Underwear or Skirt in the WW movie?

[kpjoon]

Which one do you prefer?
Honestly, I think a miniskirt will translate better onto film rather than the underwear.

[The Kid]

If it were up to me, it'd be a thong. I hope they go with underwear, or whatever it's called.

[FooYu]

Skimpier the better.

[Fused]

boyshorts: theyre sexy, but not thong ****ty. provides coverage but not like the old school granny panties. maybe something like this in blue leather/vinyl

http://img115.imageshack.us/img115/3457/boyshorts45st.jpg

[That-Guy]

Body paint. :D

[terry78]

This thing will be PG-13 at the most, which equates to a lot of family viewers, and I doubt they would want to lose that cash cow by having her in a g-string. The boy shorts thing would probably be the choice.

[Spider-Fan83]

so, are we only going to get one or the other, cuase if were not geting both, i'd go with the skirt, if you know what I mean lol
commando's the only way to go hehehe

[Morg]

A thong would be nice :)

[Steelsheen]

i like to have the battle skirt (like the ancient Greeks/Romans) with star studs and the star-spangled panties underneath.

[SolidRoar]

i like to have the battle skirt (like the ancient Greeks/Romans) with star studs and the star-spangled panties underneath.Yeah, I think that will be the direction they are aiming for.

[Chris Wallace]

Neither.
I say cover her legs. She's supposed to be the symbol of female empowerment, not eye candy. Let's give her more than a frickin' bikini!

[Soundwave88]

A thong would be nice :)

that it would be but depends whos wearing it

[ToddIsDead]

i like to have the battle skirt (like the ancient Greeks/Romans) with star studs and the star-spangled panties underneath.
I would prefer something like this.

[Morg]

that it would be but depends whos wearing it


a girl naturally :O

[Joker]

Neither.
I say cover her legs. She's supposed to be the symbol of female empowerment, not eye candy. Let's give her more than a frickin' bikini!

so you're saying empowered females cant be sexy? besides, the battle skirt look is what the greeks and romans used to wear to battle, so it's not like there's no reason for it...

[KingOfDreams]

Skirt. And I'd like it to be like that Roman/Greek-esque battle suit she was wearing for awhile...and which the new Wonder Woman wears. At least I think she does if I recall correctly. You know, individual strips made of leather I'm assuming making up the skirt.

[Chris Wallace]

so you're saying empowered females cant be sexy? besides, the battle skirt look is what the greeks and romans used to wear to battle, so it's not like there's no reason for it...
No, I am not saying empowered women can't be sexy. However, a woman can be sexy WITHOUT showing 2/3 of her skin.
And unless the movie takes place in either Ancient Greece or Ancient Rome, their battle attire is kind of moot here.

[KingOfDreams]

Not really because Wonder Woman has always had a Greek theme to it and has been set in modern day.

[Fused]

Neither.
I say cover her legs. She's supposed to be the symbol of female empowerment, not eye candy. Let's give her more than a frickin' bikini!

***heart attack***

Thats definitely not her iconic look. When you have an iconic costume like hers, doing something like that jacks it up way too much.

[Triligors]

Whatever the most revealing costume is- I choose that.

[gregtestagent]

I suppose underwear and a skirt. It's supposed to be at least a PG13 movie right? :D

[Dr. Fate]

I want the star-spangled underwear.

Although, if you want to be technical, it would probably be more practical for Wonder Woman to wear that heavy duty Roman gladiator armor when fighting the forces of evil as opposed to the metallic bikini - more protection for her, 'cause you can never have enough no matter how much stamina you have naturally.

[Ben Breeck]

As long as they stay away from the Golden Age trunks and keep from making it look like she's a Xena look alike, I really don't care.

[terry78]

^They can't help but make her a Xena lookalike, as Xena was basically modeled after her from the get go.

[ClarkLuther55]

"Underwear." Wonder Woman's look is iconic, and changing it will only annoy the masses of casual moviegoers who already have an image in their heads of the way the character is supposed to look. Letting her show her beautiful legs is NOT inherently sexist, but covering them up WILL lose sexist and/or horny male viewers (who pay money just like everyone else). The Xena skirt would be detrimental, and would probably cause a lot of jokes or accusations of "rip off." WW is a comic icon, and should not be modeled after a syndicated TV show that was popular a decade ago.

Honestly, NO ONE I know of in real life has a problem with the way WW looks. The only people who complain are a small minority of fanboys on forums like this, who think that their personal beefs and/or wishes for costume changes are what a lot of other people would prefer. Ironic, since no fanboy would call for major changes to Superman or Batman's costumes.

Some of these guys claim that audiences wouldn't take the character seriously if she wears her famous costume, even though you NEVER hear any normal people making fun of it (not even in a light-hearted Superman "underwear on the outside" way while still being accepting of it). If anything, the iconic costume is visually APPEALING. It's beautiful, colorful, and can be sexy without being overly ****ty. Since when did something no more revealing than a ONE PIECE bathing suit become too sexist and revealing again? What decade are we living in?

