he was in Batman v Superman. It's nice not having him be worse than the criminals he is catching. He has lots of gadgets and vehicles to help him keep up with his super-powered teammates, but we don't ever see the brilliant mind that makes him one of the most powerful characters in the DC universe. He isn't the "World's Greatest Detective" (in fact, a random burglar in the first five minutes of the movie seems just as smart as he is) nor does he seem to be an especially gifted tactician. He saw clear footage of Aquaman in Batman v Superman, but doesn't seem to know what he looks like in Justice League? His main role seems to be providing toys for Cyborg to take over and to provide dialogue that explains things to the audience, but he is Batman so he is still cool.
Cyborg
Cyborg is a really interesting character and Ray Fisher does a great job with the limited screen time he is given. His CGI body is not the best we've seen in superhero movies, but Fisher manages to act through that in spite of an unimpressive script. He gives us a hero we are rooting for and who has a clear character arch, no small feat in such an overpacked movie. There are tons of shots of Cyborg from the trailers that never made it into the film, so clearly his role and backstory were cut back to shave off time or CGI costs. I really hope that we get to focus more on him if there are future Justice League films or if an extended cut of this movie is released.
The Flash
I was surprised that they went with Barry Allen's dark backstory from the comics for Justice League. Honestly, when I heard the short run time of the film, I figured they'd just have him show up as some punk kid runaway and not get into it. The scenes between Barry and his dad are well done but I think they should have explained more about Barry's strengths besides being fast. He built a hideout and speedsuit by using cutting edge technology, but that is never explored. I think it would have been a great way for him to bond with Batman or Cyborg instead of just being the awkward comic relief for the whole movie. Again, I feel like this was probably a time issue. The Flash was definitely an audience favorite and a great way to add some child-like wonder to the film through the eyes of one of the main characters. It was a relief to finally have a character who is enthusiastic about the idea of becoming a superhero.
Aquaman
I think this character suffered the most from the two conflicting visions of Justice League's directors. In parts he seems like a dark, menacing drunk who saves people out of obligation. (Sounds like all the other DC heroes in Snyder's movies, right?) Then there are the clear reshoots and comedic moments that are a total contrast provided by Whedon. A middle ground between those two visions was needed, but never materialized. Instead, Aquaman ends up just coming across as Jason Momoa flipping between overacting and not acting at all. It was especially obvious how little the production team thought about Aquaman when the final battle had no sources of water or way for Arthur to use his full powerset. It's a team up move, right? Why write a final battle that completely handicaps one of the characters you just spent an hour trying to get onto the team?
Mera
Mera appeared in her skin tight underwater spandex, gold crown and super push up bra for only a few moments of the film. In the comics, she can control water with her mind to create solid objects, control the tides, or even kill her enemies through instant dehydration or forced drowning. Honestly, she should have been a major threat to even Steppenwolf in a battle at the bottom of the ocean, but all this Mera seems to be able to do is create air bubbles. The scenes in Atlantis were some of the most awkward of the film. We clearly have not mastered underwater scenes with acting or CGI. The Atlantian actors move like fish out of water (come on, I had to say that...) and the fact that they can't communicate without creating an air bubble is laughable. I really hope they get those issues sorted out for Aquaman.
Wonder Woman
Other than her badass fight scenes, Wonder Woman was pretty underwhelming in this movie, especially compared to the high bar set by her solo film. Frankly, I am on the fence about if she passes the sexy lamp test developed by Kelly Sue DeConnick. Her main contributions to the team are to be the heavy hitter until Superman shows up, and to tell the history of Steppenwolf and the mother boxes. If they had found a note about Steppenwolf's history stuck to a lamp, half of her purpose in the film would have been covered. Her fighting is great, but she never takes initiative and keeps falling into the trope of female characters only reacting to what happens around them. There are a few tender, almost maternal moments between her and the other heroes, but she doesn't really inspire them or step into the role of team leader. The script actually goes out of its way to point out multiple times that she is not inspiring the public at large and is living in the shadows due to her long lost love. This particular point doesn't make sense, since we saw her leaping into action at the end of Wonder Woman and she saves dozens of people at the beginning of Justice League too. She's doing the job of a hero so why are we explicitly told that nobody knows about her? This is obviously just a case of bad writing. They want to make Superman's return the most important thing in the movie, even if the only way to do that is by dimming all the other bulbs in the room to make him shine brighter. I can't wait to see Wonder Woman back in Patty Jenkins' hands.
Superman
The "Big Blue Boyscout" finally is back on the big screen. Superman is not a hero or beacon of hope in the previous Snyder movies. He was a brooding figure who seemed to dislike his self-imposed role of savior. His battles level cities and cause the loss of countless lives in Man of Steel. It's horrific and lays the foundation for Batman's hate in Batman v Superman, but it is never resolved. He helped fight one monster in an abandoned area of town, but that hardly seems to balance out the insane loss of life he caused smashing through buildings in the first film. And let's not forget him making out with Lois on what is essentially a mass grave site in Man of Steel.... ugh. Justice League does its best to retcon some of this, showing us cell phone footage of kids talking with a more classic-looking Superman and showing the entire world in deep mourning for Superman. Even the John William's theme from the Christopher Reeve films is used liberally to tap into nostalgia from the pre-Snyder versions of the character. I appreciated this clear attempt to undo the darkness of previous films in the series. When he finally arrives, despite the sometimes distracting CGI work on his face, the Superman in Justice League is worth the wait and is a hero worthy of the world's admiration.
Justice League opened to a astonishingly low $96 million opening weekend. A lot of things contributed to this including the bad reviews of previous Snyder/DC films, months of negative production rumors, bad press about the Amazon's new outfits (sorry, not sorry!), and the huge amount of drama surrounding the botched Rotten Tomatoes reveal of the scoreJustice League got on their website. I think that overall this was a much better offering from Warner Bros/DC than we've had since Nolan's films, with the obvious exception of Wonder Woman. I hope the depressing box office numbers don't cause Warner Bros. to give up on the Justice League's future movies just when they FINALLY seem to be moving in the right direction. We will definitely be seeing a solo Aquaman movie and a Wonder Woman sequel in the future, but only time will tell if they take another stab at the JLA.
What did you think of Justice League and how they portrayed the characters? Comment below!
Wonder Woman was a huge success for Warner Bros. With a gross income of over 800 million dollars worldwide and a final score of 92% on Rotten Tomatoes, it breathed new life into the struggling DC Cinematic Universe. The empowering depiction of the film's female characters, including the fighting technique
Amazonian warriors from Wonder Woman (left) and the picture Snyder shared of Amazon Warriors from Justice League (right)
and stylized culture of the Amazons, were one of the things fans loved most about the movie.
Which is why Zack Snyder caused an Amazonian uproar on social media when he started sharing pictures of Amazons from Justice League in leather bikinis.
This abrupt change of direction is a shock and these outfits look like generic barbarian women from a game of Dungeons and Dragons. They completely lack the unique flavor of the Greco-Roman-inspired armor ensembles that Lindy Hemming put so much thought and historical research into creating for Wonder Woman. The Wonder Woman designs received acclaim from fans and costume fanatics alike. They were clearly inspired by the Amazon's origins in the Mediterranean and were feminine but very functional. Why mess with perfection?
Oh, right. The all-male team of directors and executive directors wanted women to fight in bikinis.
More bikini warriors from Justice League
Wonder Woman began filming in 2015, the year before Justice League started filming in 2016. The Amazons' design was finalized and most of the costumes completed while Justice League was still in pre-production. That means that there were discussions about what the Amazons should wear into battle in Justice League and the epic designs from Wonder Woman were rejected in favor of leather bikinis. Let that sink in. They rejected already finished costumes to redesign and remake the armor so that more skin would be showing.
They rejected already finished costumes to redesign and remake the armor so that more skin would be showing.
Amazons wearing soft leather outfits (good for showing off boob curves) while warriors from Atlantis and Man's World are in full armor. smh.
Fans have been trying to come up with theories to rationalize the dramatic shift in costumes for the all-female civilization. Memes are making the rounds on social media speculating that the barbarian outfits are from thousands of years ago, or that it is another tribe of Amazons. Not knowing the movie's full plot, I can't say if this was the intention. I guess the theory is that the Amazons didn't know how to make armor when everyone else on earth did... because girls? (insert eye roll) I reject the idea that the Amazons were ever ignorant enough to wear these garments into battle. They have all the knowledge of the ancient world and the Greek pantheon, but based on the production pictures, it looks like the men from Atlantis and man's world had figured out armor while the Amazons were still dressing like bad Conan clichés. There are also plenty of pictures of "modern" Amazon armor that is still leaving their midriffs completely unprotected. An evolution of style would be appropriate but the Amazons would not plan to go into battle with their vital organs exposed.
Amazonian actress and CrossFit champion Brooke Ence wearing her battle outfit from Wonder Woman (left) vs. her battle outfits from Justice League (center & right)
To be absolutely clear, my issue is not with the lack of modesty. The Amazons in Wonder Woman wore sports-bra-like outfits when they were not in battle and I think that is very realistic for a society that lives in a Mediterranean climate. My problem is a millennia-old military culture wearing bikinis into battle because they are women. My problem is a wise civilization that was created by the gods to protect the world thinking that soft leather is armor. I have a problem with a really great design being thrown out in favor of something that would excite the cis male gaze.
I have a problem with a really great design being thrown out in favor of something that would excite the cis male gaze.
