|
|
Post by thenewnexus on Nov 15, 2017 3:42:57 GMT
I think its overated just like homecoming was. Miscast lead and villian
|
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Nov 15, 2017 3:45:29 GMT
Oh I'd say it's vastly overrated. I really don't think you can make a case that it's any better than either First Avenger or Thor 1, two films which is feels like a perfect amalgamation of, only it's plot is a little thinner than either of those, it's villains are weaker, and it's main character isn't the hero of the film. It was Ares that found WW, she'd given up.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 15, 2017 3:52:08 GMT
Did anyone decide why it is that she decided to sit out WW2, Vietnam, the Gulf War, various wars in the Middle East, terrorism etc.?  |
|
|
|
Post by President Ackbar™ on Nov 15, 2017 4:18:36 GMT
Oh I'd say it's vastly overrated. I really don't think you can make a case that it's any better than either First Avenger or Thor 1, two films which is feels like a perfect amalgamation of, only it's plot is a little thinner than either of those, it's villains are weaker, and it's main character isn't the hero of the film. It was Ares that found WW, she'd given up. By your own logic, if you say CA and Thor were great, then WW is also great. |
|
|
|
Post by President Ackbar™ on Nov 15, 2017 4:20:52 GMT
Did anyone decide why it is that she decided to sit out WW2, Vietnam, the Gulf War, various wars in the Middle East, terrorism etc.? How do you know she did? We didn't know she was involved in WW1 til 100 years later. We never knew the Xmen solved the Cuban Missile Crisis until 50 years after the fact. That's what sequels are for. |
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Nov 15, 2017 4:30:38 GMT
Did anyone decide why it is that she decided to sit out WW2, Vietnam, the Gulf War, various wars in the Middle East, terrorism etc.? How do you know she did? We didn't know she was involved in WW1 til 100 years later. We never knew the Xmen solved the Cuban Missile Crisis until 50 years after the fact. That's what sequels are for. Didn't she clearly say she'd "turned her back on mankind 100 years ago" in BvS (which takes place in 2014)? By her own admission she did "sit out WW2, Vietnam, the Gulf War..." etc. |
|
|
|
Post by President Ackbar™ on Nov 15, 2017 4:32:16 GMT
How do you know she did? We didn't know she was involved in WW1 til 100 years later. We never knew the Xmen solved the Cuban Missile Crisis until 50 years after the fact. That's what sequels are for. Didn't she clearly say she'd "turned her back on mankind 100 years ago" in BvS (which takes place in 2014)? By her own admission she did "sit out WW2, Vietnam, the Gulf War..." etc. No, DC has already decided to retcon that. |
|
|
|
Post by President Ackbar™ on Nov 15, 2017 4:35:57 GMT
How ‘Wonder Woman’ Retconned ‘Batman v. Superman,’ as Explained by Gal Gadot
Posted on Friday, October 27th, 2017 by Chris Evangelista
When Wonder Woman made her big screen debut in Batman v. Superman, she had turned her back on mankind 100 years ago, and was reluctant to get involved with humanity’s troubles. Yet when Wonder Woman hit theaters last year, there was no indication of Diana giving up on us foolish mortals. In fact, the film even ends with Diana’s voiceover telling us “Only love can save this world. So I stay. I fight, and I give…for the world I know it can be. This is my mission, now. Forever.”
For the sake of continuity, some fans were left wondering after Wonder Woman ended just what the heck happened to that whole “giving up on mankind” idea. Now we have our answer! In a candid interview (via Screen Rant), Wonder Woman and Justice League star Gal Gadot revealed the simple truth – the idea of Wonder Woman abandoning human beings to their own fates was dropped entirely. Here’s what Gadot had to say:
“We realized that actually, there is no way that Wonder Woman will ever give up on mankind. The reason why she left the island was because she wanted to make their life better and safer – they are her calling. So – I’m giving you a very honest answer – sometimes, in a creative process, you establish something that is not necessarily the right decision, but then you can always correct it and change it. So Wonder Woman will always be there as far as she concerns for mankind.”
|
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Nov 15, 2017 4:43:53 GMT
How ‘Wonder Woman’ Retconned ‘Batman v. Superman,’ as Explained by Gal Gadot
Posted on Friday, October 27th, 2017 by Chris EvangelistaWhen Wonder Woman made her big screen debut in Batman v. Superman, she had turned her back on mankind 100 years ago, and was reluctant to get involved with humanity’s troubles. Yet when Wonder Woman hit theaters last year, there was no indication of Diana giving up on us foolish mortals. In fact, the film even ends with Diana’s voiceover telling us “Only love can save this world. So I stay. I fight, and I give…for the world I know it can be. This is my mission, now. Forever.” For the sake of continuity, some fans were left wondering after Wonder Woman ended just what the heck happened to that whole “giving up on mankind” idea. Now we have our answer! In a candid interview (via Screen Rant), Wonder Woman and Justice League star Gal Gadot revealed the simple truth – the idea of Wonder Woman abandoning human beings to their own fates was dropped entirely. Here’s what Gadot had to say: “We realized that actually, there is no way that Wonder Woman will ever give up on mankind. The reason why she left the island was because she wanted to make their life better and safer – they are her calling. So – I’m giving you a very honest answer – sometimes, in a creative process, you establish something that is not necessarily the right decision, but then you can always correct it and change it. So Wonder Woman will always be there as far as she concerns for mankind.” Sounds even worse than "eight years later" to me. Hee hee hee... |
|
|
|
Post by President Ackbar™ on Nov 15, 2017 4:48:12 GMT
“We realized that actually, there is no way that Wonder Woman will ever give up on mankind.” Sounds even worse than "eight years later" to me. Hee hee hee... " eighty years later!" hee hee hee |
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Nov 15, 2017 8:39:35 GMT
It's definitely suffered from hype backlash with people playing up its flaws.
|
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Nov 15, 2017 11:34:55 GMT
Oh I'd say it's vastly overrated. I really don't think you can make a case that it's any better than either First Avenger or Thor 1, two films which is feels like a perfect amalgamation of, only it's plot is a little thinner than either of those, it's villains are weaker, and it's main character isn't the hero of the film. It was Ares that found WW, she'd given up. By your own logic, if you say CA and Thor were great, then WW is also great. I just said WW wasn't as good as those, and I'd call those very good, not great anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by sostie on Nov 15, 2017 11:38:39 GMT
It was good...but not amazing. Certainly, for me, doesn't stand up to repeat viewings
|
|
|
|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Nov 15, 2017 11:43:20 GMT
By your own logic, if you say CA and Thor were great, then WW is also great. I just said WW wasn't as good as those, and I'd call those very good, not great anyway.  It is waaaay better, a film transcending the appeal of children and manchildren, as evidenced by being the highest rated, higest origin solo gross, historic milestone and maybe even Globes and Oscars.
DC has created a classic (and likely a dud with JL) this year that completely obliterates everything artistically besides Logan.
See ya crying at the Oscars.
|
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Nov 15, 2017 11:45:47 GMT
It was good...but not amazing. Certainly, for me, doesn't stand up to repeat viewings I fully agree with that. |
|
