|
|
Post by Skaathar on Jun 5, 2017 6:16:39 GMT
Somewhat SPOILERS I guess:
When she enters that ditch with Steve and the others, you can clearly see that she's still wearing her London clothes underneath her cloak. I also don't remember seeing her carrying her weapons (though I might just be misremembering that). Then she turns around, moves her shoulders a bit, then faces us again and she's already in her armor underneath the cloak. Then she takes off the cloak and she has her weapons. This was a serious WTF moment for me. I was enjoying the movie till that point, still continued to enjoy it after that, but that took me completely out of the mood for a bit. It was a very cartoony and cheesy way of doing things and I just feel that they could have handled it way better.
Sometimes it irritates me how DC keeps putting silly scenes like these in their movies. MOS had the tornadocide, BvS had Martha, SS had the dancing Enchantress and WW has this costume change. I understand the purpose of each scene (well maybe not the dancing Enchantress) but they could have been handled so much better.
|
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Jun 5, 2017 6:44:27 GMT
Somewhat SPOILERS I guess: When she enters that ditch with Steve and the others, you can clearly see that she's still wearing her London clothes underneath her cloak. I also don't remember seeing her carrying her weapons (though I might just be misremembering that). Then she turns around, moves her shoulders a bit, then faces us again and she's already in her armor underneath the cloak. Then she takes off the cloak and she has her weapons. This was a serious WTF moment for me. You gotta pay attention when you watch the movie. She was already wearing her armor underneath the cloak. The shield is strapped to the back of her armor and the sword is sheathed in the back of her armor and the lasso hangs on a hook attached to the armor. Sometimes it irritates me how DC keeps putting silly scenes like these in their movies. MOS had the tornadocide, BvS had Martha, SS had the dancing Enchantress and WW has this costume change. And MCU has Ronan the Big Bad Destroyer of Planets getting defeated by a silly Dance-Off and the Hulk-Black Widow romance and the Vision-Scarlett Witch romance and Cap and Spider-Kid stop fighting in the middle of a fight just because they're both from the same city. |
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Jun 5, 2017 6:51:01 GMT
Somewhat SPOILERS I guess: When she enters that ditch with Steve and the others, you can clearly see that she's still wearing her London clothes underneath her cloak. I also don't remember seeing her carrying her weapons (though I might just be misremembering that). Then she turns around, moves her shoulders a bit, then faces us again and she's already in her armor underneath the cloak. Then she takes off the cloak and she has her weapons. This was a serious WTF moment for me. You gotta pay attention when you watch the movie. She was already wearing her armor underneath the cloak. The shield is strapped to the back of her armor and the sword is sheathed in the back of her armor and the lasso hangs on a hook attached to the armor. Sometimes it irritates me how DC keeps putting silly scenes like these in their movies. MOS had the tornadocide, BvS had Martha, SS had the dancing Enchantress and WW has this costume change. And MCU has Ronan the Big Bad Destroyer of Planets getting defeated by a silly Dance-Off and the Hulk-Black Widow romance and the Vision-Scarlett Witch romance and Cap and Spider-Kid stop fighting in the middle of a fight just because they're both from the same city. You have to pay more attention when watching a movie. She was still clearly in her office attire underneath her cloak. You can clearly see the buttons of her blouse as well as the buttons on the cuff of her sleeve. Also when you look at her walking from behind, you can clearly see that there is no shield shape underneath her cloak. It's only at the very last part just before the takes off the cloak that you see her armor underneath and now she suddenly has her shield. I'm not even going to address your second paragraph because it's so much BS. |
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Jun 5, 2017 7:01:00 GMT
You have to pay more attention when watching a movie. She was still clearly in her office attire underneath her cloak. You can clearly see the buttons of her blouse as well as the buttons on the cuff of her sleeve. Also when you look at her walking from behind, you can clearly see that there is no shield shape underneath her cloak. It's only at the very last part just before the takes off the cloak that you see her armor underneath and now she suddenly has her shield. No, you have to pay attention when you watch the movie. The whole reason she and Steve and the rest of the guys went out to the trench was because she wanted Steve to take her to where the fighting was most intense because she believed that's where Ares would be and her mission was to kill Ares. So why would she go out to the trench on a mission to kill Ares without wearing her armor and taking along the sword that she believes will kill Ares? She was wearing the armor underneath the cloak. I'm not even going to address your second paragraph because it's so much BS. You're not going to address it because it's true and you have no argument. |
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Jun 5, 2017 7:06:48 GMT