[Paganus]

Well said, ClarkLuther55. I'll only add one thing to that. She'll have—or she should anyway—a strong, athletic body. Showing that off is entirely consistent with her being a symbol of female empowerment; i.e., basic feminist principles shouldn't be confused with sexual puritanism.

[ImperfectIcon]

Stick to the classic "panties". Never referred to them as panites but rather "star-pangled satin tights".

Not going to see Xena at the movies, I'm there to see Wonder Woman.

[Dark Knight]

Battle skirt....

[dnno1]

"Underwear." Wonder Woman's look is iconic, and changing it will only annoy the masses of casual moviegoers who already have an image in their heads of the way the character is supposed to look. Letting her show her beautiful legs is NOT inherently sexist, but covering them up WILL lose sexist and/or horny male viewers (who pay money just like everyone else). The Xena skirt would be detrimental, and would probably cause a lot of jokes or accusations of "rip off." WW is a comic icon, and should not be modeled after a syndicated TV show that was popular a decade ago.

Honestly, NO ONE I know of in real life has a problem with the way WW looks. The only people who complain are a small minority of fanboys on forums like this, who think that their personal beefs and/or wishes for costume changes are what a lot of other people would prefer. Ironic, since no fanboy would call for major changes to Superman or Batman's costumes.

Some of these guys claim that audiences wouldn't take the character seriously if she wears her famous costume, even though you NEVER hear any normal people making fun of it (not even in a light-hearted Superman "underwear on the outside" way while still being accepting of it). If anything, the iconic costume is visually APPEALING. It's beautiful, colorful, and can be sexy without being overly ****ty. Since when did something no more revealing than a ONE PIECE bathing suit become too sexist and revealing again? What decade are we living in?

I don't think that Hollywood has ever had a film that casted a heroine dressed that way for the whole program ever and held a decent film rating (G, PG, or PG-13) or made a decent profit. If they do that now with "Wonder Woman" they will be bucking a trend and taking a big risk (anything outside of a PG-13 rating is usually the kiss of death for a film). I am willing to bet money that the costume will either be less revealing, or you will see very little of it at all in the film. Anyway, if I go to see the film, it won't be just to see the costume, it will be to see some good action, adventure, and drama (all in that order).

[terry78]

^Granted, they wont be making any toys to sell to boys, but Mattel will most definitely have playsets for the girl demographic on this one. And some older fanboys, of course. =P

[That-Guy]

NAKED DAMMIT!!!! :D


Sorry, just kidding. I think they should ditch the stars and blue panties/skirt altogether and give her the armor she wore in Kingdom Come. It looked super-badass and fit better with the Mediterranean culture instead of making her look like a Captain America stripper, which is what the traditional costume always looked like to me.

[hippie_hunter]

I think that the suit should be a mix of this:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/6b/Wonderwomandodson.png

and this:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e6/WWDonna.jpg

[Hypestyle]

interesting.. hopefully the costume designers will be faithful to the history of the character..

[Super_Ludacris]

lol@ the title of the thread..

[Strange]

Wonder Woman should wear bubble wrap.

[ClarkLuther55]

I don't think that Hollywood has ever had a film that casted a heroine dressed that way for the whole program ever and held a decent film rating (G, PG, or PG-13) or made a decent profit.

No, but they do have movies with thong and sex scenes that have been PG-13. Do you SERIOUSLY think that the WW outfit is more ****ty and risque than some of the things women in movies are wearing and doing these days? Take Bring it On (a movie off the top of my head). It's a movie about cheerleaders, full of sexy scenes and sex-related comedy. You seem the girls walking around in their underwear, getting wet during a bikini car wash, and a guy even sticks his finger up a girl's ass. Yet that movie was rated PG-13, and there WASN'T this huge backlash against it.

Many adults grew up watching the WW show as kids and would probably take their kids to a WW movie. When people see the iconic costume, they see WW, not excessive sexuality.

If they do that now with "Wonder Woman" they will be bucking a trend and taking a big risk (anything outside of a PG-13 rating is usually the kiss of death for a film).

Uh huh, the film would get an R rating because of the costume, when the TV show (TV-PG) and Justice League cartoon (TV-Y7) have been able to get away with it without complaints. :rolleyes:

Once again I have to say that some of you guys seem REALLY prudish. When did something no more revealing than a one piece bathing suit suddenly become R-rated material?

[seliz1]

I prefer the underwear, although I also like the boyshorts idea. I have no qualms about a woman showing skin on screen. My only problem with the whole "one piece bathing suit" thing is that I have worn one (on many occasions). And trust me, you can't walk five feet without the top sliding down or the bottom riding up. The thought of someone doing actual physical activity in one of those things is ridiculous. But do I still want to see it? Sure. Stick with the iconic suit. Gravity schmavity.

[ShadowBoxing]

You know what, since no consensus has been met, I say she wears nothing.

[Batman1939]

Nothing just kidding :D hehe.

