|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Nov 13, 2017 14:12:10 GMT
Thor 3 vs WonderWoman? That's like comparing Friday the 13th and Halloween 2. Similarly enough works, with some minor differences. Your first one "Friday the 13th and Nightmare on Elm Street" before re-editing was more apt. I would rather say Freddy vs Jason Part 3 and Halloween.
nonsense, you did not understand the WW arc, it was a realization of personal error, sacrifice and human failure, that made it good writing.
- As for Thor, only you could be so bold to refer to this play-it-save, pop-song plagued, bubble gum clobber movie as courageous. Thor3 is a jokey exercise cramming in as many stars (Thor vs Hulk etc) and jokes as possible. It's the third part of a trilogy but leaving it's more earnest mythological and cinematic roots and characters behind like a soft reboot so to make more money.
- WW was a veritable solo origin movie that dared big and succeeded! Some achievements: best reviewed CBM ever according to RT, highest grossing origin CBM ever despite the anti-female nerd sentiment, and historic milestone per se. Oscars maybe?
Hope to see you crying at the Oscars (and Globes), pal.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 13, 2017 14:23:41 GMT
nonsense, you did not understand the WW arc, Naive woman-child becomes slightly less naive woman-child. Wow, how deep. Thor's own realization that he had to destroy Asgard to save the people was more of a shock than anything Diana did in WW. When she decides to destroy Themyscira to save the rest of the world, then you'll have a point. Nothing was safe in Ragnarok. Led Zepplin is classic. No, it just doesn't ignore that the rest of the Universe exists and pretends Thor lives in a vacuum. Read the Thor comics, they have him going to alien worlds and fighting aliens with colorful visuals. The movies finally decided to embrace that. Nah, it was predictable. Daring big would've been doing something like having Trevor turn out to be a Double Agent working for Germany using Diana. Artificial boosters from critics not wanting to be seen as misogynists in this era. Same reason the new Ghostbusters got its' score. Taking inflation into account, nope. The Weinstein scandal IS making it more political to want to back this movie. So WW just happens to be getting another artificial booster. Besides, the LA Times thing is enough of a problem for Disney that we'll understand why they might not win any awards. So DC has another booster for their film.
|
|
|
Post by seahawksraawk00 on Nov 13, 2017 16:31:55 GMT
Most of the rabid mcu fans hate Wonder Woman. I LOVE strong female characters. Diana wasn't Sorry. My grandmother was stronger Hell, I'm stronger than the character in this damned movie. You think this is a strong woman? Do you have any strong women in your life? Sorry. I find stronger females in Supergirl. Agent Carter was a stronger female character. I hate badly written female characters. I see them as insults to my gender & all the strong pioneer women that built this country. My grandmother discovered her husband had never divorced his first wife so she threw him out & took care of her half dozen on her own. When she saw a neighbor child fall into a runoff swollen river, she saved the child, nearly drowning herself. Don't cry to me about strong women. Well, I think there's different degrees of how you can define a strong female character. Obviously people say Wonder Woman is a strong female character because she wants to save the world. Fair enough, but she was also naive, which they payed off in the end, which I think is what made her a stronger female character and not being super strong and deflecting bullets. For me tho, one who embodies every aspect of a strong female character is Ripley from the Alien series, but particularly in Alien 3. Yes, she was badass in Aliens and I know Sigourney Weaver got an Oscar nomination for the role in that movie, but its not all about the physical prowess that makes a female character strong, but also her actions and decisions. In Alien 3, she already lost Hicks and Newt, got an Alien Queen in her that'll kill her anyways, and is on a prison planet full or killers who try to rape her. In the end, she could have easily been, and rightfully so, like "fuck them, let the alien kill them all" but she was able to put her personal feelings aside, for the most part forgave them for their actions and doesn't hold a grudge towards any of them and rallied them all together to help kill the alien. That's what makes a strong female character. It's not just being a badass who can shoot a gun or wield a sword and deflect bullets. It's the decisions they make.
