|
Post by Skaathar on Dec 6, 2017 1:56:56 GMT
And even with their WW movie, they couldn't be bothered to put her in real danger and relied on the supporting cast because the lead wasn't good enough to carry the film on her own. Case in point: Most scenes with the Wonder Woman in them are "Gadot speaks a very simple line, followed by actor X going on and on, Gadot gets another rote line in, followed by more exposition from another actor." You've got Trevor hamming it up, Etta hamming it up, those poor Amazons forced to use Gadot's accent, Ares' monologuing, Hippolyta narrating the opening and giving all the early exposition, even the Multiethnic Sidekick Squad is very chatty in trying to fill up time so Gadot doesn't have to talk. Gadot is reduced to walking about, occasionally flatly delivering a single line of response while everyone else carefully explains what's happening. Then when action scenes happen she's either a video game character or a stuntwoman. Gal Gadot is actually doing very, very little acting in the Wonder Woman movie, it's a great illusion of a performance. Thing with Gadot is, although her acting skills are lacking she makes up for it with a load of charisma. It's the same thing with Arnold Schwarzenegger and Dwayne Johnson. Both don't really do anything except play variations of themselves in every movie, but their charisma makes up for it.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Dec 6, 2017 2:02:43 GMT
And even with their WW movie, they couldn't be bothered to put her in real danger and relied on the supporting cast because the lead wasn't good enough to carry the film on her own. Case in point: Most scenes with the Wonder Woman in them are "Gadot speaks a very simple line, followed by actor X going on and on, Gadot gets another rote line in, followed by more exposition from another actor." You've got Trevor hamming it up, Etta hamming it up, those poor Amazons forced to use Gadot's accent, Ares' monologuing, Hippolyta narrating the opening and giving all the early exposition, even the Multiethnic Sidekick Squad is very chatty in trying to fill up time so Gadot doesn't have to talk. Gadot is reduced to walking about, occasionally flatly delivering a single line of response while everyone else carefully explains what's happening. Then when action scenes happen she's either a video game character or a stuntwoman. Gal Gadot is actually doing very, very little acting in the Wonder Woman movie, it's a great illusion of a performance. Thing with Gadot is, although her acting skills are lacking she makes up for it with a load of charisma. It's the same thing with Arnold Schwarzenegger and Dwayne Johnson. Both don't really do anything except play variations of themselves in every movie, but their charisma makes up for it. Does she even have charisma? It could just be the likability of the other actors creating a miasma around the whole film.
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Dec 6, 2017 2:11:17 GMT
Thing with Gadot is, although her acting skills are lacking she makes up for it with a load of charisma. It's the same thing with Arnold Schwarzenegger and Dwayne Johnson. Both don't really do anything except play variations of themselves in every movie, but their charisma makes up for it. Does she even have charisma? It could just be the likability of the other actors creating a miasma around the whole film. Well, she's not a great actress but she's very watchable. Can't just be looks because there are a lot of good-looking actresses out there who don't quite have the same precense she has. So if it's not charisma it must be something else. And so far majority of people agree that she's the best thing out of BvS, WW and JL so it can't be her co-stars either.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Dec 6, 2017 3:54:38 GMT
WRONG! Legally, there's a HUGE difference between lying to the press and lying to shareholders at a shareholders' meeting. Lying to the prss isn't illegal. Lying to shareholders at a shareholders' meeting is illegal. They're both illegal you fool, and WB did both anyways. And bottom line is that it took WB longer to do stuff than MCU, and WW the movie wouldn't have happened if not for the MCU inspiring the entire DCEU. No, lying to the press isn't illegal. It happens all the time, and no one has ever been sent to jail simply for lying to the press. But lying to shareholders at a shareholders' meeting is illegal because shareholders are "owners" of the company so the board isn't allowed to knowingly lie to shareholders and the SEC considers lying to shareholders to be fraud. That's why no company lies to shareholders at shareholder meetings. Because if they're found guilty of lying, they could be doing some hard time in a federal prison.
