Ww84

[Lemmy]

I highly doubt it.

And I hope we never have to find out.

[Peelee]

I highly doubt it.

I mean, I'm interpreting "forgiving" in sarcastic air quotes here, since a huge portion of this thread has been harping on it and a large number of articles have been written about your precise complaints here.

[Keltest]

I mean, I'm interpreting "forgiving" in sarcastic air quotes here, since a huge portion of this thread has been harping on it and a large number of articles have been written about your precise complaints here.

I honestly cannot remember having a conversation or reading a review where the main takeaway wasnt mostly "Hey, WW basically rapes a guy and the movie doesnt even touch on it."

[Dr.Samurai]

The fact that they don't even bring it up, and in fact barely acknowledge the rights and well being of "handsome guy" just makes it much, much worse.

Sure. But not as bad as say... Steve telling her explicitly how the wish works "this man can see and hear everything, but can never wrest control from me, a prisoner in his own body, forced only to witness how I choose to live his former life, until he is eventually driven mad and his soul withers away..." and Diana saying "I don't care about any of that, it is a small price to pay for the two of us to be together..."

The movie doesn't say that, even though Diana's indifference to the situation is sort of implied. They mostly treat it as a quirk and for a few laughs. But the movie is not saying "yes, this is magical rape and Diana doesn't care, she actually enjoys it!". So, for me, it's a really stupid part of the movie that detracts from the movie, but it's not something to be outraged over (not saying that you're outraged, just explaining why I think the meta reasons for making this choice, and the way the movie treats it, says to me that this isn't a commentary on Diana's behavior towards consent).

If it were the other way around... With Superman having sex with a random woman possessed by Lois Lane, do you think people would be nearly as forgiving?

I'm inclined to agree with Peelee here, in the sense that this is being called out by everyone, so it's not really going over smoothly or getting glossed over.

However, I do think you're also right. The call outs seem to me to be more of a "hey did you even realize the implications of that wish, movie goer?" I think the difference is that if it were Superman, not only would we be having these conversations, but we'd also get all the vapid social commentary about certain groups and their toxic behavior towards others.





That group being Kryptonians, of course.

[CharonsHelper]

Comic book movies often try to introduce two (or three) villains from the Rogue's Gallery. They try to tell multiple origin stories and show the villains working independently of one another while also trying to give the superhero character conflict. The result is usually a mess, and the only one I can think of that did it well is The Dark Knight.

Despite having two villains around (3 if you count Scarecrow being in the very beginning), The Dark Knight didn't even really do that at all. They showed The Joker, but they pretty much glossed over his origin. And both Two Face's origin and the stuff he got up to were tied to The Joker, with his murders fitting nicely into the montage of Joker's crime spree.

[Lemmy]

I honestly don't see how the movie treating it as a joke or as "just a quirk" is any better...

And, sure, it isn't going smoothly... But it's nowhere near the outrage we'd see if it were Superman & Lois Lane. It certianly wouldn't be called "just areally stupid part of the movie that detracts from the movie, but not something to be outraged over", even though I agree with this sentiment (this is just one (particularly bad) reason the movie is awful).

But I really do hope we never have confirmation one way or another.

[Peelee]

I honestly don't see how the movie treating it as a joke or as "just a quirk" is any better...

And neither does almost anyone else. That is the point being made here. Congratulations, like, everyone is already agreeing with you on this.

And, sure, it isn't going smoothly... But it's nowhere near the outrage we'd see if it were Superman & Lois Lane.

Id rather be concerned about a real problem than the imagined reaction to a hypothetical one. And hey, it seems like most people are. Mission accomplished!

[Lemmy]

And neither does almost anyone else. That is the point being made here. Congratulations, like, everyone is already agreeing with you on this.

Id rather be concerned about a real problem than the imagined reaction to a hypothetical one. And hey, it seems like most people are. Mission accomplished!

Fortunately, I can agree and also point out double standards and hipocrisy in the way the movie is being generally treated.

EDIT: I mean by general media and reviewers... Not anyone here.

[Peelee]

Fortunately, I can agree and also point out double standards and hipocrisy in the way the movie is being generally treated.

What double standard?! The movie is being condemned for this.

[Lemmy]

What double standard?! The movie is being condemned for this.

Yup... Allthough nowhere near as badly as it would be if it were the other way around.

To be clear, I actually agree with the idea that it's just a really dumb aspect of a really dumb movie (that would still be bad even without said aspect). Not something to be super outraged about.

I just think the difference in treatment is... Worth noting. Oh, well.. I don't want to hijack the thread with that particular discussion, anyway. Just wanted to comment on it. And I did.

In any case... WW1 was decent (impressive, considering everything else DC was releasing at the time)... WW2 is garbage... So, by the law of averages... WW3 gotta be great, right?

