Wonder Woman (2017)

Books, movies, television...
Post Reply
User avatar
Jorge
NYUCK NYUCK NYUCK
Posts: 36487
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 3:35 pm
Location: Buenos Aires

Re: Wonder Woman (2017)

Post by Jorge »

OK. I gotta write a review now but it'll be in Spanish. Overall, I liked it!
Anders wrote:I do not have a «neoliberal assessment of geopolitics», so please stop writing that I do.
User avatar
Strat
Waiting for HVAC Repairman
Posts: 35407
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 3:48 pm
Location: Twin City Kisses

Re: Wonder Woman (2017)

Post by Strat »

theplatypus wrote:Ohh thia could've taken such an interesting turn
pan con alioli es muy bueno
User avatar
VinylGuy
jeeeesus relax already
Posts: 42765
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 5:10 pm

Re: Wonder Woman (2017)

Post by VinylGuy »

Its a cool movie...its way better than everything Marvel did in a long time for sure...and Gal Gadot is a superstar. She is amazing.
BONE FUCKIN´ TOMAHAWK.
User avatar
LoathedVermin72
The Master
Posts: 33834
Joined: Sun May 25, 2014 9:32 pm

Re: Wonder Woman (2017)

Post by LoathedVermin72 »

I appreciate that this movie follows Zack Snyder's brilliant vision of casting superheroes as contemporary mythology (literal gods), but his intuitive, baroque thematic clarity has been replaced by prosaic, expository discussion of subtext, and his beautifully complicated (and complex) optimism has been replaced by embarrassing platitudes. "Only love can truly save the world," is the conclusion they came to? Seriously?

It makes sense to me that this is being so well-received; it's not idiosyncratic enough to be divisive (or interesting). For the most part, it's...fine. It's a decently made blockbuster. The villains are milquetoast. The tone alternates between sweepingly dramatic and obligatorily light. Patty Jenkins is no visionary. She gets the job done. The movie checks the boxes and does what it needs to do. Slivers of Snyder's original vision are definitely there, but applied in a way that feels formulaic, like a TV show trying to mimic the style of a famous director who only made the pilot. In other words, a nice gesture, but ultimately empty and unfulfilling. As the DC cinematic universe progresses, I'm sure Snyder's originality will be felt less and less, and we will descend further and further into banality.
User avatar
knee tunes
for those who
are not...shall be
Posts: 8505
Joined: Sat January 05, 2013 7:30 am
Location: nothing

Re: Wonder Woman (2017)

Post by knee tunes »

LoathedVermin72 wrote:I appreciate that this movie follows Zack Snyder's brilliant vision of casting superheroes as contemporary mythology (literal gods), but his intuitive, baroque thematic clarity has been replaced by prosaic, expository discussion of subtext, and his beautifully complicated (and complex) optimism has been replaced by embarrassing platitudes. "Only love can truly save the world," is the conclusion they came to? Seriously?

It makes sense to me that this is being so well-received; it's not idiosyncratic enough to be divisive (or interesting). For the most part, it's...fine. It's a decently made blockbuster. The villains are milquetoast. The tone alternates between sweepingly dramatic and obligatorily light. Patty Jenkins is no visionary. She gets the job done. The movie checks the boxes and does what it needs to do. Slivers of Snyder's original vision are definitely there, but applied in a way that feels formulaic, like a TV show trying to mimic the style of a famous director who only made the pilot. In other words, a nice gesture, but ultimately empty and unfulfilling. As the DC cinematic universe progresses, I'm sure Snyder's originality will be felt less and less, and we will descend further and further into banality.
You're a critic!
Vitalogist wrote:As a hotel manager, you can imagine the amount of beige I’ve seen in my career.
User avatar
Jorge
NYUCK NYUCK NYUCK
Posts: 36487
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 3:35 pm
Location: Buenos Aires

Re: Wonder Woman (2017)

Post by Jorge »

LoathedVermin72 wrote: "Only love can truly save the world," is the conclusion they came to? Seriously?
This was some weird Sailor Moon shit, and it felt unearned, but I understand the need for it considering the market it shoots for. Could've been finessed better.
Anders wrote:I do not have a «neoliberal assessment of geopolitics», so please stop writing that I do.
User avatar
VinylGuy
jeeeesus relax already
Posts: 42765
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 5:10 pm

Re: Wonder Woman (2017)

Post by VinylGuy »

While i agree with most of LV view im still happy to see DC is planning on making movies out of its comics, not serialized tv like Marvel.

WW looks amazing.
BONE FUCKIN´ TOMAHAWK.
User avatar
LoathedVermin72
The Master
Posts: 33834
Joined: Sun May 25, 2014 9:32 pm

Re: Wonder Woman (2017)

Post by LoathedVermin72 »

VinylGuy wrote:While i agree with most of LV view im still happy to see DC is planning on making movies out of its comics, not serialized tv like Marvel.