[Fused]

Might wanna save your breath Clark Luthor. dnno is completely obtuse during a Wonder Woman costume discussion. As reasonable as your points are some people refuse to listen to well. . . reason.

[The Kid]

You know what, since no consensus has been met, I say she wears nothing.

Indeed. I concur with you on that decision.:up:

Oh and about wonderwoman wearing some underwear panty or whatever it's called being too risque for ratings... hey. I call shinanigans on that. First I'll post this: http://www.pmpnetwork.com/photos6/BurtWard.jpg And of course this: http://aerialexperience.com/Quickstart/ImageLib/NEWS%20Kristen%20Maloney%20Olympic%20Gymnast%20Cir que%20sur%20Glace_w.jpg(girls can wear this in front of millions during sport events but wonderwoman can't wear her classic costume for a few fights and such?)then I'll say: If I have to put up with spiderman's or the fantastic four's tights-wearing action, i think I deserve some wonder woman action in her traditional costume... tee hee -_-

I mean omg just look at this...http://www.intlgymnast.com/images/events/2002/usa-nationals/schwikert_tasha.jpg It's absolutely fasinating.

In

front

of

millions

http://www.drjump.com/images/rhythmic%20gymnastics.jpg

:)

[Joker]

I think I would like to have sex with that last gymnast you posted

[dnno1]

No, but they do have movies with thong and sex scenes that have been PG-13. Do you SERIOUSLY think that the WW outfit is more ****ty and risque than some of the things women in movies are wearing and doing these days? Take Bring it On (a movie off the top of my head). It's a movie about cheerleaders, full of sexy scenes and sex-related comedy. You seem the girls walking around in their underwear, getting wet during a bikini car wash, and a guy even sticks his finger up a girl's ass. Yet that movie was rated PG-13, and there WASN'T this huge backlash against it.

Many adults grew up watching the WW show as kids and would probably take their kids to a WW movie. When people see the iconic costume, they see WW, not excessive sexuality.

And you see how much money "Bring it On" made? A little over $80 million. That film was made for a specific audience on a low budget. A film like "Wonder Woman" is going to cost way more than $30 million to make (that would be an injustice) and the expectations are going to be quite larger than $80 million. This means that its going to rely on more than just hormonal teenagers to pay for this film. By the way if you will notice, the Wonder Woman in the TV skein wore panty hose under that costume (just like Dasy Duke did back then). Also that skein was during the T&A era and that's what a lot of men wanted to see at that time (excessive sexuality). R-rated films were very common then as well. We can't say that today, for the trend has changed. Any film ouside of a PG-13 rating (excluding G rated films and some R-rated comedies) spells the kiss of death for an action/adventure film.

Uh huh, the film would get an R rating because of the costume, when the TV show (TV-PG) and Justice League cartoon (TV-Y7) have been able to get away with it without complaints.

Once again I have to say that some of you guys seem REALLY prudish. When did something no more revealing than a one piece bathing suit suddenly become R-rated material?

It all depends on how much flesh and how long it is shown. Keep in mind that the Justice League cartoons were only shown on cable TV and aired to small markets here in the US (less than a million at one period). If you will notice in the recent Batman and Superman cartoons (which both aired on network television) you didn't see very many heroes or villians who wore bathing suits for costumes (Poison Ivy wore panty hose). I think I have argued this before on another thread, when something begins to apeal to a larger audience it begins to become either criticised or self censored by the industry.

[Isildur´s Heir]

Neither.
I say cover her legs. She's supposed to be the symbol of female empowerment, not eye candy. Let's give her more than a frickin' bikini!
To give a serious insigth, i would have to see it for myself, but my first reaction is, neither.
Not because she is not eye candy, but because...

Do you guys have any idea how easy it is for the movie to be extremely ridiculous, when the main character wears something that looks like it come out of Baywatch?
Do you guys have any idea how many jokes the movie would bring to the table?
And forget about taking it seriously...no one would take seriously, a movie where the bad guy gets an erection everytime he sees the hero.

[Mr. Thing]

Skirt, I say.

[Chris Wallace]

To give a serious insigth, i would have to see it for myself, but my first reaction is, neither.
Not because she is not eye candy, but because...

Do you guys have any idea how easy it is for the movie to be extremely ridiculous, when the main character wears something that looks like it come out of Baywatch?
Do you guys have any idea how many jokes the movie would bring to the table?
And forget about taking it seriously...no one would take seriously, a movie where the bad guy gets an erection everytime he sees the hero.
Oh, my-are you in danger of being the first person on this thread to see my point of view on this?