[Peelee]

Yup... Allthough nowhere near as badly as it would be if it were the other way around.

You keep saying this without any justification or reasoning.

Let me put it this way - person A commits a crime. Person A is convicted and sentenced to the death penalty. You are complaining that if Person B committed that crime they would have gotten the death penalty but even harder, and you are upset by this "double standard" of person A just getting off light with the death penalty.

I don't know why you want to die on this hill, but at this point if you are still insistent, be my guest.

[Lemmy]

You keep saying this without any justification or reasoning.

Let me put it this way - person A commits a crime. Person A is convicted and sentenced to the death penalty. You are complaining that if Person B committed that crime they would have gotten the death penalty but even harder, and you are upset by this "double standard" of person A just getting off light with the death penalty.

I don't know why you want to die on this hill, but at this point if you are still insistent, be my guest.

More like... One gets the death penalty, the other gets.... A fine and a few months in jail.

I don't really want to "die on this hill". I just thought it was worthing pointing out... So I did.

[LaZodiac]

Y'all really just forgetting Superman erased Louis Lane's memory with a kiss, meaning she was sexually advanced on without her knowledge, and no one cared huh.

Now yes in modern times, now that we're aware of how dumb and bad that is, we point to that and go "hey that's ****ed up, especially since for Superman Returns they decided to make it so that she got pregnant at that moment in time, making it SUPER gross and rapey".

Look, I get it. You wanna that if Superman did what Diana did it would be "more bashed" due to some beliefs about what it means to be a good person. We all get it, we're not stupid. You've more than made your point clear.

Peelee disagrees, as do most of us, partly because Wonder Woman 84 is getting (rightly) trashed for this aspect in particular. If you don't want to die on this hill, I'd suggest... getting off the hill, maybe?

[Dr.Samurai]

I think the point Lemmy is making is that the condemnation would be of a different fervor and tenor if it were Superman. And yes, this is speculation. I happen to think he is right. But no way to know and the point has been made so we can move on.

I am not very familiar with Wonder Woman's rogues gallery. What villains would fans like to see in a third movie? Also, did people like the portrayal of Maxwell Lord in this movie? I think in the comics he is a powerful telepath right? And I think WW ends up killing him. This ended in basically the opposite fashion. Thoughts?

[LaZodiac]

I think the point Lemmy is making is that the condemnation would be of a different fervor and tenor if it were Superman. And yes, this is speculation. I happen to think he is right. But no way to know and the point has been made so we can move on.

I am not very familiar with Wonder Woman's rogues gallery. What villains would fans like to see in a third movie? Also, did people like the portrayal of Maxwell Lord in this movie? I think in the comics he is a powerful telepath right? And I think WW ends up killing him. This ended in basically the opposite fashion. Thoughts?

Maxwell Lord is, by my understanding, basically just her Lex Luthor. He's a brain boy who is smart and does crimes with minions. She killed him during a comic book event where it was revealed he'd do a really bad thing or whatever.

Honestly, I don't know TOO much about Diana's rogues gallery, but most of them seem really... silly, in a way that would be hard to translate to the big screen. I could see her tackling other gods but then that's not really a super hero movie, necessarily. Honestly, having her second film (as flawed as it is) be about a theme and not caring about the big super drama or whatever, may actually be the best for her. Diana is all about being an icon of inspiration and guidance, the Amazons in setting are supposed to do that, so having her fight less dramatic, maybe even silly villains in order to bring forward a valuable lesson is a good idea.

[Lemmy]

I am not very familiar with Wonder Woman's rogues gallery. What villains would fans like to see in a third movie? Also, did people like the portrayal of Maxwell Lord in this movie? I think in the comics he is a powerful telepath right? And I think WW ends up killing him. This ended in basically the opposite fashion. Thoughts?

I don't think she has any memorable villains, TBH...

I can think of Ares, Cheetah and Giganta... Circe, maybe? Sometimes one rogue Amazon or another...

Maxwell Lord was more of a JL villain that WW ended up killing... Although he may have grown to be more closely associated with WW since then, I don't know.

A very common mistake super-hero movies make is using their top villain in the fist movie, so they end up with nothing of the same "weight class" left to use later. It's particularly bad when the hero only has a few well-known villains.

[dancrilis]

I don't know if the critique that Superman would be more harshly treated holds up.

For examples:
In Man of Steel Superman destroys a truckers truck which likely has destroyed that man's livelihood because he didn't like how the guy acted in a bar.
In Captain Marvel* the title character apparently steals a guys bike because she didn't like him giving her some advice.

The second was treated my media as much worse then the first despite the first being I would say objectively much worse then the second.

*full disclosure I have not seen this movie so hopefully I am not misrepresentation it.

And that ignores the earlier examples indicated by LaZodiac above.