The positive reception of Wonder Woman was a major blow to Zack Snyder's vision and forced Warner Bros. to course correct their failing DC Cinematic Universe. Joss Whedon stepped in as director after Snyder and a massive number of reshoots began. Many of the reshoots were reportedly to add more screen time to characters from Wonder Woman. I hope that some of these changes include more of Hemming's complete armor design.
(Special thanks to fellow Wonder Woman fan Wonder Bira for helping me track down some of the pictures I used in this article!)
I was not disappointed. Wonder Woman is an excellent movie.
Patty Jenkins did what so many others said was impossible. She brought Wonder Woman to life in a way that will please comic purists and general movie-goers alike. It has everything that the other DC movies lacked: color, genuine humor, and most importantly, appropriate pacing that gives us time to form emotional connections to the main characters. I have no idea how she managed to herd all the cats at Warner Bros into doing things her way, but I will be eternally grateful to her. She managed to make a super hero movie that is action packed but has a distinctly feminine tone to fit with a female protagonist. AND it somehow still makes sense in the dumpster fire of a cinematic universe that Snyder created. Miracles CAN HAPPEN!
Gal Gadot knocked it out of the park as Wonder Woman. She does an excellent job of contrasting Diana's vast ancient Amazonian knowledge with her naiveté of man's world. She stays true to the character's comic book roots by caring deeply for others, while also being an incredibly kickass fighter. We follow her as she discovers the extent of her own powers, cheering for her successes and mourning her losses. I'll admit I had serious reservations about Gal when she was first cast. Her un-athletic body type and lack of acting credits worried me (getting your ass groped in Fast and the Furious isn't exactly confidence inspiring) but her Diana is charming, relatable and strong.
The Amazons are one of the highlights of the film. They are pulled directly from the pages of George Perez's Wonder Woman run, which should make a lot of purists very happy. Through excellent costume design, on-location shoots, and casting scores of real athletes, the production team creates a vivid culture that sets the tone for Wonder Woman's personality throughout the film. Hippolyta (Connie Neilson) is a wonderful mother to Diana and magnificent Queen of the Amazons, but Wonder Woman's badass aunt, General Antiope (Robin Wright), is sure to be the fan favorite. The action sequences with the Amazonian army are incredible, with some of the best fight choreography and horsemanship I have seen in recent years. I got goosebumps watching an army of incredible, multi-ethnic female fighters in action. You will too.
The supporting cast does an excellent job of helping the story along, while keeping the focus on Wonder Woman herself. Chris Pine balances Steve Trevor's roles as a leading man, love interest and side kick. He is a capable, cocky American soldier who's heartfelt need to end the terrible war that is ripping the world apart inspires Diana to join in the fight. I haven't been a big fan of his before, but he does a great job in Wonder Woman. The rag-tag bunch of fighters he assembles to help them win the war are less compelling. They are multiracial, which is great, but they are mostly two dimensional and not always very well acted. There are a lot of set ups without much payoff, leaving us with the feeling that some of their story was cut on the editing room floor. Lucy Davis plays Etta Candy, an often forgotten character from early Wonder Woman comics, and is a fun addition to the film, although their shopping sequence is a bit drawn out. She is a stark contrast to the Amazons, but a welcome female presence in the male dominated culture of man's world.
The movie's biggest weakness is its villains. They are canon characters from the Wonder Woman comics, but for the most part they seem underwhelming. There is some doubt as to how big a threat they pose, and the ending is predicable. The final battle slips into Snyder-esque visuals that could have been cut and pasted from the Doomsday battle in Batman v Superman. It's a change in style from the rest of the film, but I suppose that we had to see Snyder's fingerprints somewhere on this project. This is probably the least damaging sequence where he could rear his ugly head, and there are still some really great moments in there that show Diana's true character.
Wonder Woman is easily as good as any of the Marvel origin story movies, but doesn't quite reach the level of The Avengers or Guardians of the Galaxy. It is easily the best DC movie since Nolan's TheDark Knight. It is also the first of the recent DC movies that I'd feel comfortable sharing with children. Over all, the film is a wonderful triumph after so many years of cynics saying it was impossible and I look forward to watching it again and again.
WARNING: End of spoiler-free review. DETAILS AND SPOILERS AHEAD!!! CONTINUE AT YOUR OWN RISK!
.
.
.
.
As a longtime reader of Wonder Woman comics, I am thrilled that they didn't sanitize Diana's backstory to make her "more relatable" for movie audiences. She is still the only child of the Amazons, sculpted from clay by Hippolyta and brought to life by the Greek gods. They tweaked the Greek mythology a bit, but Diana's basic story stays intact, along with her super powers and Lasso of Truth.
Wonder Woman starts with an unnecessary modern day intro, which unfortunately reminds us of its ties to Batman v Superman, but the real movie starts on Themyscira. We follow Diana as she grows from an overprotected child-princess into a trained warrior with an idealized view of combat. Young Diana (Lilly Aspell) is delightful, with witty lines and impressive horsemanship. Jenkins takes the time to develop the Amazons and their relationships with each other. Their battle on the beach is a sand and sandals action sequence on the scale of any in 300. Watching the Amazons triumph over their invaders is amazing, but it is also heartbreaking to watch them discover the deadly power of guns and General Antiope, one of the best characters in the film, is killed. In these moments we watch Diana learn the harsh realities of war, and the horror of it starts her on the path to man’s world. Some critics are calling this portion of the movie a “slog of a backstory,” but from a storytelling perspective it lays the foundation of Wonder Woman’s character for the rest of the film. I think this was time well spent and it is my favorite section of the movie. (Considering that the trailers for Justice League have shots of the Amazons in battle, I think it’s probably setting the stage for a lot more than just this movie too!)
The movie uses Steve Trevor to bridge the gap between the audience and the more far-fetched aspects of Diana's origin. It is an effective tactic, which was also used in the Wonder Woman animated film of 2009. Gal and Chris have great chemistry and they manage to make some fairly campy scenes work. The best example of this is a scene on Themyscira where Diana walks in on Steve Trevor while he is bathing, and there is an “above average” elephant in the room. We later learn that while Diana has never seen a man, she is very well read on the subject and is unsurprised by the features of Steve’s anatomy. There are some delightfully awkward moments between them that successfully lend humor and humanity to what could have been a very severe story.
Unlike Lois Lane and Superman in recent DCEU films, Diana and Steve Trevor have a surprisingly balanced relationship. When they first meet on Themyscira, he is the charming "fish out of water" who is completely ignorant of Amazon society. However, when they travel to man's world the roles are reversed and Diana is the one forced to navigate a completely foreign culture. They learn from the each other and it becomes clear that each has their own strengths. Diana is in a different league as far as her fighting skills and education, but Steve uses his street smarts and connections to help her reach her goals. The best thing about their romance is that it takes a back seat to Diana's larger mission. Their connection helps Diana learn to understand the nature of mankind, but their romantic moments are just sprinkled in between larger events. Both characters are motivated by their drive to end the war, not their budding feelings for each other. It's a huge relief that Wonder Woman avoids the trap of becoming a story about their romance. Steve plays his part, but it stays Diana's story.
The movie does suffer from being predictable. Anyone who knows classic comic book or movie formulas will guess what is happening pretty quickly. Dr. "Poison" Maru (Elena Anaya) is under utilized. The movie tries to set up General Ludendorff (Danny Huston) as Ares, the Greek god of war and Diana’s ultimate foe, but the minute we see David Thewlis as Sir Patrick we guess that there is more to him than meets the eye. It is revealed that he is actually Ares and the climactic battle that ensues is the least inspired part of the film. They move away from the acrobatic method of combat that Wonder Woman uses through the rest of the film into a Batman v Superman style big blast battle that levels everything around them. It's a little desensitizing and there are a few points where I wonder if keeping stuffy Sir Patrick's face and mustache on the God of War was a good creative choice. There is also a fair amount of monologue-ing as Ares tells Diana that she is a young god/demi-god (which finally explains New 52 style electronic blasts that we see her use) and that Zeus created her to defeat Ares. (WHY WOULD YOU TELL HER THAT? DUMB SUPER VILLAIN!) It is an interesting tweak to the reason that Zeus brought her to life, and also explains why Hippolyta was so worried about her becoming a warrior. I like these details, but wish they’d been revealed in a more elegant way.
The most interesting thing about this fight was that we see Diana finally let loose. It is awe-inspiring and a little terrifying. She momentarily gives up on humanity out of sorrow and anger, and her feelings are understandable. Jenkins does a superb job of setting this up throughout the movie. The gradual creep from losing her aunt Antiope and other amazons on the beach in Themyscira (possibly the first deaths she has seen since the amazons are immortal), to her seeing the horrors of trench warfare and the deaths of innocent people at the hands of modern weapons, and finally the loss of Steve Trevor all takes its toll on her. We understand Diana’s fury and frustration and the devastation of WWI is the perfect backdrop for it. As an audience, it is especially tragic because we know that Ares’ comments about humanity ring true. The “War to End All Wars” is really the birthplace of modern combat techniques and weaponry. These factors make it all the more inspiring and uplifting when Diana overcomes the trauma and, because of the wisdom and love she has gained from her time with humanity, turns on Ares and defeats him.