|
|
|
Post by harpospoke on Nov 13, 2017 20:00:07 GMT
Like Steve Rogers in First Avenger? Not like Steve Rogers at all. Steve Trevor made the ultimate sacrifice. Steve Rogers made no sacrifice at all. Good to know ditching a plane in the ocean and sleeping for 70 years is "no sacrifice at all".
|
|
|
Post by harpospoke on Nov 13, 2017 20:10:08 GMT
...Black Widow ... depicted her as strong and overcoming obstacles. Oh wait....Marvel made her a main strong female character long before DC made WW. yeah...oh wait... what a pity Marvel was not strong enough to put that strong female Widow character in her own movie. Or put any female lead into a MCU movie. Pity, pity, pity.
The jealous fanboy delusion is strong with this one. Ever heard of Supergirl, or Catwoman or the 70s WW show, or teh current SG show, or...get the point?
We have a feminist comic book nerds here @deblovesbeccy - would love to hear her informed perspective what company is a tad more couragous with it's female superheros.
Could you be any more desperate? Deal with it, DC saw risk and reaped historical artistic acclaim. Playing it kiddy-kiddy-safe does not get you there. Nice try. Pretending a Black Widow movie is the same as a WW movie from a risk standpoint. Which gets back to....what was DC waiting for? Where was this passion for WW in the 80s? You don't get credit for being "progressive" 3 decades too late. DC set back female characters by botching Supergirl and Catwoman. Nice job. They are the opposite of progressive. Those two movies were only made because of Superman and Batman. No...WW was about DC desperately trying to catch up to Marvel and FINALLY branching out from the Superman Batman family when Marvel proved it was possible first. WW just happened to be their 3rd most popular option so it had nothing to do with her genitals. Even that wasn't enough until now. They have actually done more with Flash and Green Lantern BEFORE they got around to WW. Two characters who are less popular than her got their shots first. So this "progressive" stuff is just so much fanboy nonsense. DC did WW long after they should have and only because it was the best available option.
|
|
|
Post by harpospoke on Nov 13, 2017 20:15:06 GMT
I LOVE strong female characters. Diana wasn't Sorry. My grandmother was stronger Hell, I'm stronger than the character in this damned movie. You think this is a strong woman? Do you have any strong women in your life? Sorry. I find stronger females in Supergirl. Agent Carter was a stronger female character. I hate badly written female characters. I see them as insults to my gender & all the strong pioneer women that built this country. My grandmother discovered her husband had never divorced his first wife so she threw him out & took care of her half dozen on her own. When she saw a neighbor child fall into a runoff swollen river, she saved the child, nearly drowning herself. Don't cry to me about strong women. Well, I think there's different degrees of how you can define a strong female character. Obviously people say Wonder Woman is a strong female character because she wants to save the world. Fair enough, but she was also naive, which they payed off in the end, which I think is what made her a stronger female character and not being super strong and deflecting bullets. For me tho, one who embodies every aspect of a strong female character is Ripley from the Alien series, but particularly in Alien 3. Yes, she was badass in Aliens and I know Sigourney Weaver got an Oscar nomination for the role in that movie, but its not all about the physical prowess that makes a female character strong, but also her actions and decisions. In Alien 3, she already lost Hicks and Newt, got an Alien Queen in her that'll kill her anyways, and is on a prison planet full or killers who try to rape her. In the end, she could have easily been, and rightfully so, like "fuck them, let the alien kill them all" but she was able to put her personal feelings aside, for the most part forgave them for their actions and doesn't hold a grudge towards any of them and rallied them all together to help kill the alien. That's what makes a strong female character. It's not just being a badass who can shoot a gun or wield a sword and deflect bullets. It's the decisions they make. I agree with a lot of that. Ripley is still my favorite female character and it has nothing to do with physical strength. I liked WW a lot, but I did notice she found her strength in the end from the time honored "true love" cliche. Not exactly a female empowerment thing.