And the bottom line is the Avengers would never exist if not for the Justice League inspiring Stan Lee to create superhero teams for Marvel and Captain Marvel would never be made if WB hadn't announced a Wonder Woman movie first.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Dec 6, 2017 4:14:06 GMT
No, lying to the press isn't illegal. Yes, it is. Nope, that's revisionist history. The Justice League were never necessary for Marvel to do anything.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Dec 6, 2017 4:22:58 GMT
If a company was legally bound to carry forth their plans, as announced at a shareholders meeting, then changing the release date would be illegal. No, you don't read very carefully. I'll repeat what I said before: the shareholders are the owners of the company so it's illegal for the board to knowingly lie to shareholders. So if WB told shareholders they were going to produce a Wonder Woman movie but the board knew that was a lie and had no intention of doing that, then that's considered defrauding the shareholders and is illegal. But if the board had every intention of producing a Wonder Woman movie and set a release date 3 years in the future and then 2 years later they see that they're ahead of schedule and decide to move the release date up several weeks, then that's not illegal because the board didn't have knowledge when the made the announcement in Oct 2014 that they would be ahead of schedule so the change in release date was a result of the board acquiring more knowledge or information (i.e. the project is ahead of schedule) that they didn't have back in Oct 2014 and not a result of any knowing intent to defraud shareholders. Nor is it illegal to cancel a project after you've announced your intent to pursue it. It isn't illegal to cancel a project after you've announced it to shareholders as long as your announcement was in good faith (i.e. you had every intention of completing the project when you announced it to shareholders and didn't knowingly try to defraud shareholders into believing that you were going forward with the project when you knew you had no intention of doing so). If the board knowingly announced to shareholders a project that they knew they had no intention of delivering, then that's considered defrauding shareholders and IS illegal. That's a nice fairy-tale for distraught DC fans looking for something (anything!) positive to hang their hat on, but due to the precedent of reneging on their Wonder Woman announcements, we can't say with any certainty that WB was truly committed to a Wonder Woman movie simply because they announced it (again). Like I mentioned before, it's doubtful that they suddenly grew a backbone after years of following Marvel's lead in other things. DC has never followed Marvel. DC has always led the way. DC published the 1st superhero comic book in 1938. DC was the 1st to have a superhero show on radio in the 1940s. DC was the 1st to have a superhero show on TV in the 1950s. DC was the 1st to have a big-budget superhero movie in 1978. DC was the 1st to have a shared cinematic universe for superheroes in 1984. DC was the 1st to win an Oscar in a major category for a superhero movie in 2008. And DC was the 1st to have a successful female-led superhero movie and soon will be the 1st to have a Best Picture Oscar nomination for a superhero movie in 2017. MCU has always just been following DC.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Dec 6, 2017 4:25:47 GMT
No, you don't read very carefully. He does, you just don't have a point. No, it was just lucky to not have much competition in the beginning that it could screw over (Shazam/Captain Marvel). All it has going for it is "Was here first" and that's not much of anything. All DC ever had going for it was dumb luck, nothing more.
|
|
|
Post by BexxyJ on Dec 6, 2017 13:54:22 GMT
Dear delusional fan boy. You get an A for effort and Merry Christmas but until Marvel has a female superhero movie out your thread means jackshit, diddly squat, muffins in the oven and when is this Captain Marvel coming out? The year 2019 or 2029? Are we going to see it in our lifetimes or is the movie that keeps getting pushed back? It has been pushed back already and history shows it will be pushed back again for Iron Man 4, Captain America 4 and Thor 4. I Hate to crap all over your charade but DC already have Wonder Woman and Wonder Woman 2, Batgirl, Harley Quinn and Gotham City Sirens are coming. DC has 2 female fronted TV shows and LGBTI representation in Supergirl, Arrow and Legends of Tomorrow. A Harley Quinn TV show is next. What does Marvel have? Jackshit. If you want to steal the credit first you need a movie kid and I ain’t seeing anything that makes me believe Captain Marvel will come out before Iron Man 4 or Thor 4. Fuck, who are we kidding? Iron Man 5, Thor 5 and Captain America 4 and 5. Marvel will throw in a remake Howard the Duck before they ever put a female superhero movie out. Watch and see.