[Chris Wallace]

Indeed. I concur with you on that decision.:up:

Oh and about wonderwoman wearing some underwear panty or whatever it's called being too risque for ratings... hey. I call shinanigans on that. First I'll post this: http://www.pmpnetwork.com/photos6/BurtWard.jpg And of course this: http://aerialexperience.com/Quickstart/ImageLib/NEWS%20Kristen%20Maloney%20Olympic%20Gymnast%20Cir que%20sur%20Glace_w.jpg(girls can wear this in front of millions during sport events but wonderwoman can't wear her classic costume for a few fights and such?)then I'll say: If I have to put up with spiderman's or the fantastic four's tights-wearing action, i think I deserve some wonder woman action in her traditional costume... tee hee -_-

I mean omg just look at this...http://www.intlgymnast.com/images/events/2002/usa-nationals/schwikert_tasha.jpg It's absolutely fasinating.

In

front

of

millions

http://www.drjump.com/images/rhythmic%20gymnastics.jpg

:)
Never use Burt Ward's Robin costume to make a point.
And I was never trying to imply that the shorts or skirt would get them in trouble w/the MPAA or anything like that. I just think that if the main character is running around damn near naked, leaping & flying & what have you, this movie could get thrown in the box w/CINO & Tomb Raider. I don't see why she can't just wear some tights.
And don't give me that "iconic" argument. Not one superhero costume has made it to the big screen unaltered in the last 20 years. If it looks good, you'll get over it.

[WonderWoman]

"Underwear." Wonder Woman's look is iconic, and changing it will only annoy the masses of casual moviegoers who already have an image in their heads of the way the character is supposed to look. Letting her show her beautiful legs is NOT inherently sexist, but covering them up WILL lose sexist and/or horny male viewers (who pay money just like everyone else). The Xena skirt would be detrimental, and would probably cause a lot of jokes or accusations of "rip off." WW is a comic icon, and should not be modeled after a syndicated TV show that was popular a decade ago.

Honestly, NO ONE I know of in real life has a problem with the way WW looks. The only people who complain are a small minority of fanboys on forums like this, who think that their personal beefs and/or wishes for costume changes are what a lot of other people would prefer. Ironic, since no fanboy would call for major changes to Superman or Batman's costumes.

Some of these guys claim that audiences wouldn't take the character seriously if she wears her famous costume, even though you NEVER hear any normal people making fun of it (not even in a light-hearted Superman "underwear on the outside" way while still being accepting of it). If anything, the iconic costume is visually APPEALING. It's beautiful, colorful, and can be sexy without being overly ****ty. Since when did something no more revealing than a ONE PIECE bathing suit become too sexist and revealing again? What decade are we living in?

Very, very well said. :) :up:

[The Kid]

Never use Burt Ward's Robin costume to make a point.
And I was never trying to imply that the shorts or skirt would get them in trouble w/the MPAA or anything like that. I just think that if the main character is running around damn near naked, leaping & flying & what have you, this movie could get thrown in the box w/CINO & Tomb Raider. I don't see why she can't just wear some tights.
And don't give me that "iconic" argument. Not one superhero costume has made it to the big screen unaltered in the last 20 years. If it looks good, you'll get over it.

I'll do whatever I want to do. And I never read one of your posts in this thread before posting... but it's cool..

And I think she'd look fine in her comic outfit. It's a movie, come on! Wonderwoman in her tights would look as ridiculous as Superman or Spiderman, or fantastic four, or whatever in their circus inspired costumes. It's always going to look ridiculous in live action but who cares? It's cool. they wear this skin tight stuff in the books, so they do it in the movie. maybe dock ock did get an erection while watching spidey in his tights but he was too busy dodging punches and such to feel too good about it.

all i'm saying is that it's not too unusual to see athletic women running around in very... interesting... outfits.

[Fused]

R-rated films were very common then as well. (excluding G rated films and some R-rated comedies) spells the kiss of death for an action/adventure film.


OH NOEZ! ! Woman withz expozed thighs. Gets an R RATING. MOVIE WILL TANK OMGZ! ! !! !!

Please.

[GL1]

Hmmm...

My first instinct is to say Skirt. It is iconic of her first costume and the battle skirt is a popular way to take Wonder Woman away from being an American Flag. It's been used in comics very often and is just as iconic in the books as teh panties are from the 70s TV show. A blue skirt with silver star-shaped studs, imho, is the best way to keep WW's iconic look and not have her running around in a glorified swimsuit. If WW is portrayed as a gymnast, the gymnast look would be consistent, however, as is, I'd rather not have the panties just for panties sake.

I'm aginst covering up of the legs just for covering up the legs sake. The best movie design I've seen was a costume with legs, and so I do favor that interpretation... it did keep the iconic color scheme. However, to cover up Wonder Woman just for modesty sake goes against the grain of the character. She stareted out in 'sensational' comics. Part of her appeal is being a woman that you want and can't have... girls empathize with that kind of freedom and power and men are attracted to it. Turning her into Hilary Clinton would not be wise, nor appealing to either the fans, casual fans or conservatives who think it's all kids stuff anyway.

But there is something to preserving a small bit of mystery to make her sexier. A Thong doesn't do that. At all. That gets old quick... we don't want pornstar WW, at least, we won't pay 8.50 for it when can get a month subscription to equal quality porn for two bucks mroe. The standard panties she wore from twenty years ago up until recently... they're okay, but they don't provide mystery in body parts and shape to provide something for a real live actor to work with. I'd suggest the skirt. Her figure is still obvious... she's still very capable of being hot, but small, and interesting, portion of her silhouette is hidden... providing something to tease with. And if she wears star spangled panties under that, more power to her.