|
|
|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Nov 13, 2017 20:22:02 GMT
Nice try. Pretending a Black Widow movie is the same as a WW movie from a risk standpoint. Which gets back to....what was DC waiting for? Where was this passion for WW in the 80s? You don't get credit for being "progressive" 3 decades too late. DC set back female characters by botching Supergirl and Catwoman. Nice job. They are the opposite of progressive. Those two movies were only made because of Superman and Batman. No...WW was about DC desperately trying to catch up to Marvel and FINALLY branching out from the Superman Batman family when Marvel proved it was possible first. WW just happened to be their 3rd most popular option so it had nothing to do with her genitals. Even that wasn't enough until now. They have actually done more with Flash and Green Lantern BEFORE they got around to WW. Two characters who are less popular than her got their shots first. So this "progressive" stuff is just so much fanboy nonsense. DC did WW long after they should have and only because it was the best available option. we can agree that DC was always a lot more progressive and supportive of female characters, relatively speaking to Marvel that is. Marvel seem to be ashamed of comic book women. Especially strong comic book women. Heck, they even put in film a flyspeck like Antman before giving Cap Marvel a chance, in a solo film! Even though the latter sold a lot more comics over the years. It's so shameful really I can hardly believe it. @deblovesbeccy knows best.
|
|
|
Post by harpospoke on Nov 13, 2017 20:36:59 GMT
Nice try. Pretending a Black Widow movie is the same as a WW movie from a risk standpoint. Which gets back to....what was DC waiting for? Where was this passion for WW in the 80s? You don't get credit for being "progressive" 3 decades too late. DC set back female characters by botching Supergirl and Catwoman. Nice job. They are the opposite of progressive. Those two movies were only made because of Superman and Batman. No...WW was about DC desperately trying to catch up to Marvel and FINALLY branching out from the Superman Batman family when Marvel proved it was possible first. WW just happened to be their 3rd most popular option so it had nothing to do with her genitals. Even that wasn't enough until now. They have actually done more with Flash and Green Lantern BEFORE they got around to WW. Two characters who are less popular than her got their shots first. So this "progressive" stuff is just so much fanboy nonsense. DC did WW long after they should have and only because it was the best available option. we can agree that DC was always a lot more progressive and supportive of female characters, relatively speaking to Marvel that is. Marvel seem to be ashamed of comic book women. Especially strong comic book women. Heck, they even put in film a flyspeck like Antman before giving Cap Marvel a chance, in a solo film! Even though the latter sold a lot more comics over the years. It's so shameful really I can hardly believe it. @deblovesbeccy knows best. DC has had the ability to make movies since at least the 70s. Congrats on finally getting around to your 3rd most well known character after 40+ years. Let's see...Marvel started in 2008 so they are already planning their female lead movie less than 10 years into their run. And they are doing it with a character that no one knows. DC had a female character that everyone knew and ignored her for 4 decades. They did give WW a TV show...but Marvel did that with Peggy Carter in their first decade...and again with a character that no one knows. That's taking risks. By the time Marvel is 40 years in, this will be a blowout in Marvel's favor. Amazing you are bragging about this stuff when DC had several decades of a head start and still is just now getting around to doing it.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 13, 2017 21:00:55 GMT
Marvel seem to be ashamed of comic book women. Especially strong comic book women. No, just Ike Perlmutter. And he's gone.
|
|
|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Nov 13, 2017 21:21:05 GMT
Marvel seem to be ashamed of comic book women. Especially strong comic book women. No, just Ike Perlmutter. And he's gone. good, whoever he was, you talked a lot about him, sounds like a bad MCU apple.
|
|
|
Post by merh on Nov 14, 2017 2:27:49 GMT
Like Steve Rogers in First Avenger? Not like Steve Rogers at all. Steve Trevor made the ultimate sacrifice. Steve Rogers made no sacrifice at all. Steve didn't expect to live. Actually, he had quite the death wish. Threw himself on that grenade in boot camp. Went deep behind enemy lines alone to save all those prisoners. And went down with Red Skull's plane to save N.Y.
|
|
|
Post by Hauntedknight87 on Nov 14, 2017 2:50:24 GMT
Jesus Christ this place is a hot mess!
|
|
|
Post by merh on Nov 14, 2017 3:04:29 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 14, 2017 6:59:40 GMT
...Black Widow ... depicted her as strong and overcoming obstacles. Oh wait....Marvel made her a main strong female character long before DC made WW. yeah...oh wait... what a pity Marvel was not strong enough to put that strong female Widow character in her own movie. Or put any female lead into a MCU movie. Pity, pity, pity.