You have to pay more attention when watching a movie. She was still clearly in her office attire underneath her cloak. You can clearly see the buttons of her blouse as well as the buttons on the cuff of her sleeve. Also when you look at her walking from behind, you can clearly see that there is no shield shape underneath her cloak. It's only at the very last part just before the takes off the cloak that you see her armor underneath and now she suddenly has her shield. No, you have to pay attention when you watch the movie. The whole reason she and Steve and the rest of the guys went out to the trench was because she wanted Steve to take her to where the fighting was most intense because she believed that's where Ares would be and her mission was to kill Ares. So why would she go out to the trench on a mission to kill Ares without wearing her armor and taking along the sword that she believes will kill Ares? She was wearing the armor underneath the cloak. I'm not even going to address your second paragraph because it's so much BS. You're not going to address it because it's true and you have no argument. Sigh. Go watch the movie again then get back to me. You can try to reason it out as much as you want, that does not explain why she was wearing a buttoned blouse under her cloak. Unless you want to claim that she had her armor underneath that blouse. |
|
|
|
Post by brownstones on Jun 5, 2017 9:05:11 GMT
Pretty sure she was wearing it under her civilian attire, because she obviously doesn't leave it with anyone, she hands her shield and sword to Etta, but not the armor.
|
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Jun 5, 2017 9:16:48 GMT
Pretty sure she was wearing it under her civilian attire, because she obviously doesn't leave it with anyone, she hands her shield and sword to Etta, but not the armor. That's correct. She was wearing the armor under the cloak. Like I explained to skaathar, the whole reason she and Steve and the rest of the guys went out to the trench was because she wanted Steve to take her to where the fighting was most intense because she believed that's where Ares would be and her mission was to kill Ares. So why would she go out to the trench on a mission to kill Ares without wearing her armor and taking along the sword that she believes will kill Ares? MCU fans protest when we say that they didn't understand a DCEU movie or weren't paying attention. Yet they prove that they weren't paying attention by asking these dumb questions. When BvS was in theaters, 1 MCU fan who clearly wasn't paying attention during the movie actually asked this dumb question:
"How did Wonder Woman know her plane was flying right over the spot where Doomsday was about to fry Batman? Is pinpointing a tiny spot on the ground from airplane cruising height 1 of her superpowers? Why is the airport allowing flights to leave when there's a massive battle with beings of immense power happening between the two cities? All flights should've been grounded."
|
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Jun 5, 2017 12:18:01 GMT
Somewhat SPOILERS I guess: When she enters that ditch with Steve and the others, you can clearly see that she's still wearing her London clothes underneath her cloak. I also don't remember seeing her carrying her weapons (though I might just be misremembering that). Then she turns around, moves her shoulders a bit, then faces us again and she's already in her armor underneath the cloak. Then she takes off the cloak and she has her weapons. This was a serious WTF moment for me. You gotta pay attention when you watch the movie. She was already wearing her armor underneath the cloak. The shield is strapped to the back of her armor and the sword is sheathed in the back of her armor and the lasso hangs on a hook attached to the armor. Sometimes it irritates me how DC keeps putting silly scenes like these in their movies. MOS had the tornadocide, BvS had Martha, SS had the dancing Enchantress and WW has this costume change. And MCU has Ronan the Big Bad Destroyer of Planets getting defeated by a silly Dance-Off and the Hulk-Black Widow romance and the Vision-Scarlett Witch romance and Cap and Spider-Kid stop fighting in the middle of a fight just because they're both from the same city. Ronan was defeated by an Infinity Stone, not dancing. Hulk and Widow? Romance happens. Vision Scarlet Witch? Why Not? Cap and Spider-Man didn't want to fight to begin with, no one there did except Black Panther. These were allies forced to battle, not actual enemies. |
|
|
|
Post by DSDSquared on Jun 5, 2017 12:25:04 GMT
The armor was under her clothes. I got that and it makes sense. She was wearing her trench coat so it is implied she has her shield and sword. I know she did not actually have them as you would see them bulging out when she was walking around, but it is just a movie. I can suspend my disbelief for this scene.
|
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Jun 5, 2017 15:31:28 GMT
To all the people saying she had her armor underneath her civilian clothing... you do know that hiding armor under civilian clothing is not easy right? It's not like she's wearing tight spandex like Superman or Spiderman. And considering how form fitting her civilian clothing is it seems awkward to hide armor underneath that. But ok, it's a movie, I can suspend doubt and believe that she wears armor underneath her civilian clothing.