With Diana’s comments about “walking away from the world” in Batman v Superman, I was very worried that this movie would end with Diana giving up, but the movie ends on a note of hope. The war is over and people are celebrating in the streets. Diana has suffered many losses, but she loves humanity and has not lost her belief that they can learn to be better than they are. The last real shot of the story shows Diana FLYING to the rescue as the world’s first superhero. She has discovered her purpose, grown into her powers, and will continue to protect humanity. It’s really amazing and it was one of many points in the film where I teared up because my inner geek-girl was so happy…
Too bad they HAD to bookend the movie with another modern scene that includes Batman. It doesn’t ruin the ending, but doesn’t really add anything either.
Despite its flaws, Wonder Woman is a really enjoyable movie. It stayed true to the legacy of one of the world's most recognizable icons. Fans of her comics, animated features, or even Lynda Carter's TV show will recognize the hero that they love, and a new generation of Wonder Woman fans will be born.
The new trailer for Wonder Woman dropped this week, and I have to admit that I loved it. I officially have hope again and am REALLY looking forward to this movie, even after all the disappointments DC has brought to the screen and all the rumors about production troubles. I’m not too proud to admit that I actually cried a little when I watched it.
Watch the trailer before you read the rest of this article. If you've already seen it, proceed. Be aware that my observations and suppositions might end up being accurate spoilers.
0:00 Water. Pretty blue water… and then we see Themyscira, a.k.a. Paradise Island. They have completely nailed the look and feel of Wonder Woman’s island home, with Greek-inspired architecture and a majestic natural beauty. White peacocks roam the island, a symbol for the Greek goddess Hera who is a patron of the Amazons in many of the Wonder Woman comics. We see a few shots of the city that really give it scope and depth. It should also be noted that the footage on Themyscira is bright, with rich natural colors, a striking contrast to the dark look of DC's movies so far. Hippolyta’s (Wonder Woman’s mother) voice over speaks of the “many gifts” the gods have given them, implying that the whole island is a gift, and hinting at the Amazon’s backstory. It also segues perfectly into…
0:10 Hippoyta shows Diana a collection of guarded weapons from the gods, focusing on a sword with which young Diana is immediately obsessed. It’s unclear if this is a cannon weapon from the DC Universe or something created just for the movie-verse. Many reports call it the God Killer, which matches the name of a sword from Deathstroke's comics that was forged by Hephaestus (paving the way for some possible interaction between Wonder Woman and Deathstroke in future films?) however Wonder Woman never had that sword in the comics. I think a better bet is the sword that Wonder Woman wields in Kingdom Come. That sword was also a gift from Hephaestus and is famous for being sharp enough to split atoms and make Superman bleed. It’s a god-killer sword, not THE God Killer sword.
There is some debate about the conversation between Hippolyta and Diana in this scene. Why is Hippolyta already putting down her daughter by saying she isn’t worthy of the sword? There are many explanations, but the most likely one is pretty obvious: Diana is Hippolyta’s only child. I’ll talk about her birth a little later in this post, but Hippolyta loves Diana and wants to protect her. Training her for war, just in case, and encouraging her to participate in war are two very different things. Any Amazon who uses that sword will not be training; they will be fighting the most powerful foes on the planet. Also, in some runs of the comic, once Diana leaves Themyscira she is not allowed to return, thus forever separating her from everything she has ever known. Why would Hippolyta want that for her daughter? In almost every version of Wonder Woman’s origin story, Hippolyta is proud of her daughter but also heartbroken that she will not live a peaceful life on Themyscira. Hippolyta is NOT A BAD MOTHER!
0:26
Next we see Antiope training a teen version of Diana. This is thrilling because it means they will (hopefully) be spending some time on her backstory on Themyscira. We’ve seen Batman’s parents die at least twelve times on screen, so it’s nice to hope that we will get a good origin story for Wonder Woman after all this time. Growing up on the island is pivotal to Diana’s overall character. She has lived in a utopian society! She knows that it is possible for a warlike culture to find peace, because she has experienced it firsthand. This is how she is able to look past the horrors of the real world and continue to believe that there is hope for a better future… at least in the comics.
0:30
Adult Diana is training in a field with other MULTI-RACIAL AMAZONS. This makes me really happy since I grew up on George Perez’s Amazons, which came in all races and colors. So far, all of the stunt work and fights look incredible! Diana pulls some really amazing moves, but Antiope still gets the upper hand and forces her to the ground. Antiope rips into Diana for her failure, only to be blown off her feet by a mysterious blast of energy when Diana throws her arms up to protect herself with her metal bracers. As Diana stares at her bracers in shock, we hear Hippolyta say, “But she must never know the truth about what she is.”
This is causing some waves because it is not a traditional power in Wonder Woman comics. Wonder Woman was the only child of the Amazons who were blessed by the gods but had no children in their civilization. Hippolyta was so desperate for a child that she molded one out of clay and begged the gods to bring it to life. Thus, Diana was created and blessed by the gods with super powers. In 2011, the New 52 twisted that story into a lie told by Hippolyta to cover up an affair she had with the god Zeus. As an illegitimate demi-god, Diana takes after her father and has electric powers that she can’t quite control. Her magical bracers block her electric powers so she can function normally. The movie seems to have gone with that power set, although there is no saying what that means for her creation story. Personally, I’m really hoping they stick with the clay version of their origins.
0:53
Adult Diana watches from a cliff as a plane crashes into the ocean near the island and dives in to investigate. Steve Trevor is brought to the beach and she stares at his unconscious form in wonder. We've seen this in other trailers but it's still exciting to see such a classic moment brought to life.
1:03 Cut to Hippolyta’s throne room (is this Steve’s trial for trespassing?) and then to Steve in a dark cave (prison cell?) with Diana explaining to him about the Amazon’s mission to defend the world. This has confused people, because how are they supposed to defend the world if they never leave their island? Well, in many of the comics, Themysira is where the gods placed the entrance to the underworld. The Amazons sacred duty is to protect that gateway. Is that what that line is referring to?
1:05
War obviously comes to Themyscira, but it’s impossible to tell by these quick shots at what point in the story it happens. The bad guys are obviously not just your typical “evil” Nazi rip-offs. They seem more like Hydra (yes, I know that’s Marvel!) with weird looking hench(wo)men and super powerful weapons. Are they after the weapons on Themyscira? The gateway? Or do they just follow Steve and stumble upon the island in the beginning? So many possibilities!
1:15
Diana FLIES … or super jumps… into the vault where the Amazon’s gifts are kept and claims them as her own: the sword from the first scene, a golden lasso, and her famous red and blue outfit. Now that she’s properly dressed, let’s head to the real world!
1:21
Diana is in London, and she is not impressed. The shots and colors do a great job of contrasting the pollution and corruption of “man’s world” with the bright beauty of Themyscira, and sets the tone for the “fish out of water” feeling that Wonder Woman has in many of her origin stories. Sadly, it looks like the rest of the film continues with the dark gritty look of previous DC films after this point.
1:26
Diana hides her armor with a secret identity outfit, complete with glasses. I think this is great and fits in with the original comics perfectly. Despite her new threads the trailer sets us straight when she saves Steve from a bullet, she may be dressed like a secretary but she is still a warrior!
1:30
Now we have a montage of epic shots set to music! They are fast but there are flashes of important things! We see:
Diana in full Wonder Woman form! She uses her shield to stop what appears to be a large shell in the middle of a battlefield.
Diana kicking ass! She is obviously an incredibly skilled fighter.
GLOWING GOLDEN LASSO! We’ve seen this in other trailers, but it still makes me happy.
Diana taking off! Is she flying or jumping?
Diana throwing a truck. Super strength? Check!
Diana and Steve looking at one another lovingly.
Lots of stuff blowing up!
Diana floating above the ground! Flying!
Diana using her lighting powers on purpose!
1:57
The voice over in this part is especially good. Calling herself “Diana of Themyscira, Daughter of Hippolyta” is perfect.
2:08
Now we have the logo and the electronic sounding music that is her theme. After the STUNNING music in the rest of the trailer, this crappy theme is jarring and out of place. FYI: I am a music snob and have hated this theme from the beginning. I blame Zack Snyder.
2:14 We get a final glimpse of Diana trying to get through a rotating door with her shield and sword, then snarky comments about the sword not going with her outfit. It’s a cute bit, but is desperately designed to show that there are lighthearted moments in the film. Personally, I hope that the movie's humor doesn’t just consist of jokes about how Diana isn't “girly."
Based on DC's previous movies, there is a good chance that the movie will still be horrible. I know that in my heart of hearts, but this trailer hit it out of the park. It may have just been expert editing, but maybe this is a good reflection of the final product. Dare I say it? I finally have some hope!
And I don’t think changing him… you know, people are always like, “You changed Superman,” and I’m like, if you’re a comic book fan, you know I didn’t change Superman. If you know the true canon, you know that I didn’t change Superman. - Zack Snyder
Batman v Superman had everything going for it. A great cast, decades of content to draw from, and hundreds of millions of dollars should have laid a successful foundation for a great superhero film. Unfortunately, that wasn't the case. While the film had enjoyable moments, its flaws far outweighed its positive qualities. There have been hundreds of articles published about how Zack Snyder didn't "get" the characters in this movie. I have decided to focus on the flaws in directing and film making that lead to this film's downfall, instead of analyzing his interpretations of the Justice League as characters... except with Wonder Woman. (You knew that was coming...)