Boyshorts... interesting... has she ever worn them in comics? For decades?

[Chris Wallace]

I'll do whatever I want to do. And I never read one of your posts in this thread before posting... but it's cool..

And I think she'd look fine in her comic outfit. It's a movie, come on! Wonderwoman in her tights would look as ridiculous as Superman or Spiderman, or fantastic four, or whatever in their circus inspired costumes. It's always going to look ridiculous in live action but who cares? It's cool. they wear this skin tight stuff in the books, so they do it in the movie.

all i'm saying is that it's not too unusual to see athletic women running around in very... interesting... outfits.
Again, not what I'm saying. Not at all. It's not an issue of realism. I just think the tights would be a better way to go. I just think it'd be better than having her running around naked. You guys see "cover her legs" & your mind reads "Destroy the character!"

[terry78]

Some people are just against it because they feel it's the P.C. police bearing down on them. I doubt they even care that much if she sports a thong or not, they just want the option available.

[Marcus M.]

pants

[batbat_29640]

I would have to say Alex Ross' loin cloth idea from Kingdom Come. If you could make it like chain mail, think Frodo's mithrel shirt from LOTR. I really can't see one piece bathing suit girl as an ambassador of war. To me that's too much like Megatron beeing a shrinking gun in a live action movie. Just silly

[LongDong]

boyshorts: theyre sexy, but not thong ****ty. provides coverage but not like the old school granny panties. maybe something like this in blue leather/vinyl

http://img115.imageshack.us/img115/3457/boyshorts45st.jpg

Hey where did you get that pic of my mother??? You hacking into my computer again??

[Fried Gold]

Hey where did you get that pic of my mother??? You hacking into my computer again??
Are you saying that you have pictures of your own mother, posing in her underwear, on your computer? Weirdo.

[LongDong]

Are you saying that you have pictures of your own mother, posing in her underwear, on your computer? Weirdo.

heh heh, it was only a joke sheesh

[Red Arrow]

Hey where did you get that pic of my mother??? You hacking into my computer again??

You found that funny? :rolleyes:

[LongDong]

You found that funny? :rolleyes:

Well I was going to put that it was someone else's mother but then realized that it would have been a banning offence so I decided against it. last second change

[Fused]

Boyshorts... interesting... has she ever worn them in comics? For decades?

Well the idea came when her bottoms were often described as blue "trunks" as in the comics they are obviously not shorts like boxer's trunks are, but boyshorts allow a clothing article to be trunks perse, but still retain the design cuts familiar to the character without being super ****ty or completely foreign to what Wonder Woman fans are used to.

[Red Arrow]

Well I was going to put that it was someone else's mother but then realized that it would have been a banning offence so I decided against it. last second change

Either wouldn't have been funny. :o

[LongDong]

Either wouldn't have been funny. :o

Not like it really matters

[pifpaf]

i think she can be a wonder woman she is beautifful and fit

and a give you some example of what kind of short she can wear


http://img146.imagevenue.com/loc367/th_87482_lucia_tovar_blanc_318_122_367lo.jpg (http://img146.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=87482_lucia_tovar_blanc_318_122_367l o.jpg)http://img135.imagevenue.com/loc310/th_87487_lucia_tovar_mauve_122_310lo.jpg (http://img135.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=87487_lucia_tovar_mauve_122_310lo.jp g)http://img107.imagevenue.com/loc488/th_87492_lucia_tovar_mauve_1_122_488lo.jpg (http://img107.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=87492_lucia_tovar_mauve_1_122_488lo. jpg)http://img131.imagevenue.com/loc600/th_87498_lucia_tovar_mauve_2_122_600lo.jpg (http://img131.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=87498_lucia_tovar_mauve_2_122_600lo. jpg)
http://img146.imagevenue.com/loc399/th_87503_lucia_tovar_rouge_307_122_399lo.jpg (http://img146.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=87503_lucia_tovar_rouge_307_122_399l o.jpg)http://img105.imagevenue.com/loc353/th_87508_lucia_tovar_tight_jeans_78_122_353lo.jpg (http://img105.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=87508_lucia_tovar_tight_jeans_78_122 _353lo.jpg)http://img43.imagevenue.com/loc575/th_87514_lucia_tovar_9_122_575lo.jpg (http://img43.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=87514_lucia_tovar_9_122_575lo.jpg)
for the last pic is not the design we have to look but what kind of material the suit it will be made of


by the way she can be a very sexy and outstanding amazon

[Joker]

if she dressed like that, in that kind of fabric, she would look like a stripper. Give her the halter top and battle skirt, both made of painted metal. Or just gold metal like the Donna Troy Wonder Woman was seen in, because that was very close to the classic look, and actually looked functional.