|
|
|
Post by BexxyJ on Dec 6, 2017 14:00:35 GMT
If a company was legally bound to carry forth their plans, as announced at a shareholders meeting, then changing the release date would be illegal. No, you don't read very carefully. I'll repeat what I said before: the shareholders are the owners of the company so it's illegal for the board to knowingly lie to shareholders. So if WB told shareholders they were going to produce a Wonder Woman movie but the board knew that was a lie and had no intention of doing that, then that's considered defrauding the shareholders and is illegal. But if the board had every intention of producing a Wonder Woman movie and set a release date 3 years in the future and then 2 years later they see that they're ahead of schedule and decide to move the release date up several weeks, then that's not illegal because the board didn't have knowledge when the made the announcement in Oct 2014 that they would be ahead of schedule so the change in release date was a result of the board acquiring more knowledge or information (i.e. the project is ahead of schedule) that they didn't have back in Oct 2014 and not a result of any knowing intent to defraud shareholders. Nor is it illegal to cancel a project after you've announced your intent to pursue it. It isn't illegal to cancel a project after you've announced it to shareholders as long as your announcement was in good faith (i.e. you had every intention of completing the project when you announced it to shareholders and didn't knowingly try to defraud shareholders into believing that you were going forward with the project when you knew you had no intention of doing so). If the board knowingly announced to shareholders a project that they knew they had no intention of delivering, then that's considered defrauding shareholders and IS illegal. That's a nice fairy-tale for distraught DC fans looking for something (anything!) positive to hang their hat on, but due to the precedent of reneging on their Wonder Woman announcements, we can't say with any certainty that WB was truly committed to a Wonder Woman movie simply because they announced it (again). Like I mentioned before, it's doubtful that they suddenly grew a backbone after years of following Marvel's lead in other things. DC has never followed Marvel. DC has always led the way. DC published the 1st superhero comic book in 1938. DC was the 1st to have a superhero show on radio in the 1940s. DC was the 1st to have a superhero show on TV in the 1950s. DC was the 1st to have a big-budget superhero movie in 1978. DC was the 1st to have a shared cinematic universe for superheroes in 1984. DC was the 1st to win an Oscar in a major category for a superhero movie in 2008. And DC was the 1st to have a successful female-led superhero movie and soon will be the 1st to have a Best Picture Oscar nomination for a superhero movie in 2017. MCU has always just been following DC. You just handed his ass to him. Can you hear that sound? I bet he is somewhere with Mummy and Daddy crying over how DCfan was so mean. DC has always lead the way. This is not about taking sides but respecting history. The OP is delusional. He probably thinks he is a Mighty Morphin’ Power Ranger and runs around doing punches and kicks with his invisible friends in the playground at lunch. Next he will be trying take the credit for DC’s LGBTI representation but we’ve seen what Marvel does with LGBTI characters.
|
|
|
Post by damngumby on Dec 6, 2017 14:24:46 GMT
I'll repeat what I said before ... so you can have the same argument fail twice? Sorry champ, there is no legal difference between making a public announcement at a press conference or at a shareholder meeting. If you insist there is, then cite the reg. Otherwise, don't bother repeating yourself a 3rd time. Thanks for highlighting how the once mighty DC has fallen so far behind Marvel recently. When DC is so deprived of accomplishments after 1984 that you have to take the Best Supporting Actor Oscar away from Heath Ledger and give it to DC to bolster their resume, well ... that says it all.
|
|
|
Post by damngumby on Dec 6, 2017 14:38:06 GMT
Thank you. Marvel doesn't have a 20 year history of reneging on their female superhero movie announcements, so their credit is still good. DC must pay with cash. DC can have that one. Hopefully they don't try to re-imagine Batman and his relationship with Robin.