Superman
Superman is easily the least likable character in the entire film. This is an impressive feat of crappy directing considering the Man of Steel is played by Henry Cavill, who I have adored since The Tudors. I haven't seen a talented actor given such bland direction and such terrible dialogue since the Star Wars prequels. We are introduced to Superman through the eyes of the citizens of Metropolis during his fight with General Zod from Man of Steel. He is a small figure flying above them as buildings crumble and people die. The level of destruction is unforgivable, especially to an audience that lives in a post 9/11 world, and afterwards Superman NEVER MENTIONS IT OR EVEN SEEMS REMORSEFUL. The people of Metropolis build a huge statue of him as part of their memorial, but no time is given to redeeming Superman in the audiences' eyes. We get a handful of shots of Superman being a hero (while looking depressed and unhappy), but Snyder doesn't spend any time building him up as a hero in our eyes. Most of Cavill's dialogue is focused on how dangerous Batman is, which after the opening scenes of Metropolis being leveled seems forced and incredibly hypocritical. The script never provides any depth of character, endearing moments, or proper motivation for his thoughts or actions. The lame attempts to humanize him via bathtub sex with Lois Lane or weird dream sequences about Jonathan Kent stacking rocks fail. I found myself agreeing with the characters who thought Superman was dangerous and wanted to stop him. Snyder slacked on character building because he thought we'd support anyone wearing the "S", and he was very wrong.
Lex Luthor The Lex from Batman v Superman is actually more like Lex, Jr. from the comics. He didn't build Lex Corp, and is lacking the serious businessman attitude that we are used to seeing in more traditional renditions of this infamous villain. Oh, and he has hair. The character actually works as a young, socially awkward tech-billionaire, but Snyder sacrifices the genius that makes the comic book character worthy of being Superman's nemesis in favor of more CGI and slo-mo. NOTHING ABOUT LEX'S PLANS MAKE SENSE! He is king of the plot holes. He kills a Senator because she is going to block the importation of Kryptonite, but his secret ship with the rock is already docked so it wouldn't have impacted his plans at all. He blows up a hearing that was going to impose sanctions AGAINST Superman (wouldn't Lex want that?) because Snyder thought it would be cool to watch a room of innocent people burn up around Superman. Finally, we get to the big master plan: trick Batman into killing Superman. Considering nobody has actually tested Kryptonite against Superman yet, this seems like a really bad plan. Plan B is even worse because Lex turns General Zod's body into one of the cave trolls from Lord of the Rings to kill Superman, just in case Batman fails. WHAT IF BATMAN HAD WON?? We'd have a mindless cave troll, sorry, DOOMSDAY on the loose and Superman would already be dead. Or what if Doomsday had succeeded in killing Superman and then was unstoppable and destroyed everything? Bad plan, Lex.
More annoying than the lame Wile E. Coyote level plots was Lex's complete lack of motivation. His goal is obviously to beat Superman, but we never know why. He makes some comments about devils coming from above, that absolute power and innocence are incompatible, and references his father's physical abuse, but we are never told the reason for his hate. Is he jealous of Superman's power? Afraid for mankind? Maybe someone he cared about was killed in Metropolis? In true Snyder fashion we get some cool shots of Lex Corp and some weird dialogue instead of real character development or backstory.
Batman
(AKA the other billionaire in the movie trying to kill Superman) Bruce Wayne/Batman is the most developed character in the movie and is the only one whose motivation we actually know. We saw him trying to save lives in the streets of Metropolis as Superman and Zod tore it apart. He clearly states that he wants vengeance for the thousands killed that day and is terrified by Superman's unlimited power. That's really where the good stuff ends. This Batman brands people for no logical reason, other than Snyder needs a plot device that gives Superman a reason to hate him. I really love (read: think it's stupid) that it's the branding that pisses Superman off and not the FLAT OUT MURDER of bad guys with the Batmobile's machine guns. Most troubling is the fact that we are given absolutely no history of this Batman's crime fighting. Has he always been a murderous vigilante? Did he start out as a hero and then start killing after losing hope? Did the death of a friend break him? Was he pushed to this extreme after the appearance of Superman and the realization of his own limitations? The cops seem to hate him, but there is still a Batsignal? No relevant background information is given to the audience to put Batman's actions in the larger context of his time in the cowl. But good thing we spent time showing Bruce's parents being murdered... again.
Since I disliked Snyder's city-murdering Superman I was really hoping that Batman would be a hero. He isn't. I get that this is an older, darker Batman, but he never does any real detective work or uses his brain. In Snyder's attempt to put at much mindless testosterone in the movie as possible, his ONE big scene with the Bat Computer is interspersed with shots of Bruce doing Crossfit in the Bat Cave. Batman's intelligence is what makes him so powerful in the DC universe, however we see no evidence of it in this movie.
Maybe it's the Gotham City in me, but it just seems like another example of the script taking a back seat to the visuals of the movie.
Wonder Woman I am pretty pleased with Wonder Woman's appearance in Batman v Superman. She looks great and wasn't in it enough for Snyder to ruin. We don't really get any character development or backstory for her, but I'm thrilled that they are leaving that to the Wonder Woman movie and Patty Jenkins. It seems that some important elements of her traditional comic book persona are intact. She goes by the name Diana Prince and is immortal (or at least doesn't age) since we see pictures of her from World War I. We see her kick some serious ass in the fight with Doomsday, and it seems her bracelets deflect even the most powerful of blows, and SHE HAS A GLOWING GOLD LASSO that she uses effectively in battle. Considering how little Batman does in the fight, and how much time Superman spent talking to Lois Lane, I think it's safe to say that Wonder Woman was the MVP of that beat down.
Wonder Woman spends most of the movie at fancy parties. Her role in the movie seems out of place, which is unsurprising since they added Wonder Woman to the story long after the project was developed. She is trying to track down a picture that Lex Luthor has of her from World War I and serves as proof that she is superhuman. Unfortunately, it seems that Diana doesn't understand how digital files work and that Lex probably has back up copies somewhere, but it does lead to her meeting Bruce Wayne. There were some golden moments through, despite her brief appearances and few lines. One of my favorites is when Lex references Greek mythology in a lame speech as a party, and the camera cuts to Diana rolling her eyes. (Yes, I was the only person in the theatre that laughed at that point.) The shot of her from WWI is intriguing and combined with her lines about pulling away from the world makes me WANT to know more about her history. WWI is an underrepresented war in motion pictures and I can't wait to see how they tie in my favorite Amazon. Finally, there is the now infamous smile during her fight with Doomsday which shows that Gal gets some of what Diana is about.
Lois Lane
The feisty reporter serves the same role in this movie as she did in her early appearances in the comics, a damsel in distress for Superman to save... repeatedly. She spends most of the movie tracking a mystery bullet that ends up being meaningless to the plot and a huge waste of screen time. Nothing she learns gives the "good guys" any advantage, or gives the audience any more information than they already had. Mostly she is there as a plot device to put Superman in danger.
The Justice League "Shoehorned" doesn't quite cover how forced and clunky the addition of other Justice League characters was in Batman v Superman. Batman emails Wonder Woman the files of super-humans that he stole from Lex Luthor's files. We then cut to shots of Wonder Woman READING that email line by line (what??) and then opening each file. I'd like to point out that each file is labeled with the logo of its corresponding Justice League member. (I guess Lex designed their logos? Did he design their costumes too?) She opens each file and views footage worthy of any made for Syfy movie. Seriously. The scene of Cyborg's creation looks like a badly made TV show, not like laboratory footage like they intended. Aquaman's debut was awkward for the audience and the actor alike. He looked so uncomfortable underwater that it made us feel uncomfortable to watch him. Seriously pathetic. Flash's security camera footage wasn't too bad, but his crazy time-travel appearance in Batman's dream-within-a-dream (screw you Snyder) confused everyone and had NOTHING TO DO WITH ANY PLOT POINTS. He warns Batman to save Lois Lane but there are no points where this warning seems to matter after that. I guess maybe they are hinting at Batman being able to tell the future? No clue. Even with decades of comic book knowledge at my disposal I found this confusing.
Zack Snyder is the master of cool visual effects and slow motion. He is also the king of badly developed characters, plot holes and wasted screen time. I think that it's ok for DC's movies to have a gritty, real-world feel. They don't need to copy Marvel's light-hearted formula, but they do need to make sense! I'm fine with seeing Batman and Superman deal with the consequences of vigilantism politically and in their personal lives, but we have to care about the characters for any of that to matter. The audience has to see more than bad ass CGI action to become involved in the story emotionally, and this is where Snyder has failed. He tried to stuff too much into this movie, which made it all meaningless because there wasn't enough time spent on anything for us to become invested.
Zack Snyder is a bad movie maker. He took two of the most emotionally complex stories in the DC universe, combined them, and managed to make them incredibly generic. Warner Bros. shares the blame. In their desperation to catch up to Marvel they have not taken the necessary time to build up their universe. Combine that rush with a director who already cuts corners in his storytelling and you have a recipe for disaster. We told them we were unhappy after Man of Steel and there have been red flags about Batman v Superman since the project started. WB didn't listen. Hopefully, the 69% drop in revenue from opening weekend will finally catch their attention. We aren't going to love something just because it has the Bat-logo on it. MAKE A GOOD MOVIE!
Wake up, WB! Keep Snyder in charge the visuals, because it's the only thing he is good at, and get someone with the chops to create a real cinematic universe for DC! A universe with depth and characters that we actually see as heroes.
The official announcement of Wonder Woman's solo movie was a horribly anticlimactic moment for fans around the world. Warner Bros. released a list of ten upcoming DC titles, and Wonder Woman just happened to be on that list. No press event. No formal announcement at NYCC, which was only a few days prior. The world's most well-known female comic book hero and universal symbol for female empowerment had her movie announced in a list that included Shazam and the Suicide Squad. No offense to them, but they don't really belong on the same billing as Wonder Woman. Needless to say, I was seriously concerned for the fate of the Amazon Princess on screen and so disappointed I couldn't even bring myself to blog about it.