[pifpaf]

if she dressed like that, in that kind of fabric, she would look like a stripper. Give her the halter top and battle skirt, both made of painted metal. Or just gold metal like the Donna Troy Wonder Woman was seen in, because that was very close to the classic look, and actually looked functional.
why not! we allways need more stripper. more we have better we are. actually for me it looked very functional for stripping and make LLOVVVEEEE!to wonderwoman



and by the way joker ,a was joking

[pifpaf]

i think she can be a wonder woman she is beautifful and fit

and a give you some example of what kind of short she can wear


http://img146.imagevenue.com/loc367/th_87482_lucia_tovar_blanc_318_122_367lo.jpg (http://img146.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=87482_lucia_tovar_blanc_318_122_367l o.jpg)http://img135.imagevenue.com/loc310/th_87487_lucia_tovar_mauve_122_310lo.jpg (http://img135.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=87487_lucia_tovar_mauve_122_310lo.jp g)http://img107.imagevenue.com/loc488/th_87492_lucia_tovar_mauve_1_122_488lo.jpg (http://img107.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=87492_lucia_tovar_mauve_1_122_488lo. jpg)http://img131.imagevenue.com/loc600/th_87498_lucia_tovar_mauve_2_122_600lo.jpg (http://img131.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=87498_lucia_tovar_mauve_2_122_600lo. jpg)
http://img146.imagevenue.com/loc399/th_87503_lucia_tovar_rouge_307_122_399lo.jpg (http://img146.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=87503_lucia_tovar_rouge_307_122_399l o.jpg)http://img105.imagevenue.com/loc353/th_87508_lucia_tovar_tight_jeans_78_122_353lo.jpg (http://img105.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=87508_lucia_tovar_tight_jeans_78_122 _353lo.jpg)http://img43.imagevenue.com/loc575/th_87514_lucia_tovar_9_122_575lo.jpg (http://img43.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=87514_lucia_tovar_9_122_575lo.jpg)
for the last pic is not the design we have to look but what kind of material the suit it will be made of


by the way she can be a very sexy and outstanding amazon




if someone can make a manip it will be fun

[Clouseau]

i'd settle for boy shorts over a miniskirt anyday, when it comes to Wonder Woman... but i also wouldn't mind something skimpier... not a thong, though... can't see that lending itself greatly to action scenes... not the kind of action scenes we'd expect from a Wonder Woman movie, at least... ;)

[haephestus]

Battle skirt.

Blue leather strips with silver star shaped studs.

Or blue leather pants with some kind of "star" stitching or design down the outside of each leg.

Cheers.

[ClarkLuther55]

And you see how much money "Bring it On" made? A little over $80 million. That film was made for a specific audience on a low budget. A film like "Wonder Woman" is going to cost way more than $30 million to make (that would be an injustice) and the expectations are going to be quite larger than $80 million. This means that its going to rely on more than just hormonal teenagers to pay for this film.

Way to COMPLETELY miss the point. :rolleyes: My argument was that a movie like Bring it On, which had lingerie, bikini, and FINGERING scenes can get a PG-13 rating. Your idea that WW's classic costume is an R-rating risk is downright insane. I really have to question your perception of reality if you think a one-piece is too extreme for today's society.

Bring it On was a fluffy comedy with no A-List stars (Kirsten Dunst wasn't as big back in 2000), without the huge special effects or epic story. Of course it wasn't a blockbuster. That's NOT proof that its sexuality somehow ruined its box office.

[pifpaf]

yeaAAA! BBBAAAAbbyyyyyyyy! commmmme to meeee diana i am ron jeremy

[Chris Wallace]

i think she can be a wonder woman she is beautifful and fit

and a give you some example of what kind of short she can wear


http://img146.imagevenue.com/loc367/th_87482_lucia_tovar_blanc_318_122_367lo.jpg (http://img146.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=87482_lucia_tovar_blanc_318_122_367l o.jpg)http://img135.imagevenue.com/loc310/th_87487_lucia_tovar_mauve_122_310lo.jpg (http://img135.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=87487_lucia_tovar_mauve_122_310lo.jp g)http://img107.imagevenue.com/loc488/th_87492_lucia_tovar_mauve_1_122_488lo.jpg (http://img107.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=87492_lucia_tovar_mauve_1_122_488lo. jpg)http://img131.imagevenue.com/loc600/th_87498_lucia_tovar_mauve_2_122_600lo.jpg (http://img131.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=87498_lucia_tovar_mauve_2_122_600lo. jpg)
http://img146.imagevenue.com/loc399/th_87503_lucia_tovar_rouge_307_122_399lo.jpg (http://img146.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=87503_lucia_tovar_rouge_307_122_399l o.jpg)http://img105.imagevenue.com/loc353/th_87508_lucia_tovar_tight_jeans_78_122_353lo.jpg (http://img105.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=87508_lucia_tovar_tight_jeans_78_122 _353lo.jpg)http://img43.imagevenue.com/loc575/th_87514_lucia_tovar_9_122_575lo.jpg (http://img43.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=87514_lucia_tovar_9_122_575lo.jpg)
for the last pic is not the design we have to look but what kind of material the suit it will be made of


by the way she can be a very sexy and outstanding amazonWho's she?