WW looks amazing.
TBH I didn't think it looked that great. A lot of it was pretty flat and chintzy visually, especially at the beginning.
User avatar
VinylGuy
jeeeesus relax already
Posts: 42765
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 5:10 pm

Re: Wonder Woman (2017)

Post by VinylGuy »

oh i loved it. From the color palette to the framing, it was more like a real movie than anything Marvel did in their last movies.
I guess the last Marvel movie that had something like this was Captain America maybe.
BONE FUCKIN´ TOMAHAWK.
User avatar
LoathedVermin72
The Master
Posts: 33834
Joined: Sun May 25, 2014 9:32 pm

Re: Wonder Woman (2017)

Post by LoathedVermin72 »

VinylGuy wrote:oh i loved it. From the color palette to the framing, it was more like a real movie than anything Marvel did in their last movies.
I guess the last Marvel movie that had something like this was Captain America maybe.
I mean almost any movie looks more cinematic than what Marvel does so
User avatar
VinylGuy
jeeeesus relax already
Posts: 42765
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 5:10 pm

Re: Wonder Woman (2017)

Post by VinylGuy »

LoathedVermin72 wrote:
VinylGuy wrote:oh i loved it. From the color palette to the framing, it was more like a real movie than anything Marvel did in their last movies.
I guess the last Marvel movie that had something like this was Captain America maybe.
I mean almost any movie looks more cinematic than what Marvel does so
Not really. I would say that its more common to have the Marvel route in every movie these days. Comedys, dramas, even action movies...they all seem like tv series.
BONE FUCKIN´ TOMAHAWK.
User avatar
wease
Major Dude
Posts: 40175
Joined: Sat January 05, 2013 1:57 pm
Location: Where everybody knows your name

Re: Wonder Woman (2017)

Post by wease »

Just got tix for matinee tomorrow.
Let me tell you, Homer Simpson is cock of nothing!
- C. Montgomery Burns
User avatar
epilogue
We All We Got, We All We Need
Posts: 84847
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 5:33 pm
Location: Ghorman
Contact:

Re: Wonder Woman (2017)

Post by epilogue »

I'll probably see this Sunday or Monday. Not sure yet. Things are still up in the air. But I'm SUPER pumped to see it.
User avatar
Jorge
NYUCK NYUCK NYUCK
Posts: 36487
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 3:35 pm
Location: Buenos Aires

Re: Wonder Woman (2017)

Post by Jorge »

I loved the look of it. Nobody else noticed how oddly the action was cut, often showing us the immediate aftermath of the thing, like there were frames missing? It happened like five times. Also there's a shot of her throwing a tank near the end that is reallly weird.
Anders wrote:I do not have a «neoliberal assessment of geopolitics», so please stop writing that I do.
User avatar
VinylGuy
jeeeesus relax already
Posts: 42765
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 5:10 pm

Re: Wonder Woman (2017)

Post by VinylGuy »

Yeah, that was weird. Specially that scene were she gets her sword back. Really weird.
BONE FUCKIN´ TOMAHAWK.
jwfocker
AnalLog
Posts: 1855
Joined: Thu January 31, 2013 9:44 pm

Re: Wonder Woman (2017)

Post by jwfocker »

LoathedVermin72 wrote:I appreciate that this movie follows Zack Snyder's brilliant vision of casting superheroes as contemporary mythology (literal gods), but his intuitive, baroque thematic clarity has been replaced by prosaic, expository discussion of subtext, and his beautifully complicated (and complex) optimism has been replaced by embarrassing platitudes. "Only love can truly save the world," is the conclusion they came to? Seriously?

It makes sense to me that this is being so well-received; it's not idiosyncratic enough to be divisive (or interesting). For the most part, it's...fine. It's a decently made blockbuster. The villains are milquetoast. The tone alternates between sweepingly dramatic and obligatorily light. Patty Jenkins is no visionary. She gets the job done. The movie checks the boxes and does what it needs to do. Slivers of Snyder's original vision are definitely there, but applied in a way that feels formulaic, like a TV show trying to mimic the style of a famous director who only made the pilot. In other words, a nice gesture, but ultimately empty and unfulfilling. As the DC cinematic universe progresses, I'm sure Snyder's originality will be felt less and less, and we will descend further and further into banality.

Man, for a minute I thought that last portion was a critique on humanity.
User avatar
LoathedVermin72
The Master
Posts: 33834
Joined: Sun May 25, 2014 9:32 pm

Re: Wonder Woman (2017)

Post by LoathedVermin72 »

jwfocker wrote:
LoathedVermin72 wrote:I appreciate that this movie follows Zack Snyder's brilliant vision of casting superheroes as contemporary mythology (literal gods), but his intuitive, baroque thematic clarity has been replaced by prosaic, expository discussion of subtext, and his beautifully complicated (and complex) optimism has been replaced by embarrassing platitudes. "Only love can truly save the world," is the conclusion they came to? Seriously?