Then the announcement came that Michelle MacLaren would be directing Wonder Woman, and I was suddenly filled with hope.
Is it because Michelle is a woman? Absolutely not. I honestly don't think that gender can foretell how a writer or director will bring a character to life. There have been many male writers who have perfectly captured Diana on the page. George Perez is responsible for rebooting Wonder Woman and bringing her into the modern age of comics. Without his run, I don't think the Amazon Princess would have stayed relevant in the genre. Greg Rucka also springs to mind. I love his take on Diana and his graphic novel The Hiketeia is one of my favorite Wonder Woman titles. Most recently, Brian Azzarello rebooted Diana again for the New 52. Although his changes were controversial, his Wonder Woman was powerful, intelligent, and ground breaking. He brought Diana out of the shadows and made Wonder Woman one of the most successful titles in DC's new lineup. However, all good things must come to an end. The current FEMALE writer of Wonder Woman, Meredith Finch, is already drawing criticism for her rendition of Diana only one issue into her run. It's about respecting and understanding the character, not what reproductive organs the writer has.
Michelle is a very talented director with a knack for crafting impressive action sequences. She is best known for her directorial work on Game of Thrones, Breaking Bad, and The Walking Dead. Very few directors can bring the graphic sword fights of Game of Thrones to life and also create well-done shoot outs for Breaking Bad. THIS IS INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT! She has successfully navigated the fantasy/historical realm and the modern setting, both of which are necessary to bring Diana to life on the big screen. I think this makes Michelle uniquely qualified to take on the Amazon Princess, who must straddle the ancient traditions of Themyscria and the mean streets of man's world in the same film.
Considering that DC's movie universe is being overseen by the ass-hat who considered Sucker Punch a story of female empowerment, many Wonder Woman fans have been concerned about her film adaptation. Wonder Woman has been a symbol for female empowerment for decades, and it is vital that she is depicted as such in the movies. This is another area where Michelle shines. She has directed the female characters on Game of Thrones, The Walking Dead, and X-files, all of which are unique individuals with complex motivations. Any director who can capture the spirit of Arya Stark, the noble warrior nature of Brienne of Tarth, and the intelligence of Dana Scully has the potential to hit Wonder Woman out of the park.
Only time will tell, but this is definitely a step in the right direction. UPDATE: 4/13/15 - Michelle MacLaren has dropped out of directing Wonder Woman due to what the parties involved are calling creative differences. It is unclear whether MacLaren's departure will affect the movie's scheduled release — it has been slotted for 2017.
Rumors about the Batman vs. Superman movie, now called Dawn of Justice, have been flying around the internet for months. I was thrilled that Wonder Woman was rumored to be in the film, then had a mixed reaction with the official casting, but I've always known it would be the outfit that would really make or break my hope for this film. Now, thanks to JoBlo.com, we may actually have some hints at the direction they are taking Diana in the DC movies.
Wonder Woman’s costume:
Costume design from the Rainfall Films Wonder Woman Short
The reports of Wonder Woman wearing the pre-new52 jacket and leggings outfit are inaccurate. Completely. The description of the outfit from our source uses the term “badass” on multiple occasions. This Wonder Woman is ripped right from the comics and has a “traditional, yet sleeker” costume that’s “battle ready.” She’ll have a blue leather skirt, silver-armored cuffs that reach to her elbows, golden tiara (with a design of some sort in the center, possibly the red star) and a variation of the traditional-looking red top (no word on additional armor on it). Her overall appearance is described as “Amazon warrior princess” and definitely not an urban reimagining. She’s there to kick ass and that’s readily apparent. Word is that WB is getting a VERY positive response on her appearance to those they’ve shown it to.
HALLELUJAH!!!! THIS MAKES ME SO HOPEFUL AND EXCITED!!! This sounds very similar to some of my favorite Wonder Woman designs, but it also may give us more hints about the movie. A "traditional" and "battle ready" design suggests that they may be keeping her back story intact, which is hugely important to fans. It also sounds like she is going to be a powerful fighter herself, rather than eye candy to hang on Superman's arm.
Wonder Woman’s weapons:
That’s right, not just a golden lasso here. Wonder Woman will have no less than FOUR weapons, including shield, sword, spear, and of course, the traditional lasso. It’s also noted that she will wear the shield on her back, Captain America style, when not in use.
Did you read that?!? GOLDEN LASSO!! If these rumors are to be believed than this is another sign that they are staying true to comic book Wonder Woman! It is also a great sign that they are arming her with the most common weapons that she is portrayed with in the comics. Now to wait and see if the lasso retains the magical properties it traditionally has.
Wonder Woman’s screen time in the film:
Her character will be introduced as “Diana” in the film initially before we ever see her as Wonder Woman. She will have a fair amount of screen time and will team up with Batman and Superman for the final battle against an un-named villain who may be working or controlled by Lex Luther. Her origin will be intentionally vague, but she is brought into the fold to show that there are other superheroes in the universe other than Superman.
This part I am taking with a grain of salt. I've worked on enough movie projects to know that things change drastically between the script and the cutting room floor. It's nice to hear the whispers that she will be more then a small cameo, and it's GREAT to hear that she will be fighting in the big final battle. Hopefully, they don't have her end up being Lois Lane 2.0 and just a new pretty face for Superman to save over and over.
Leaving her origins vague may mean that they are planning on giving her a solo movie later to explain things, but I'm guessing it's due more to pacing and trying to keep the movie shorter than Gone with the Wind. They are introducing A LOT of heroes in this movie. It initially focused on Superman and Batman, but now the confirmed cast includes Wonder Woman, Lex Luthor, Cyborg, Aquaman, and possibly even Nightwing. That's a lot of explaining to do if they are even going to briefly touch on everyone's origin stories, and introducing that many characters in a film will cut drastically into the screen time of any individual character. This makes me nervous, because I want Diana to get the screen time she deserves as part of DC's trinity.
Dawn of Justice has to do well for Wonder Woman to get her own film. These rumors give me hope, but we have a long way to go before we see the final product.
It has finally happened. Wonder Woman is going to appear in a major motion picture. Gal Gadot wasn't on my short list for the part. She wasn't even on my long list for the part. To be honest, she hadn't crossed my mind at all. I was hoping for Lynn Collins, who screamed Wonder Woman with her performance in John Carter. Lynn has the look and the acting chops to bring Diana to life, despite the fact that she'd need an apple box and some movie magic to make her appear taller. In contrast, I really don't know anything about Gal except how she looks physically, because she's never been in anything that required much acting.
The movie I have been dreaming of has arrived, and I am filled with a mixture of joy and fear that only comes with being a fanatic... er... fan.
JOY: DC movies are really well cast. I may not like all the choices or stories, but I have almost always liked the casting in DC movies. Every time I nerd-rage out about someone being cast, I have (almost) always been proven wrong. I ate my words with both Heath Ledger's portrayal of the Joker, and Ann Hathaway's spot-on Catwoman. Man of Steel and Green Lantern were both well cast, and their actors did their best despite terrible scripts. The casting people at Warner's obviously have a good eye for this, so maybe Gal will knock it out of the park.
FEAR: DC movies have really crappy scripts.
DC movies have a history of terrible scripts that are filled with cornball jokes or gaping plot holes. I think George Clooney could have been a Batman for the ages if he had been given the right script. Ditto for Jim Carrey as the Riddler. Can you imagine him playing a creepy, puzzle-crazed Riddler in a more realistic way like Heath Ledger's Joker? These problems have continued into more recent projects. Batman Begins started the new DC movies off strong, but both The Dark Knight Rises and Man of Steel suffered from bad pacing, lack of character development, and moments that simply didn't make sense! I am terrified they will completely miss the mark with Diana's appearance in Batman & Superman, which will be the death sentence for any Wonder Woman movie in the works.
JOY: Gal has actual military experience! I love this! My sister joined the US Army a few years ago, and even her weeks of boot camp gave her an impressive amount of training. Israel is the only country in the world where service is compulsory for both women and men, and two years of military service in the Israeli Defense Force is nothing to sneeze at. Women can be assigned to infantry combat service and be directly in the line of fire. Even if Gal didn't experience that, Israel is far from a peaceful place and the training would have prepared her for all possibilities. She has been closer to real combat than most action stars in Hollywood.
FEAR: Gal isn't built like Wonder Woman.
Yes, I'll admit that this is a bit shallow, but Wonder Woman's physique is part of what drew me to her as a child. I was always one of the tallest kids in my class. Combine that with my athletic build from years of competitive swimming and the rude comments prepubescent boys made, I could often feel out of place. Wonder Woman helped young Kimi deal with that. She showed me that a woman could be physically imposing, while still being feminine! While there is certainly a lot of depth to Wonder Woman, her physical build shouldn't be ignored. I hope Gal hits the gym.
JOY: Zack Snyder's movies look cool.
There is no disputing that Zack Snyder has great style. Man of Steel and Watchmen were visually stunning interpretations of comic publications. Most importantly, 300 proved that a movie based on ancient stories/myths (like Wonder Woman herself) could succeed and be accepted by the modern audience.
FEAR: Zack Snyder sucks at creating good female characters.