[Chris Wallace]

if she dressed like that, in that kind of fabric, she would look like a stripper. Give her the halter top and battle skirt, both made of painted metal. Or just gold metal like the Donna Troy Wonder Woman was seen in, because that was very close to the classic look, and actually looked functional.
The "stripper" remark is part of why I suggested a less revealing costume.

[pifpaf]

Who's she?lucia tovar i have all 10 000picture of her

[pifpaf]

The "stripper" remark is part of why I suggested a less revealing costume. why not a stipper look
women have special part to look at they have power we dont have

[terry78]

http://www.wax-work.com/images/covers/wonderwoman220.jpg

Now this looks somewhat better than a thong, but you just couldn't have too many ass shots in the movie because it's still riding up a tad. Basically it would be like Mystique having her own movie, and you basically saw every nook and cranny of her junk in X2 and 3.

[Manic]

http://www.numutant.net/string.jpg

[pifpaf]

http://www.wax-work.com/images/covers/wonderwoman220.jpg

Now this looks somewhat better than a thong, but you just couldn't have too many ass shots in the movie because it's still riding up a tad. Basically it would be like Mystique having her own movie, and you basically saw every nook and cranny of her junk in X2 and 3.

i like that

[pifpaf]

http://www.numutant.net/string.jpg


MMMmmm to large we need some thing more small :)

[JBElliott]

"Underwear." Wonder Woman's look is iconic, and changing it will only annoy the masses of casual moviegoers who already have an image in their heads of the way the character is supposed to look.

I'd like to see a WW costume with the "underwear" look, but I'm not sure that that look is iconic (though Linda Carter's WW did wear the "underwear" and is probably top in the memory of the general public, but then so is Adam West's Batman). The bottom of WW's costume/uniform has been through some changes over the years. The earliest versions did have a skirt:

http://campus.queens.edu/depts/amstdy/images/Wonder%20Woman%201.jpg

While later versions had tights/shorts:

http://www.forbiddenplanet.co.uk/images/D/D2363.jpg

And now we've got the "underwear" version:

http://afigures.com/g/generated/DC%20Comic%20Toys/DCDJune04/WonderWomanStatue__scaled_800.jpg

If it was up to me, I'd go with the Adam Hughes overall look, costume, build of actress, but with bigger bracelets, something like John Byrne drew

http://www.fantasticfiction.co.uk/images/n2/n10115.jpg

but that's not underwear is it?

[Manic]

While later versions had tights/shorts:

http://www.forbiddenplanet.co.uk/images/D/D2363.jpg
She's wearing Wonder Pumps!

[Steelsheen]

this is what i meant by the battle skirt with star studs and the star-spangled panties/ boyshorts underneath:

http://img231.imageshack.us/img231/1780/wwsamp315gv.jpg
http://img164.imageshack.us/img164/8905/wwsamp413vf.jpg

images drawn by the fantastic Nicola Scott :)

[ultimatefan]

Hmmm, the panties shape her booty and leave some of it hanging out... But when she takes a leap the wind can lift her skirt... hmmm....

[Lex Luthor]

I'm expecting something of a battle skirt.

The underwear would be cool, but I dont see Joss going with that kind of look for his interpretation of Wonder Woman. Either way, Morena Baccarin would look hot. :D

Skirt > Underwear

[dnno1]

OH NOEZ! ! Woman withz expozed thighs. Gets an R RATING. MOVIE WILL TANK OMGZ! ! !! !!

Please.

You don't see very many "R" rated films that are hits nowadays do you?

[igotatromboner]

Why not both gentlemen? First we get WW in a skirt. Have Whedon write jokes about the impracticalities of a skirt with bronze armor like qualities in the modern world. Then somewhere in the film have it "torn off" and we get the hot, and slightly ****tier, WW kicking ass with a ragin CT going on.

[Clouseau]

i'd settle for boy shorts over a miniskirt anyday, when it comes to Wonder Woman... but i also wouldn't mind something skimpier... not a thong, though... can't see that lending itself greatly to action scenes... not the kind of action scenes we'd expect from a Wonder Woman movie, at least... ;)
these are kinda like what i had in mind...

http://home.freeuk.net/moondog/wondie11.jpg

http://home.freeuk.net/moondog/rossi.jpg

but rather than trying to describe what it is i like, maybe it's easier to point out the things i hope i never see again...

http://home.freeuk.net/moondog/y.jpeg

http://home.freeuk.net/moondog/ar.jpg

:whatever:

[The ?uestion]

How about she wears nothing at all?! then we can have the pleasure of seeing her walk naked all over Themiskera. (sp)? :daredevil

[ClarkLuther55]

You don't see very many "R" rated films that are hits nowadays do you?