That still doesn't explain HOW she got her civilian clothing off. She turns around, shrugs her shoulders a bit, and all of a sudden her civilian clothing is gone? And this was in front of a lot of people, without seeming to blur with superspeed. At least Superman goes into a phone booth, blurs with speed and comes out in costume. Spiderman hides in an alley.
|
|
northernlad
Sophomore
@northernlad
Posts: 898
Likes: 620
 
|
Post by northernlad on Jun 5, 2017 15:36:25 GMT
It would really help if you guys would pay attention. She was wearing it under her clothes...like everyone has said. This is not that difficult to figure out. Geez.
|
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Jun 5, 2017 15:53:20 GMT
It would really help if you guys would pay attention. She was wearing it under her clothes...like everyone has said. This is not that difficult to figure out. Geez. 1. How do you prove that? 2. That still doesn't answer HOW she remove her civilian clothes with just a few shrugs. |
|
northernlad
Sophomore
@northernlad
Posts: 898
Likes: 620
|
Post by northernlad on Jun 5, 2017 15:57:53 GMT
I don't have to prove that. lol It's a given to anyone with a brain. You seem to be intentionally not wanting to accept what is there and what is given in the film. That is kind of making you similar to a troll.
But I will tell you later on the film...they clearly show her riding the horse and she takes the blue dress off and leaves it. So therefore...she had her suit on under the clothes...just as she did in No Man's Land.
|
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Jun 5, 2017 16:03:54 GMT
I don't have to prove that. lol It's a given to anyone with a brain. You seem to be intentionally not wanting to accept what is there and what is given in the film. That is kind of making you similar to a troll. But I will tell you later on the film...they clearly show her riding the horse and she takes the blue dress off and leaves it. So therefore...she had her suit on under the clothes...just as she did in No Man's Land. ok.... how do you wear armored boots and high heeled shoes at the same time then? How do you wear an evening gown, with a very low back, and still wear your armor underneath? If you think it's trollish behavior to point out weak points in a film then you're acting very childish. And you still haven't answered how shrugging her shoulders all of a sudden made her civilian clothes disappear. |
|
northernlad
Sophomore
@northernlad
Posts: 898
Likes: 620
|
Post by northernlad on Jun 5, 2017 16:04:29 GMT
Maybe you should go see it again.
|
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Jun 5, 2017 16:05:19 GMT
Maybe you should go see it again. In short, you're unable to actually give me proper, well thought out answers. |
|
northernlad
Sophomore
@northernlad
Posts: 898
Likes: 620
|
Post by northernlad on Jun 5, 2017 16:06:05 GMT
Maybe you should go see it again.
|
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Jun 5, 2017 16:22:33 GMT
Maybe you should go see it again. Like I said, that's your default reply because you know you can't come up with a proper response. You can't explain how she made her civilian clothes disappear with a shrug. You can't explain how she hid her armor underneath a form fitting gown. And so you default to "Maybe you should watch it again" hoping that this gives you a free getaway card. |
|
northernlad
Sophomore
@northernlad
Posts: 898
Likes: 620
|
Post by northernlad on Jun 5, 2017 16:31:41 GMT
You need to see the movie again. I don't need to prove anything to you. You're being nitpicky about a super hero woman who deflects bullets with bracelets. And you're worried about how she got her boots on? lol Get real.
|
|
|
|
Post by Larcen26 on Jun 5, 2017 16:38:04 GMT
She was always wearing her armor underneath her "London" clothes. (Hence how Steve was able to tie himself with the lasso on the stairs.) And those clothes were a loose skirt, I think there was a loose fitting petticoat, blouse and jacket. All completely removable with little to no effort.
Was it a little TOO easy? Sure. But no easier than any other superhero quick change.
|
|