The jealous fanboy delusion is strong with this one. Ever heard of Supergirl, or Catwoman or the 70s WW show, or teh current SG show, or...get the point?
We have a feminist comic book nerds here @deblovesbeccy - would love to hear her informed perspective what company is a tad more couragous with it's female superheros.
I will reply when I am on here again later tonight. I am going off to get dinner ready now.
|
|
|
Post by miike80 on Nov 14, 2017 7:38:02 GMT
I might prefer Ragnarok to Antman. or maybe 2 or 3 other MCU movies. Or suicide Squad. But that's it
|
|
|
Post by Hauntedknight87 on Nov 14, 2017 8:34:32 GMT
If it wasn't for Ike I'm extremely confident that we would have a Black Panther, Black Widow and Captain Marvel films alot earlier. I'm glad that jackass is no longer in control of the MCU.
|
|
|
Post by sostie on Nov 14, 2017 10:49:42 GMT
we can agree that DC was always a lot more progressive and supportive of female characters, relatively speaking to Marvel that is. Marvel seem to be ashamed of comic book women. Especially strong comic book women. Heck, they even put in film a flyspeck like Antman before giving Cap Marvel a chance, in a solo film! Even though the latter sold a lot more comics over the years. It's so shameful really I can hardly believe it. @deblovesbeccy knows best. DC has had the ability to make movies since at least the 70s. Congrats on finally getting around to your 3rd most well known character after 40+ years. Let's see...Marvel started in 2008 so they are already planning their female lead movie less than 10 years into their run. And they are doing it with a character that no one knows. DC had a female character that everyone knew and ignored her for 4 decades. They did give WW a TV show...but Marvel did that with Peggy Carter in their first decade...and again with a character that no one knows. That's taking risks. By the time Marvel is 40 years in, this will be a blowout in Marvel's favor. Amazing you are bragging about this stuff when DC had several decades of a head start and still is just now getting around to doing it. Actually it was a surprise it took so long to get to Ant-Man considering he was a founding member of the Avengers As for which between DC & Marvel a re more progressive, both have a chequered history. If you are talking film, well DC have had input into their movies since 1989 and it took them 15 years to make their first female fronted CBM with Catwoman. Marvel have had input in to their films since 1998...it took them 6 years to make their first female fronted CBM with Elektra. It took DC 27 years to put Wonder Woman on screen. 27 years to put not just the most famous female comic character on screen but one of the most famous comic book heroes ever. In that time we had 9 films featuring Batman, 3 featuring Superman...Wonder Woman had to get her break supporting those two. Marvel had no one, other than Spider-Man, as well known as WW yet DC took nearly 3 decades to give us WW? (On a side note DCs first female director came after 27 years, Marvels after 10) Isn't the representation of a female character as important as the billing? Marvel have a plethora of strong female characters, including the X-Verse. Has Marvel ever tried to market a film using a sexualised wank fantasy in the way DC did with Harley Quinn in Suicide Squad? It's very easy to criticise Marvel for it's female "output", but you have to remember these films are all based on comics and that dictates the characters that are available. Look at the history of the comics and you'd see, DC was first with Wonder Woman, was an embarrassment in the 50s and 60s, Marvel came along and changed everything in the 60s, there was a back and forth in the 70s, resurgence in the 80s, a change of art in the 90s - and over these periods female characters have been created, changed, used and represented in so many positive and negative ways it's difficult to pin down who is more progressive. They have had their ups and downs...there may have been big female characters but they were not necessarily as positive as many smaller ones.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 14, 2017 11:52:44 GMT
We have a feminist comic book nerds here @deblovesbeccy - would love to hear her informed perspective what company is a tad more couragous with it's female superheros.