|
|
Peter B. Parker
Sophomore
Watch the hands, not the mouth
@babygroot
Posts: 853
Likes: 411
|
Post by Peter B. Parker on Dec 6, 2017 17:25:32 GMT
Probably because of how films like Catwoman and Elektra been received in the past. There was a belief that they couldn't be successful and no one wanted a CBM with a female lead. The 2017 Wonder Woman movie obviously proved them wrong. Here's hoping that all female CBM films do well! There's Captain Marvel coming out in 2019, so I think we may be getting another well liked female led solo CBM
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Dec 6, 2017 19:13:54 GMT
Probably because of how films like Catwoman and Elektra been received in the past. There was a belief that they couldn't be successful and no one wanted a CBM with a female lead. The 2017 Wonder Woman movie obviously proved them wrong. Here's hoping that all female CBM films do well! There's Captain Marvel coming out in 2019, so I think we may be getting another well liked female led solo CBM Most likely.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Dec 7, 2017 4:28:34 GMT
Dear delusional fan boy. You get an A for effort and Merry Christmas but until Marvel has a female superhero movie out your thread means jackshit, diddly squat, muffins in the oven and when is this Captain Marvel coming out? The year 2019 or 2029? Are we going to see it in our lifetimes or is the movie that keeps getting pushed back? It has been pushed back already and history shows it will be pushed back again for Iron Man 4, Captain America 4 and Thor 4. I Hate to crap all over your charade but DC already have Wonder Woman and Wonder Woman 2, Batgirl, Harley Quinn and Gotham City Sirens are coming. DC has 2 female fronted TV shows and LGBTI representation in Supergirl, Arrow and Legends of Tomorrow. A Harley Quinn TV show is next. What does Marvel have? Jackshit. If you want to steal the credit first you need a movie kid and I ain’t seeing anything that makes me believe Captain Marvel will come out before Iron Man 4 or Thor 4. Fuck, who are we kidding? Iron Man 5, Thor 5 and Captain America 4 and 5. Marvel will throw in a remake Howard the Duck before they ever put a female superhero movie out. Watch and see. Excellent post! Yes, MCU kept pushing Captain Marvel back so its doubtful that MCU will ever release a Captain Marvel movie.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Dec 7, 2017 4:41:34 GMT
Thank you. Marvel doesn't have a 20 year history of reneging on their female superhero movie announcements, so their credit is still good. DC must pay with cash. MCU has had a 10-year history of refusing to make a female-led superhero movie so MCU's credit is worthless as far as the Captain Marvel movie is concerned.
And no WB didn't lie when they announced a Wonder Woman movie 2 weeks BEFORE MCU added Captain Marvel to their slate of movies in reaction to WB's announcement. Just because your hero Tom Brady lied in a press conference and also lied in his Arbitration hearing about being a cheater doesn't make it legal for WB to lie to shareholders at a shareholders' meeting.
The NFL had no legal authority to charge Brady with lying at his Arbitration hearing so Brady was able to get away with lie after lie. But the SEC does have legal authority to charge board members with lying and defrauding shareholders.
The NFL let Brady and the Patriots get away with their constant cheating and fraud with nothing more than just a slap on the wrist. But the SEC isn't as lenient when it comes to fraud. The SEC goes after perpetrators of fraud like bulldogs. If WB had lied with their announcement to shareholders at a shareholders' meeting, then the board would be serving some hard time in a federal prison for fraud.
Since none of the board were charged with fraud and since WB not only produced the Wonder Woman movie but also released it ahead of the original schedule, it's pretty clear that WB didn't lie so the onus is on you to prove your bullshit allegations, and so far you've provided no proof at all.