This is the director who HONESTLY thought Sucker Punch was a story of female empowerment. That's right, the movie about girl who is trapped in an insane asylum and repeatedly raped, but mentally escapes to a fantasy world where she is a sex slave, who mentally escapes to another fantasy world where she is a scantily clad fighter trying to find random objects, but in reality, she just gets lobotomized in the real world and stays a victim. Wow. Way to empower women Zack. Create a Russian nesting doll of victimization and assault for your female characters on all levels of their psyche. While I have no doubt that Mr. Snyder will make fight scenes that will be worthy of Wonder Woman (just look at Faora in Man of Steel), I believe he is utterly incapable of capturing her character and motivations.
When it comes right down to it, the actress is not my biggest worry with Wonder Woman appearing on film. I'm much more concerned about the writers, and the director. That being said, I'm trying not to judge too harshly until there is something to be judged. I can't wait to see the costume they come up with... or can I?
The new trailer for The Hobbitmovie was released last week, just in time for the 75th anniversary of The Hobbit. I'm currently reading the book with my middle school English classes, so I've been spending even more time than usual contemplating Middle Earth. We just finished the "Riddles in the Dark" chapter, and the kids are loving it. The first trailer was wonderful and the dwarven music gave me goosebumps. This time, I was only left with worry lines in my forehead. Maybe it's my students' new-found delight in these characters as they are written, or perhaps it is just that the story is so fresh in my mind, but the trailer seemed to stray from the book a bit too much for my liking.
While The Hobbit is a much more lighthearted book than The Lord of the Rings, it worries me that some of the scenes with the dwarves seem to be inspired by The Three Stooges. They are the principle heroes in The Hobbit, and I really hope they are treated with the respect they deserve. It's bad enough that Gimli ended up being comic relief for much of the trilogy, do all the dwarves have to be goofy? It seems that only Thorin is treated with any respect. These are capable warriors from a noble race of artisans, and while there should be comedic moments in The Hobbit, they shouldn't simply be comic relief.
Another thing that is worrying me is the amount of obvious CGI in the trailer. I realize that it was a hug part of the LOTR movies too, but when combined with miniatures it was usually very seamless (other than a few very annoying green screen shots). Some of the shots in both trailers look very fake. The one moment that made me cringe in the first trailer was when Bilbo held up Sting, and it was very obviously a CGI sword instead of a real one. Perhaps they are not finalized effects yet, or maybe they will look better when they are all in context. A girl can hope, right?
The amount of content that has been added has always been something I was worried about. There were a lot of scenes that seemed to be drastically different than the book, or flat out created for the movie in spite of the book. I realize that some adjustments have to be made when a book is brought to life on film, but I've been nervous since I heard they were going to turn it into three movies. They brought all three books of The Lord of the Rings to life in three movies. Why are they taking three movies to recreate The Hobbit when it's only one book and a more simple story?
I'm holding out hope and reminding myself of a bit of wisdom from the man himself. "Do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement. For even the very wise cannot see all ends.” ― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Fellowship of the Ring
The Hobbit is one of the most anticipated movies of all time. After the bar was set so high by the Lord of the Rings trilogy (except for the horrific abomination that is the battle of Helm's Deep... don't get me started) Tolkien fans are champing at the bit to see how this big-budget prequel turns out. With an amazing cast and proven source material, how could it fail? The answer may be held in a fraction of a second.
As all followers of The Hobbit movie know, Peter Jackson is pushing the film to be viewed in 48 frames per second. What does this mean? Well normal movies and TV shows are shown at 24 frames per second and our minds naturally fill in the missing bits. We don't even realize that it's happening. However, soap operas, home movies, and other videos are shot at 30 frames per second. This is why you can instantly tell a soap opera or reality TV show from other programs just by looking at it for a few seconds. In general, our minds link video and high frame rates to low budget programs. Despite Peter Jackson's assurance that it will revolutionize movies, many fans are worried about him using The Hobbit as a guinea pig.
Jackson has been praising the new frame rate for months, claiming that it was "more attractive" and "more lifelike." He sings its praises and never fails to mention how it will improve the 3D experience for movie goers (how thrilling..not). In April, Jackson and Warner Bros debuted about 10 minutes of footage at CinemaCon. This footage was shown at 48 frames per second and was met with a resounding "Ugh" by pretty much everyone in attendance. The consensus seems to be that it looked TOO real. It looked like a home movie and wasn't "cinematic" enough. The level of detail and realism distracted people from the movie rather than adding to the experience. Even directors like Chris Nolan and Neill Blomkamp (considered by many to be Peter Jackson's protege) have gone on the record as hating footage shot in 48 frames per second.
Last week at San Diego Comic-Con, Jackson debuted twelve minutes of footage at The Hobbit panel. (No, I didn't wait in the ten hour line to see it in person, I had too much cosplay stuff planned this year and am uncomfortable sleeping overnight on public sidewalks.) This time the footage was shown at 24 frames per second and the crowed went crazy for it! Peter Jackson stated, "With our 48 frames per second presentation, negative bloggers are the ones the mainstream press runs with and quotes from. I decided to screen the Hobbit reel at Comic-Con in 2-D and 24 frames per second, so the focus stays firmly with the content and not the technical stuff. If people want 3-D and 48fps, that choice will be there for them in December."
Interesting. So now the big question, was it the frame rate or the people in the audience that made the difference? Would the CinemaCon critics have found problems with the unfinished footage no matter what? Would the hardcore Tolkien freaks have loved anything they were shown at ComicCon after being in the hot sun for 8+ hours, regardless of the frame rate? Just like 3D it will be a matter of personal taste. Jackson claims that 48 fps is the future and that once we get used to seeing such crisp, clear footage we will never want to watch 24 fps movies again.
Maybe Middle Earth is the perfect place to show at a higher frame rate, and I'm sure many fans (myself included) will see it both ways. We'll see how it goes. I have a Quenya-to-English dictionary on my desktop and have Elvish baby names picked out for my future children, but I seriously doubt that even Tolkien can make me like 3D.
I am filled with bitter nerd-rage after seeing Justice League. Not because it was bad, but because for a few brief moments, it was so good. We finally got a glimpse of what the DC movies should have been from the beginning and Henry Cavill FINALLY GOT TO BE THE REAL SUPERMAN! (Unless you live under a rock, that isn't a spoiler) But Justice League was so weighed down by course correcting its cinematic universe that it couldn't reach its full potential. It's a promising house built on the sand foundation of Man of Steel and Batman v Superman.
The biggest problem with Justice League is its split personality. The accepted rumor in Hollywood is that Zach's original vision for the film was terrible and Joss Whedon was brought in to "help fix it". This is why he was already a part of the team when Snyder had to leave the project a while later, due to a tragedy in his family. Joss did a massive amount of reshoots and a lot of the new footage is obvious. The huge amount of trailer footage that ISN'T in the movie hints at how much the vision for the movie has changed in recent months. The final product feels like a filler issue between two big comic book story arcs. Its whole job is to be fun and set up the next story and in that, Justice League met its goal. It has a simple bad guy with predictable motivations, convenient plot devices to keep things moving in the expected direction, Krypton-sized plot holes, and lots of middling quality CGI. There are an overabundance of one-line jokes, but the humor is a big enough step in the right direction that many fans will forgive many large problems with the movie because of its lighter tone. There were some really great moments. There were also some real WTF moments? (No spoilers, but one of those moments is when The Flash and Cyborg are digging together. You will know the moment when you see it. Seriously, W.... T.... F???) Overall, I enjoyed the movie and was grateful for the change in tone. I think that if the project had changed hands sooner we would have ended up with a much better movie, but at least we got something fun.
Justice League also has a women problem. Yes, many of the Amazons wear bikinis in their scenes, both modern day and ancient. No, angry fanboys of the internet, there is no logical explanation for their vital organs being exposed. However the issue doesn't stop at a troubling selection of costumes. After the revolutionary screen treatment of women in Wonder Woman, the repeated use of Wonder Woman/Diana's butt to help frame shots in Justice League is obvious and awkward. Her teammates reference her physical appearance repeatedly which makes it feel like the Justice League's next acquisition should be an HR department. It's all jokes that we have seen in other movies and comments that women hear all the time in our daily lives, but that doesn't excuse it. For a movie short on screen time for female characters, it's troubling that the production team decided to spend so much of it focused on Wonder Woman's "assets." Maybe this was acceptable in a pre-Wonder Woman superhero film, but we now know that we can and should expect more, especially in a movie that takes place in the same universe. (I talk more about Wonder Woman's depiction in the movie below in the spoiler section.)
Batman
shave off time or CGI costs. I really hope that we get to focus more on him if there are future Justice League films or if an extended cut of this movie is released.
Mera
Superman
Patty Jenkins did what so many others said was impossible. She brought Wonder Woman to life in a way that will please comic purists and general movie-goers alike. It has everything that the other DC movies lacked: color, genuine humor, and most importantly, appropriate pacing that gives us time to form emotional connections to the main characters. I have no idea how she managed to herd all the cats at Warner Bros into doing things her way, but I will be eternally grateful to her. She managed to make a super hero movie that is action packed but has a distinctly feminine tone to fit with a female protagonist. AND it somehow still makes sense in the dumpster fire of a cinematic universe that Snyder created. Miracles CAN HAPPEN!
Gal Gadot knocked it out of the park as Wonder Woman. She does an excellent job of contrasting Diana's vast ancient Amazonian knowledge with her naiveté of man's world. She stays true to the character's comic book roots by caring deeply for others, while also being an incredibly kickass fighter. We follow her as she discovers the extent of her own powers, cheering for her successes and mourning her losses. I'll admit I had serious reservations about Gal when she was first cast. Her un-athletic body type and lack of acting credits worried me (getting your ass groped in Fast and the Furious isn't exactly confidence inspiring) but her Diana is charming, relatable and strong.