It makes sense to me that this is being so well-received; it's not idiosyncratic enough to be divisive (or interesting). For the most part, it's...fine. It's a decently made blockbuster. The villains are milquetoast. The tone alternates between sweepingly dramatic and obligatorily light. Patty Jenkins is no visionary. She gets the job done. The movie checks the boxes and does what it needs to do. Slivers of Snyder's original vision are definitely there, but applied in a way that feels formulaic, like a TV show trying to mimic the style of a famous director who only made the pilot. In other words, a nice gesture, but ultimately empty and unfulfilling. As the DC cinematic universe progresses, I'm sure Snyder's originality will be felt less and less, and we will descend further and further into banality.

Man, for a minute I thought that last portion was a critique on humanity.
Spoiler: show
I know! And then they just threw it away! They set up this great metaphor with Ares representing something in man's nature, and then, at the last second, they walk that back and are like, "Nevermind, Ares is an actual character and when he dies, the war ends." What?!
jwfocker
AnalLog
Posts: 1855
Joined: Thu January 31, 2013 9:44 pm

Re: Wonder Woman (2017)

Post by jwfocker »

LoathedVermin72 wrote:
jwfocker wrote:
LoathedVermin72 wrote:I appreciate that this movie follows Zack Snyder's brilliant vision of casting superheroes as contemporary mythology (literal gods), but his intuitive, baroque thematic clarity has been replaced by prosaic, expository discussion of subtext, and his beautifully complicated (and complex) optimism has been replaced by embarrassing platitudes. "Only love can truly save the world," is the conclusion they came to? Seriously?

It makes sense to me that this is being so well-received; it's not idiosyncratic enough to be divisive (or interesting). For the most part, it's...fine. It's a decently made blockbuster. The villains are milquetoast. The tone alternates between sweepingly dramatic and obligatorily light. Patty Jenkins is no visionary. She gets the job done. The movie checks the boxes and does what it needs to do. Slivers of Snyder's original vision are definitely there, but applied in a way that feels formulaic, like a TV show trying to mimic the style of a famous director who only made the pilot. In other words, a nice gesture, but ultimately empty and unfulfilling. As the DC cinematic universe progresses, I'm sure Snyder's originality will be felt less and less, and we will descend further and further into banality.

Man, for a minute I thought that last portion was a critique on humanity.
Spoiler: show
I know! And then they just threw it away! They set up this great metaphor with Ares representing something in man's nature, and then, at the last second, they walk that back and are like, "Nevermind, Ares is an actual character and when he dies, the war ends." What?!
Spoiler: show
no balls. Had to go the generic route.
User avatar
Jorge
NYUCK NYUCK NYUCK
Posts: 36487
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 3:35 pm
Location: Buenos Aires

Re: Wonder Woman (2017)

Post by Jorge »

LoathedVermin72 wrote:
jwfocker wrote:
LoathedVermin72 wrote:I appreciate that this movie follows Zack Snyder's brilliant vision of casting superheroes as contemporary mythology (literal gods), but his intuitive, baroque thematic clarity has been replaced by prosaic, expository discussion of subtext, and his beautifully complicated (and complex) optimism has been replaced by embarrassing platitudes. "Only love can truly save the world," is the conclusion they came to? Seriously?

It makes sense to me that this is being so well-received; it's not idiosyncratic enough to be divisive (or interesting). For the most part, it's...fine. It's a decently made blockbuster. The villains are milquetoast. The tone alternates between sweepingly dramatic and obligatorily light. Patty Jenkins is no visionary. She gets the job done. The movie checks the boxes and does what it needs to do. Slivers of Snyder's original vision are definitely there, but applied in a way that feels formulaic, like a TV show trying to mimic the style of a famous director who only made the pilot. In other words, a nice gesture, but ultimately empty and unfulfilling. As the DC cinematic universe progresses, I'm sure Snyder's originality will be felt less and less, and we will descend further and further into banality.

Man, for a minute I thought that last portion was a critique on humanity.
Spoiler: show
I know! And then they just threw it away! They set up this great metaphor with Ares representing something in man's nature, and then, at the last second, they walk that back and are like, "Nevermind, Ares is an actual character and when he dies, the war ends." What?!
Yep. That's what I meant with
theplatypus wrote:Ohh this could've taken such an interesting turn
That also would've been consistent with her outlook in BVS
Anders wrote:I do not have a «neoliberal assessment of geopolitics», so please stop writing that I do.
User avatar
E.H. Ruddock
Guys, I am not a moderator! I swear to God! Why does everyone think I'm a moderator?
Posts: 51787
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 2:48 pm

Re: Wonder Woman (2017)

Post by E.H. Ruddock »

does she fly an invisible jet in this
Clouuuuds Rolll byyy...BANG BANG BANG BANG
Post Reply