You are right. When it comes to female superheroes and female lead comic book series in general DC is at the top of the mountain thanks to the success of Wonder Woman, Supergirl (Kara Zor-El and Linda Danvers), Batgirl and Birds of Prey followed by Image Comics, Dynamite Entertainment and Marvel. Marvel has had some successful female lead titles over the years such as Ms Marvel, Spider-Woman, Shanna the She-Devil, Patsy Walker, Captain Marvel, Spider Gwen and She-Hulk and lesser known titles like Elsa Bloodstone, Jessica Jones (Alias), Silk and America but they ultimately lost the biggest selling female lead series they had and fell short of creating any female superheroes that matched the sales of DC’s Wonder Woman, Supergirl, Batgirl and the Birds of Prey and when the female lead comic book revolution came along in the 90s and 00s their female lead series got slaughtered in sales by ‘Witchblade’ and other female lead titles by independent companies who capitalized on the lack of female lead series under Marvel and DC at the time and dominated in sales.
At the moment 'Wonder Woman' is sitting at number one as the biggest selling and most successful female lead comic book movie of all time in a genre which is set to increase big time with movies of Batgirl, Red Sonja, Razor, Strike, Fathom, Painkiller Jane, Avegeleyne, Captain Marvel, Sheena: Queen of the Jungle, Gotham City Sirens, Wonder Woman 2, Silver and Black, Nonplayer, Princeless, The Pro etc and more female superhero movies as confirmed by Geoff Johns which will most likely include Supergirl and Birds of Prey and it is going to be very difficult for Marvel to compete with DC with female lead movies going forward especially with Spider Woman and SpiderGwen being under Sony and they will have to bring out more of their names like Shanna, Ms Marvel and She Hulk and with Batgirl being based on Gail Simone's series which is the most popular Batgirl series of all time (and the first time a movie has been based on a comic book series by a female writer) it has a good chance of beating 'Wonder Woman' and being a huge hit!!
The problem with female lead comic book movies as many male and female comic book writers have spoken out about has always been the heads of the studios not willing to take a chance on a female lead comic book movie and their believes that female heroes were emasculating to males and women only liked Romance movies while men liked Action movies. This is why we have had so many female lead comic book movies in development like 'Witchblade' with Angelina Jolie, Supergirl/Linda Danvers with Peter David writing the script and Alicia Silverstone playing Linda, Darkchylde with John Carpenter directing, Hack/Slash, Fathom, Aphrodite IX, the Magdalena. Vampirella, Black Canary, Avagelyene (the last one), Raven, Warrior Nun Areala, Danger Girl, Shi (Lucy Lui and Tia Carrere were both attached at different stages), Lady Death, Wonderland etc. Male and female comic book writers tried for decades to get more female lead comic book movies made and the studios made movies of every single big name and obscure male lead series and their dogs and ducks instead of female lead movies. The biggest joke was the Supergirl/ Linda Danvers movie by Peter David which many at Warner Bros and DC thought could be a huge success and get a lot of Buffy fans with its Horror themes and the head of Warner Bros told Peter David he didn't want an edgier Supergirl on screen than Superman.
Thankfully things have changed thanks to the success of 'Wonder Woman' and we FINALLY have the chance to see many movies that we were robbed of getting before due to the sexism of Hollywood.
|
|
|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Nov 14, 2017 12:24:05 GMT
We have a feminist comic book nerds here @deblovesbeccy - would love to hear her informed perspective what company is a tad more couragous with it's female superheros.
Thankfully things have changed thanks to the success of 'Wonder Woman' and we FINALLY have the chance to see many movies that we were robbed of getting before due to the sexism of Hollywood.
Thanks, you should write a book on the history of female superheroes in film or publish a paper, considering the details you set forth you might already have done that.
|
|
|
Post by Hauntedknight87 on Nov 14, 2017 12:27:33 GMT
Thankfully things have changed thanks to the success of 'Wonder Woman' and we FINALLY have the chance to see many movies that we were robbed of getting before due to the sexism of Hollywood.
Thanks, you should write a book on the history of female superheroes in film or publish a paper, considering the details you set forth you might already have done that.
She's definitely been a lot of help on the boards especially on this subject. Wish we had more posters like her.
|
|