The Amazons are one of the highlights of the film. They are pulled directly from the pages of George Perez's Wonder Woman run, which should make a lot of purists very happy. Through excellent costume design, on-location shoots, and casting scores of real athletes, the production team creates a vivid culture that sets the tone for Wonder Woman's personality throughout the film. Hippolyta (Connie Neilson) is a wonderful mother to Diana and magnificent Queen of the Amazons, but Wonder Woman's badass aunt, General Antiope (Robin Wright), is sure to be the fan favorite. The action sequences with the Amazonian army are incredible, with some of the best fight choreography and horsemanship I have seen in recent years. I got goosebumps watching an army of incredible, multi-ethnic female fighters in action. You will too.
inspires Diana to join in the fight. I haven't been a big fan of his before, but he does a great job in Wonder Woman. The rag-tag bunch of fighters he assembles to help them win the war are less compelling. They are multiracial, which is great, but they are mostly two dimensional and not always very well acted. There are a lot of set ups without much payoff, leaving us with the feeling that some of their story was cut on the editing room floor. Lucy Davis plays Etta Candy, an often forgotten character from early Wonder Woman comics, and is a fun addition to the film, although their shopping sequence is a bit drawn out. She is a stark contrast to the Amazons, but a welcome female presence in the male dominated culture of man's world.
are still some really great moments in there that show Diana's true character.
Wonder Woman starts with an unnecessary modern day intro, which unfortunately reminds us of its ties to Batman v Superman, but the real movie starts on Themyscira. We follow Diana as she grows from an overprotected child-princess into a trained warrior with an idealized view of combat. Young Diana (Lilly Aspell) is delightful, with witty lines and impressive horsemanship. Jenkins takes the time to develop the Amazons and their relationships with each other. Their battle on the beach is a sand and sandals action sequence on the scale of any in 300. Watching the Amazons triumph over their invaders is amazing, but it is also heartbreaking to watch them discover the deadly power of guns and General Antiope, one of the best characters in the film, is killed. In these moments we watch Diana learn the harsh realities of war, and the horror of it starts her on the path to man’s world. Some critics are calling this portion of the movie a “slog of a backstory,” but from a storytelling perspective it lays the foundation of Wonder Woman’s character for the rest of the film. I think this was time well spent and it is my favorite section of the movie. (Considering that the trailers for Justice League have shots of the Amazons in battle, I think it’s probably setting the stage for a lot more than just this movie too!)
Unlike Lois Lane and Superman in recent DCEU films, Diana and Steve Trevor have a surprisingly balanced relationship. When they first meet on Themyscira, he is the charming "fish out of water" who is completely ignorant of Amazon society. However, when they travel to man's world the roles are reversed and Diana is the one forced to navigate a completely foreign culture. They learn from the each other and it becomes clear that each has their own strengths. Diana is in a different league as far as her fighting skills and education, but Steve uses his street smarts and connections to help her reach her goals. The best thing about their romance is that it takes a back seat to Diana's larger mission. Their connection helps Diana learn to understand the nature of mankind, but their romantic moments are just sprinkled in between larger events. Both characters are motivated by their drive to end the war, not their budding feelings for each other. It's a huge relief that Wonder Woman avoids the trap of becoming a story about their romance. Steve plays his part, but it stays Diana's story.
The movie does suffer from being predictable. Anyone who knows classic comic book or movie formulas will guess what is happening pretty quickly. Dr. "Poison" Maru (Elena Anaya) is under utilized. The movie tries to set up General Ludendorff (Danny Huston) as Ares, the Greek god of war and Diana’s ultimate foe, but the minute we see David Thewlis as Sir Patrick we guess that there is more to him than meets the eye. It is revealed that he is actually Ares and the climactic battle that ensues is the least inspired part of the film. They move away from the acrobatic method of combat that Wonder Woman uses through the rest of the film into a Batman v Superman style big blast battle that levels everything around them. It's a little desensitizing and there are a few points where I wonder if keeping stuffy Sir Patrick's face and mustache on the God of War was a good creative choice. There is also a fair amount of monologue-ing as Ares tells Diana that she is a young god/demi-god (which finally explains New 52 style electronic blasts that we see her use) and that Zeus created her to defeat Ares. (WHY WOULD YOU TELL HER THAT? DUMB SUPER VILLAIN!) It is an interesting tweak to the reason that Zeus brought her to life, and also explains why Hippolyta was so worried about her becoming a warrior. I like these details, but wish they’d been revealed in a more elegant way.
The most interesting thing about this fight was that we see Diana finally let loose. It is awe-inspiring and a little terrifying. She momentarily gives up on humanity out of sorrow and anger, and her feelings are understandable. Jenkins does a superb job of setting this up throughout the movie. The gradual creep from losing her aunt Antiope and other amazons on the beach in Themyscira (possibly the first deaths she has seen since the amazons are immortal), to her seeing the horrors of trench warfare and the deaths of innocent people at the hands of modern weapons, and finally the loss of Steve Trevor all takes its toll on her. We understand Diana’s fury and frustration and the devastation of WWI is the perfect backdrop for it. As an audience, it is especially tragic because we know that Ares’ comments about humanity ring true. The “War to End All Wars” is really the birthplace of modern combat techniques and weaponry. These factors make it all the more inspiring and uplifting when Diana overcomes the trauma and, because of the wisdom and love she has gained from her time with humanity, turns on Ares and defeats him.
With Diana’s comments about “walking away from the world” in Batman v Superman, I was very worried that this movie would end with Diana giving up, but the movie ends on a note of hope. The war is over and people are celebrating in the streets. Diana has suffered many losses, but she loves humanity and has not lost her belief that they can learn to be better than they are. The last real shot of the story shows Diana FLYING to the rescue as the world’s first superhero. She has discovered her purpose, grown into her powers, and will continue to protect humanity. It’s really amazing and it was one of many points in the film where I teared up because my inner geek-girl was so happy…
Water. Pretty blue water… and then we see Themyscira, a.k.a. Paradise Island. They have completely nailed the look and feel of Wonder Woman’s island home, with Greek-inspired architecture and a majestic natural beauty. White peacocks roam the island, a symbol for the Greek goddess Hera who is a patron of the Amazons in many of the Wonder Woman comics. We see a few shots of the city that really give it scope and depth. It should also be noted that the footage on Themyscira is bright, with rich natural colors, a striking contrast to the dark look of DC's movies so far. Hippolyta’s (Wonder Woman’s mother) voice over speaks of the “many gifts” the gods have given them, implying that the whole island is a gift, and hinting at the Amazon’s backstory. It also segues perfectly into…
Hippoyta shows Diana a collection of guarded weapons from the gods, focusing on a sword with which young Diana is immediately obsessed. It’s unclear if this is a cannon weapon from the DC Universe or something created just for the movie-verse. Many reports call it the God Killer, which matches the name of a sword from Deathstroke's comics that was forged by Hephaestus (paving the way for some possible interaction between Wonder Woman and Deathstroke in future films?) however Wonder Woman never had that sword in the comics. I think a better bet is the sword that Wonder Woman wields in Kingdom Come. That sword was also a gift from Hephaestus and is famous for being sharp enough to split atoms and make Superman bleed. It’s a god-killer sword, not THE God Killer sword.
powerful foes on the planet. Also, in some runs of the comic, once Diana leaves Themyscira she is not allowed to return, thus forever separating her from everything she has ever known. Why would Hippolyta want that for her daughter? In almost every version of Wonder Woman’s origin story, Hippolyta is proud of her daughter but also heartbroken that she will not live a peaceful life on Themyscira. Hippolyta is NOT A BAD MOTHER!
wisted that story into a lie told by Hippolyta to cover up an affair she had with the god Zeus. As an illegitimate demi-god, Diana takes after her father and has electric powers that she can’t quite control. Her magical bracers block her electric powers so she can function normally. The movie seems to have gone with that power set, although there is no saying what that means for her creation story. Personally, I’m really hoping they stick with the clay version of their origins.
Cut to Hippolyta’s throne room (is this Steve’s trial for trespassing?) and then to Steve in a dark cave (prison cell?) with Diana explaining to him about the Amazon’s mission to defend the world. This has confused people, because how are they supposed to defend the world if they never leave their island? Well, in many of the comics, Themysira is where the gods placed the entrance to the underworld. The Amazons sacred duty is to protect that gateway. Is that what that line is referring to?
1:15
We get a final glimpse of Diana trying to get through a rotating door with her shield and sword, then snarky comments about the sword not going with her outfit. It’s a cute bit, but is desperately designed to show that there are lighthearted moments in the film. Personally, I hope that the movie's humor doesn’t just consist of jokes about how Diana isn't “girly."