For the example itself from Wonder Woman 1984 - neither Steve or Diana knew what was going on, Steve justifiable treated the body he was in as his body, Diana after the initial meeting only saw Steve so treated him as Steve.
This is poor but I think the decision to gloss over it was likely for the best.

[Lemmy]

EDIT: Nevermind. No point in continuing this argument any further.

[LaZodiac]

I don't know if the critique that Superman would be more harshly treated holds up.

For examples:
In Man of Steel Superman destroys a truckers truck which likely has destroyed that man's livelihood because he didn't like how the guy acted in a bar.
In Captain Marvel* the title character apparently steals a guys bike because she didn't like him giving her some advice.

The second was treated my media as much worse then the first despite the first being I would say objectively much worse then the second.

*full disclosure I have not seen this movie so hopefully I am not misrepresentation it.

And that ignores the earlier examples indicated by LaZodiac above.

For the example itself from Wonder Woman 1984 - neither Steve or Diana knew what was going on, Steve justifiable treated the body he was in as his body, Diana after the initial meeting only saw Steve so treated him as Steve.
This is poor but I think the decision to gloss over it was likely for the best.

For discussions sake, the scene from Captain Marvel is a deleted scene (so not in the movie, and not valid, since they DID remove it) where she meets a biker who makes lewd, unwanted comments to her. She gives him a zap of energy and then takes his bike, Terminator style.

[Ramza00]

For discussions sake, the scene from Captain Marvel is a deleted scene (so not in the movie, and not valid, since they DID remove it) where she meets a biker who makes lewd, unwanted comments to her. She gives him a zap of energy and then takes his bike, Terminator style.

Also clearly a reference as a “homage” to other fish out of water movies such as the terminator 2 biker scene where the superpower person does horrible things to get someone else’s clothes and stuff. Vers is trying to figure things out, rude guy purposefully violates personal boundaries involving space, after violating said space he asks “you need a ride” in a way that is condescending (but he may think is charming), she takes his bike and clothes off a store mannequin.

It was a homage but also inverting that Terminator 2 scene for how people treat men and women are different. Furthermore it was much shorter the deleted scene being less than a minute vs 4 minutes of action.

[Willie the Duck]

For discussions sake, the scene from Captain Marvel is a deleted scene (so not in the movie, and not valid, since they DID remove it) where she meets a biker who makes lewd, unwanted comments to her. She gives him a zap of energy and then takes his bike, Terminator style.

Yep. Stuff gets left out of movies for a reason. If we use those, why not previous versions of the screenplays where such and such protagonist character started out as a villain, or the like?

It was a homage but also inverting that Terminator 2 scene for how people treat men and women are different. Furthermore it was much shorter the deleted scene being less than a minute vs 4 minutes of action.

It's also part of the story of T2 that the protagonist robot isn't really a good guy, so much as a amoral robot programmed to obey the good guys' orders. CM doesn't have the same framing, so it would have been a wildly out-of-character moment for the sake of an homage gag.

[GloatingSwine]

It's also part of the story of T2 that the protagonist robot isn't really a good guy, so much as a amoral robot programmed to obey the good guys' orders. CM doesn't have the same framing, so it would have been a wildly out-of-character moment for the sake of an homage gag.

It's also part of the story that Vers is not currently a good guy. It actually is in line with her presentation at the time as a Kree special forces soldier with little regard for the norms of the primitive planet she is currently stranded on.

[Willie the Duck]

It's also part of the story that Vers is not currently a good guy. It actually is in line with her presentation at the time as a Kree special forces soldier with little regard for the norms of the primitive planet she is currently stranded on.

Ah, good to know. I didn't know where in the movie this deleted scene was supposed to be.

[BloodSquirrel]

I don't know if the critique that Superman would be more harshly treated holds up.

For examples:
In Man of Steel Superman destroys a truckers truck which likely has destroyed that man's livelihood because he didn't like how the guy acted in a bar.
In Captain Marvel* the title character apparently steals a guys bike because she didn't like him giving her some advice.

The second was treated my media as much worse then the first despite the first being I would say objectively much worse then the second.

*full disclosure I have not seen this movie so hopefully I am not misrepresentation it.

First off, Man of Steel was pretty seriously savaged, with the running theme of "Superman isn't acting like Superman".

Second, the framing of the truck scene was entirely different. Clark is being presented as troubled and conflicted, and part of the movie's plot (and its sequels') is that Superman winds up looking to a lot of people like more of a potential threat than a hero. The Captain Marvel scene is framed as "empowering". The offender in the truck scene also goes much farther, actually pouring a beer over Clark's head and physically threatening him.