Bottom line: WB led the way and announced a Wonder Woman movie first and then 2 weeks later MCU reacted to WB's announcement by adding Captain Marvel to their slate of movies.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Dec 7, 2017 4:43:38 GMT
Probably because of how films like Catwoman and Elektra been received in the past. There was a belief that they couldn't be successful and no one wanted a CBM with a female lead. The 2017 Wonder Woman movie obviously proved them wrong. Here's hoping that all female CBM films do well! There's Captain Marvel coming out in 2019, so I think we may be getting another well liked female led solo CBM I doubt it. MCU hates female superheroes (that's why they haven't made a female-led superhero movie in a decade) so MCU will probably make Captain Marvel another damsel-in-distress who needs the male superheroes to come to her rescue, similar to how Iron Man came to Spider-Kid's rescue not once but TWICE in SMH.
|
|
|
Post by seahawksraawk00 on Dec 7, 2017 4:59:22 GMT
There's Captain Marvel coming out in 2019, so I think we may be getting another well liked female led solo CBM I doubt it. MCU hates female superheroes (that's why they haven't made a female-led superhero movie in a decade) so MCU will probably make Captain Marvel another damsel-in-distress who needs the male superheroes to come to her rescue, similar to how Iron Man came to Spider-Kid's rescue not once but TWICE in SMH. Hey, how about that Infinity War trailer, huh!?! Amazing how its even better than the Justice League film itself. I know you're still butthurt and reeling in pain from JL's performance, but look on the bright side, the MCU will always be successful.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 7, 2017 7:01:32 GMT
Dear delusional fan boy. You get an A for effort and Merry Christmas but until Marvel has a female superhero movie out your thread means jackshit, diddly squat, muffins in the oven and when is this Captain Marvel coming out? The year 2019 or 2029? Are we going to see it in our lifetimes or is the movie that keeps getting pushed back? It has been pushed back already and history shows it will be pushed back again for Iron Man 4, Captain America 4 and Thor 4. I Hate to crap all over your charade but DC already have Wonder Woman and Wonder Woman 2, Batgirl, Harley Quinn and Gotham City Sirens are coming. DC has 2 female fronted TV shows and LGBTI representation in Supergirl, Arrow and Legends of Tomorrow. A Harley Quinn TV show is next. What does Marvel have? Jackshit. If you want to steal the credit first you need a movie kid and I ain’t seeing anything that makes me believe Captain Marvel will come out before Iron Man 4 or Thor 4. Fuck, who are we kidding? Iron Man 5, Thor 5 and Captain America 4 and 5. Marvel will throw in a remake Howard the Duck before they ever put a female superhero movie out. Watch and see. He certainly is delusional. I think 'Captain Marvel' will come out eventually but it was the DCEU that beat them to the punch with 'Wonder Woman' as their third movie (and not their 21st) and not only have they have announced movies of 'Batgirl', 'Harley Quinn', 'Gotham City Sirens' and 'Wonder Woman 2' Geoff Johns said after 'Wonder Woman' they have big plans for more female superhero movies and they are going to bring the Bat Family to screen for the very first time and a lot of Bat Family members like the Spoiler, Orphan, Batwoman, Bluebird, Hawkfire etc are female. Unlike most of the Hollywood executives Geoff Johns isn't a sexist pig and Geoff has written for a few female lead comic books series like 'Supergirl' and 'Witchblade, he is a big fan of Batgirl, Black Canary and Birds of Prey and was one of the main people behind curing Barbara Gordon so she could be Batgirl again. Geoff Johns having more power and influence over the direction of the DCEU is the real reason we got 'Wonder Woman' and the debut episode of 'Supergirl' which had higher ratings than any superhero TV show in the past 20 years (including Smallville) was also said to be one of the things that influenced Warner Bros decision to give the greenlight for 'Wonder Woman' 'cause it showed people wanted female superheroes.