The Lex from Batman v Superman is actually more like Lex, Jr. from the comics. He didn't build Lex Corp, and is lacking the serious businessman attitude that we are used to seeing in more traditional renditions of this infamous villain. Oh, and he has hair. The character actually works as a young, socially awkward tech-billionaire, but Snyder sacrifices the genius that makes the comic book character worthy of being Superman's nemesis in favor of more CGI and slo-mo. NOTHING ABOUT LEX'S PLANS MAKE SENSE! He is king of the plot holes. He kills a Senator because she is going to block the importation of Kryptonite, but his secret ship with the rock is already docked so it wouldn't have impacted his plans at all. He blows up a hearing that was going to impose sanctions AGAINST Superman (wouldn't Lex want that?) because Snyder thought it would be cool to watch a room of innocent people burn up around Superman. Finally, we get to the big master plan: trick Batman into killing Superman. Considering nobody has actually tested Kryptonite against Superman yet, this seems like a really bad plan. Plan B is even worse because Lex turns General Zod's body into one of the cave trolls from Lord of the Rings to kill Superman, just in case Batman fails. WHAT IF BATMAN HAD WON?? We'd have a mindless cave troll, sorry, DOOMSDAY on the loose and Superman would already be dead. Or what if Doomsday had succeeded in killing Superman and then was unstoppable and destroyed everything? Bad plan, Lex.
Batman
I am pretty pleased with Wonder Woman's appearance in Batman v Superman. She looks great and wasn't in it enough for Snyder to ruin. We don't really get any character development or backstory for her, but I'm thrilled that they are leaving that to the Wonder Woman movie and Patty Jenkins. It seems that some important elements of her traditional comic book persona are intact. She goes by the name Diana Prince and is immortal (or at least doesn't age) since we see pictures of her from World War I. We see her kick some serious ass in the fight with Doomsday, and it seems her bracelets deflect even the most powerful of blows, and SHE HAS A GLOWING GOLD LASSO that she uses effectively in battle. Considering how little Batman does in the fight, and how much time Superman spent talking to Lois Lane, I think it's safe to say that Wonder Woman was the MVP of that beat down.
"Shoehorned" doesn't quite cover how forced and clunky the addition of other Justice League characters was in Batman v Superman. Batman emails Wonder Woman the files of super-humans that he stole from Lex Luthor's files. We then cut to shots of Wonder Woman READING that email line by line (what??) and then opening each file. I'd like to point out that each file is labeled with the logo of its corresponding Justice League member. (I guess Lex designed their logos? Did he design their costumes too?) She opens each file and views footage worthy of any made for Syfy movie. Seriously. The scene of Cyborg's creation looks like a badly made TV show, not like laboratory footage like they intended. Aquaman's debut was awkward for the audience and the actor alike. He looked so uncomfortable underwater that it made us feel uncomfortable to watch him. Seriously pathetic. Flash's security camera footage wasn't too bad, but his crazy time-travel appearance in Batman's dream-within-a-dream (screw you Snyder) confused everyone and had NOTHING TO DO WITH ANY PLOT POINTS. He warns Batman to save Lois Lane but there are no points where this warning seems to matter after that. I guess maybe they are hinting at Batman being able to tell the future? No clue. Even with decades of comic book knowledge at my disposal I found this confusing.
Zack Snyder is the master of cool visual effects and slow motion. He is also the king of badly developed characters, plot holes and wasted screen time. I think that it's ok for DC's movies to have a gritty, real-world feel. They don't need to copy Marvel's light-hearted formula, but they do need to make sense! I'm fine with seeing Batman and Superman deal with the consequences of vigilantism politically and in their personal lives, but we have to care about the characters for any of that to matter. The audience has to see more than bad ass CGI action to become involved in the story emotionally, and this is where Snyder has failed. He tried to stuff too much into this movie, which made it all meaningless because there wasn't enough time spent on anything for us to become invested.
The official announcement of Wonder Woman's solo movie was a horribly anticlimactic moment for fans around the world. Warner Bros. released a list of ten upcoming DC titles, and Wonder Woman just happened to be on that list. No press event. No formal announcement at NYCC, which was only a few days prior. The world's most well-known female comic book hero and universal symbol for female empowerment had her movie announced in a list that included Shazam and the Suicide Squad. No offense to them, but they don't really belong on the same billing as Wonder Woman. Needless to say, I was seriously concerned for the fate of the Amazon Princess on screen and so disappointed I couldn't even bring myself to blog about it.
Is it because Michelle is a woman? Absolutely not. I honestly don't think that gender can foretell how a writer or director will bring a character to life. There have been many male writers who have perfectly captured Diana on the page. George Perez is responsible for rebooting Wonder Woman and bringing her into the modern age of comics. Without his run, I don't think the Amazon Princess would have stayed relevant in the genre. Greg Rucka also springs to mind. I love his take on Diana and his graphic novel The Hiketeia is one of my favorite Wonder Woman titles. Most recently, Brian Azzarello rebooted Diana again for the New 52. Although his changes were controversial, his Wonder Woman was powerful, intelligent, and ground breaking. He brought Diana out of the shadows and made Wonder Woman one of the most successful titles in DC's new lineup. However, all good things must come to an end. The current FEMALE writer of Wonder Woman, Meredith Finch, is already drawing criticism for her rendition of Diana only one issue into her run. It's about respecting and understanding the character, not what reproductive organs the writer has.
Michelle is a very talented director with a knack for crafting impressive action sequences. She is best known for her directorial work on Game of Thrones, Breaking Bad, and The Walking Dead. Very few directors can bring the graphic sword fights of Game of Thrones to life and also create well-done shoot outs for Breaking Bad. THIS IS INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT! She has successfully navigated the fantasy/historical realm and the modern setting, both of which are necessary to bring Diana to life on the big screen. I think this makes Michelle uniquely qualified to take on the Amazon Princess, who must straddle the ancient traditions of Themyscria and the mean streets of man's world in the same film.
empowerment for decades, and it is vital that she is depicted as such in the movies. This is another area where Michelle shines. She has directed the female characters on Game of Thrones, The Walking Dead, and X-files, all of which are unique individuals with complex motivations. Any director who can capture the spirit of Arya Stark, the noble warrior nature of Brienne of Tarth, and the intelligence of Dana Scully has the potential to hit Wonder Woman out of the park.
Captain America style, when not in use.
Leaving her origins vague may mean that they are planning on giving her a solo movie later to explain things, but I'm guessing it's due more to pacing and trying to keep the movie shorter than Gone with the Wind. They are introducing A LOT of heroes in this movie. It initially focused on Superman and Batman, but now the confirmed cast includes Wonder Woman, Lex Luthor, Cyborg, Aquaman, and possibly even Nightwing. That's a lot of explaining to do if they are even going to briefly touch on everyone's origin stories, and introducing that many characters in a film will cut drastically into the screen time of any individual character. This makes me nervous, because I want Diana to get the screen time she deserves as part of DC's trinity.
It has finally happened. Wonder Woman is going to appear in a major motion picture. Gal Gadot wasn't on my short list for the part. She wasn't even on my long list for the part. To be honest, she hadn't crossed my mind at all. I was hoping for Lynn Collins, who screamed Wonder Woman with her performance in John Carter. Lynn has the look and the acting chops to bring Diana to life, despite the fact that she'd need an apple box and some movie magic to make her appear taller. In contrast, I really don't know anything about Gal except how she looks physically, because she's never been in anything that required much acting.
obviously have a good eye for this, so maybe Gal will knock it out of the park.
is compulsory for both women and men, and two years of military service in the Israeli Defense Force is nothing to sneeze at. Women can be assigned to infantry combat service and be directly in the line of fire. Even if Gal didn't experience that, Israel is far from a peaceful place and the training would have prepared her for all possibilities. She has been closer to real combat than most action stars in Hollywood.
on ancient stories/myths (like Wonder Woman herself) could succeed and be accepted by the modern audience.
The new trailer for The Hobbit movie was released last week, just in time for the 75th anniversary of The Hobbit. I'm currently reading the book with my middle school English classes, so I've been spending even more time than usual contemplating Middle Earth. We just finished the "Riddles in the Dark" chapter, and the kids are loving it. The first trailer was wonderful and the dwarven music gave me goosebumps. This time, I was only left with worry lines in my forehead. Maybe it's my students' new-found delight in these characters as they are written, or perhaps it is just that the story is so fresh in my mind, but the trailer seemed to stray from the book a bit too much for my liking.
While The Hobbit is a much more lighthearted book than The Lord of the Rings, it worries me that some of the scenes with the dwarves seem to be inspired by The Three Stooges. They are the principle heroes in The Hobbit, and I really hope they are treated with the respect they deserve. It's bad enough that Gimli ended up being comic relief for much of the trilogy, do all the dwarves have to be goofy? It seems that only Thorin is treated with any respect. These are capable warriors from a noble race of artisans, and while there should be comedic moments in The Hobbit, they shouldn't simply be comic relief.
Another thing that is worrying me is the amount of obvious CGI in the trailer. I realize that it was a hug part of the LOTR movies too, but when combined with miniatures it was usually very seamless (other than a few very annoying green screen shots). Some of the shots in both trailers look very fake. The one moment that made me cringe in the first trailer was when Bilbo held up Sting, and it was very obviously a CGI sword instead of a real one. Perhaps they are not finalized effects yet, or maybe they will look better when they are all in context. A girl can hope, right?
The Hobbit is one of the most anticipated movies of all time. After the bar was set so high by the Lord of the Rings trilogy (except for the horrific abomination that is the battle of Helm's Deep... don't get me started) Tolkien fans are champing at the bit to see how this big-budget prequel turns out. With an amazing cast and proven source material, how could it fail? The answer may be held in a fraction of a second.
and other videos are shot at 30 frames per second. This is why you can instantly tell a soap opera or reality TV show from other programs just by looking at it for a few seconds. In general, our minds link video and high frame rates to low budget programs. Despite Peter Jackson's assurance that it will revolutionize movies, many fans are worried about him using The Hobbit as a guinea pig.