Third, Man of Steel ends with Superman killing someone, which became the lightning rod for most of that kind of discussion. Even if it was more morally justified than the truck scene, it was still breaking a rule that people consider to be one of Superman's defining traits, and people were pretty upset about it. This was also the movie where Pa Kent told Clark that he should have let a whole school bus full of his classmates drown to death, so stuff like the truck scene winds up looking a lot less disturbing by comparison.

I also don't think the T2 scene is comparable at all. Arnold isn't reacting to somebody being rude to him. He's 100% the aggressor. He walks into the bar and demands that somebody give him his clothing and his motorcycle. The guy he robs was just minding his own business before that. Yeah, the guy puts a cigar out on his chest, but he was just standing up to some crazy guy who was trying to extort him at that point. Also keep in mind that we weren't even supposed to know which robot was the "good" guy yet. The marketing gave it away, but right until the scene where he runs into John, for all we know he was planning on killing him.

EDIT: Just re-watched it, and, yeah, it's 100% shot, framed, and scored as the opening scene to a horror movie (which makes a lot of sense, given that the first movie was more of a horror movie, and T2 is still playing with those expectations). The reason it's so much longer is because it's building up tension, and the bar patrols are clearly the ones we're supposed to feel sympathy for.

[BloodSquirrel]

Also clearly a reference as a “homage” to other fish out of water movies such as the terminator 2 biker scene where the superpower person does horrible things to get someone else’s clothes and stuff. Vers is trying to figure things out, rude guy purposefully violates personal boundaries involving space, after violating said space he asks “you need a ride” in a way that is condescending (but he may think is charming), she takes his bike and clothes off a store mannequin.

Two thing: first, the scene is still in the movie. They deleted the part where she zaps him, but she still steals his bike.

Second, he doesn't violate her space at all. He pulls into an empty parking space, parks his bike, and says:
"Nice scuba scoot"
"Lighten up, honey. You got a smile for me"
(under his breath) "Freak"
Then he goes straight into the store.

I also don't really buy that she's supposed to be morally ambiguous at this point. She's a fish out of water, but nothing in the movie paints her as anything other than unambiguously heroic.

EDIT: Looking at the original scene- wow, it's way, way worse than the Man of Steel one. She threatens to permanently cripple the guy.

EDIT: And I just watched the Man of Steel scene again, and, jeez, yeah, that guy didn't just pour a beer on Clark's head, he started by groping a woman, then he poured the beer on him when Clark asked him to stop, then when Clark didn't take the bait, he shoved him as hard as he could. The only reason he apparently didn't do any else is shoving Clark turned out to be like shoving a concrete wall. Then, when Clark turns around and starts walking away, he throws a beer can at the back of his head.

Interestingly enough, even in the scene where Clark is the victim, it's an assault on a woman that's used to make the perpetrator unsympathetic enough to justify Clark confronting him in the first place.

On an unrelated note, how did nobody hear anything when Clark shoved several wooden poles through a Mach truck?

[Lemmy]

On an unrelated note, how did nobody hear anything when Clark shoved several wooden poles through a Mach truck?

Maybe they did, but then he kissed everyone at super speed to make them forget about the noise.

[Dargaron]

Is it just me, or is the current incarnation of Wonder Woman the worst member of the Justice League lineup to give a lesson about unearned power and taking shortcuts? Virtually all of her powers are the result of divine heritage. Superman at least had a fig leaf scene about how he had to learn how to avoid sensory overload, a decent chunk of Aquaman's powers were acquired by seeking his magic trident, and both Cyborg and Flash are the products of lab accidents with legitimate physical side-effects. At best, she's tied with Superman.

It also doesn't help that Wonder Woman (and admittedly, most DC movie heroes) tends to overpower her enemies instead of outfighting them. In Wonder Woman, the fight scenes vs. humans generally emphasized her superhuman strength/speed/durability rather than combat skill, and even when she was fighting an equal (Ares), the climax consists of her no-selling his abilities before overwhelming him with a single attack.

[BloodSquirrel]

Eh... it's not like she sought out easy power. She has the powers that she was born with, and she generally uses them for good. Even the Steve wish was an accident.

I think the real problem- as I've pointed out before- is that the message itself is full of unfortunate implications. It doesn't work once you start asking questions about people with horrible, terminal illnesses or mothers in underdeveloped countries with starving children. It doesn't even work with some of the wishes like "I hope you drop dead!". I mean, what's the message there, that he should have killed her the good ol' fashioned way, by beating her death with a hammer?

[Kantaki]

It doesn't even work with some of the wishes like "I hope you drop dead!". I mean, what's the message there, that he should have killed her the good ol' fashioned way, by beating her death with a hammer?

No, of course not.
Using a tool would be taking the easy way after all.

[Vrock Bait]

Does anybody else think that Wonder Woman’s abilities in this movie were kind of... lame? The web-swinging with the lasso, the Captain America tiara stupidity, the shiny pointless action figure armor...