To be fair, Marvel have had 2 female lead movies out. Both 'Elektra' and the old 'Sheena: Queen of the Jungle' movie with Tanya Roberts were Marvel and I am not sure how long 'Sheena: Queen of the Jungle' was under Marvel but their name was on the film and they made a comic book adaption of the movie so they have made 2 in the past but they had the entire MCU to make a female superhero movie and Ms Marvel (who played a big part in Civil War and had an entire graphic novel dedicated to her role) was screwed over by Ike Perlmutter. Marvel has a bad history with female lead titles due to management. They sabotaged Ms Marvel's popularity in the late 70s when she was hailed as a feminist icon by having her raped and impregnated by her own son while the other Avengers smiled over it and acted like there was nothing wrong and their biggest mistake was losing 'Red Sonja' who is one of the biggest selling female comic book characters of all time .
|
|
|
Post by sostie on Dec 7, 2017 11:53:04 GMT
DC has never followed Marvel. DC has always led the way. DC published the 1st superhero comic book in 1938. DC was the 1st to have a superhero show on radio in the 1940s. DC was the 1st to have a superhero show on TV in the 1950s. DC was the 1st to have a big-budget superhero movie in 1978. DC was the 1st to have a shared cinematic universe for superheroes in 1984. DC was the 1st to win an Oscar in a major category for a superhero movie in 2008. And DC was the 1st to have a successful female-led superhero movie and soon will be the 1st to have a Best Picture Oscar nomination for a superhero movie in 2017. MCU has always just been following DC. Before Marvel, but not the first ever DC themselves were not responsible for these...they had no input in the films production. Well Elektra did make a profit. Not the first ever...both Modesty Blaise and Barbarella were successful CBM movies. Arguably the Underworld, Resident Evil and Tomb Raider films could be seen as super hero movies. Perhaps if you specified even further..."DC was the 1st to have a successful female-led superhero movie based on a comic book that earned over a certain amount" And that is the problem with your constant claims...a Marvel v DC back and forth can go on forever if you reduce to specifics. But seeing as you want to spout little lists here are a few things Marvel did before DC Openly gay Super Hero Openly bi-sexual super hero Black super hero Black headline super hero Asian headline super hero Muslim super hero Muslim headline superhero First black Super hero TV series Successful black CBM First black CBM/Super Hero movie franchise Highest grossing super hero movie Highest grossing super hero movie sequel Highest grossing super hero solo movie Highest grossing super hero team movie
|
|
|
Post by sostie on Dec 7, 2017 12:00:11 GMT
Dear delusional fan boy. You get an A for effort and Merry Christmas but until Marvel has a female superhero movie out your thread means jackshit, diddly squat, muffins in the oven and when is this Captain Marvel coming out? The year 2019 or 2029? Are we going to see it in our lifetimes or is the movie that keeps getting pushed back? It has been pushed back already and history shows it will be pushed back again for Iron Man 4, Captain America 4 and Thor 4. I Hate to crap all over your charade but DC already have Wonder Woman and Wonder Woman 2, Batgirl, Harley Quinn and Gotham City Sirens are coming. DC has 2 female fronted TV shows and LGBTI representation in Supergirl, Arrow and Legends of Tomorrow. A Harley Quinn TV show is next. What does Marvel have? Jackshit. If you want to steal the credit first you need a movie kid and I ain’t seeing anything that makes me believe Captain Marvel will come out before Iron Man 4 or Thor 4. Fuck, who are we kidding? Iron Man 5, Thor 5 and Captain America 4 and 5. Marvel will throw in a remake Howard the Duck before they ever put a female superhero movie out. Watch and see. Excellent post! Yes, MCU kept pushing Captain Marvel back so its doubtful that MCU will ever release a Captain Marvel movie.
There is some hypocrisy you applauding a post that champions the status (or criticises the lack of) female and LGBTI representation in CBMs You constantly deny and underplay Wonder Woman's status and importance in comic book history and popular culture before the recent movie You said in the past that giving the WW directing job to a woman was a risk. And personally I find someone who has emphasised that they are "100% Hetrosexual" on their IMDB profile a bit odd to say the least.
|
|