Did you even understand what Fused was saying? He was making fun of your prudishness, and obviously DOESN'T think that showing WW's legs (something that CARTOONS have been able to get away with) will get the film an R rating. :rolleyes: Again, I have to question your perception of reality, because it seems like you're living in a different century than everyone else.

dnno1's concept of a PG-13 Wonder Woman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Woman_walking_in_Afghanistan.jpg).

[ClarkLuther55]

I'd like to see a WW costume with the "underwear" look, but I'm not sure that that look is iconic (though Linda Carter's WW did wear the "underwear" and is probably top in the memory of the general public, but then so is Adam West's Batman). The bottom of WW's costume/uniform has been through some changes over the years. The earliest versions did have a skirt

So the WW costume has been through some changes. That still doesn't change what WW's iconic look is. For most of her history, she's had the "underwear" shorts. That's what people think when they think of WW. And giving her a less sexy costume WILL turn away some of the horny male demographic.

There is nothing to gain from changing her costume (except perhaps appealing to the prudish fundamentalist demographic, and they STILL wouldn't see this movie), but there is something to lose.

[dnno1]

Did you even understand what Fused was saying? He was making fun of your prudishness, and obviously DOESN'T think that showing WW's legs (something that CARTOONS have been able to get away with) will get the film an R rating. :rolleyes: Again, I have to question your perception of reality, because it seems like you're living in a different century than everyone else.

dnno1's concept of a PG-13 Wonder Woman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Woman_walking_in_Afghanistan.jpg).

Hey, I'm not being prudish, I'm just stating the obvious. Nowadays, a film with anything outside of a PG-13 rating is a looser at the boxoffice. If Wonder Woman wears the panties in the film you will be very disappointed, because she will be wearing panythose under them or you will be able to count the amount of time you see her dressed like that in it in minutes (not hours). And your idea of what I think Wonder Woman should look like is way off what I was thinking. Next time you could just ask me what my thoughts are on a costume design and I'll tell you myself.

[ClarkLuther55]

Hey, I'm not being prudish, I'm just stating the obvious. Nowadays, a film with anything outside of a PG-13 rating is a looser at the boxoffice. If Wonder Woman wears the panties in the film you will be very disappointed, because she will be wearing panythose under them or you will be able to count the amount of time you see her dressed like that in it in minutes (not hours).

You're not stating the obvious, your talking about your delusions. "Underwear"/boy shorts are NOT an R rating risk. :rolleyes: They're not even close. The average moviegoer has no problem with WW's iconic look.

You know, when everybody is making fun of your prudish posts, maybe, just MAYBE your views on what society considers obscene clothing are wrong.

And your idea of what I think Wonder Woman should look like is way off what I was thinking. Next time you could just ask me what my thoughts are on a costume design and I'll tell you myself.

You do understand what exxagerations/jokes are, right?

[Fused]

That is as comedic as it is tragic.

[Manic]

Hey, I'm not being prudish, I'm just stating the obvious. Nowadays, a film with anything outside of a PG-13 rating is a looser at the boxoffice. If Wonder Woman wears the panties in the film you will be very disappointed, because she will be wearing panythose under them or you will be able to count the amount of time you see her dressed like that in it in minutes (not hours). And your idea of what I think Wonder Woman should look like is way off what I was thinking. Next time you could just ask me what my thoughts are on a costume design and I'll tell you myself.
Um... dude... they could totally get away with Wonder Woman wearing panties throughout the whole movie, and still keep it PG-13. It's basically a bikini bottom, and you can show those on PG/TV-14 television without the FCC cracking down.

It's not the 1970s, anymore. They don't have to slap satin tights and granny panties on Wonder Woman to make her presentable to today's audiences.

[blake]

http://img183.imageshack.us/img183/4529/wonderwomands6.jpg

[ImperfectIcon]

Did you even understand what Fused was saying? He was making fun of your prudishness, and obviously DOESN'T think that showing WW's legs (something that CARTOONS have been able to get away with) will get the film an R rating. :rolleyes: Again, I have to question your perception of reality, because it seems like you're living in a different century than everyone else.

dnno1's concept of a PG-13 Wonder Woman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Woman_walking_in_Afghanistan.jpg).

Funny! Harsh, but funny!

I reckon stick to the classic look, and just hope and pray the actress who fills that costume does a credible performance.

[dnno1]

Um... dude... they could totally get away with Wonder Woman wearing panties throughout the whole movie, and still keep it PG-13. It's basically a bikini bottom, and you can show those on PG/TV-14 television without the FCC cracking down.

It's not the 1970s, anymore. They don't have to slap satin tights and granny panties on Wonder Woman to make her presentable to today's audiences.

Jessica Simpson wore the Dasy Dukes without hose and look where it got that movie (Dukes of Hazzard). The film was critisized for not being authentic.

[Manic]

Jessica Simpson wore the Dasy Dukes without hose and look where it got that movie (Dukes of Hazzard). The film was critisized for not being authentic.
Are you saying that the film was criticized because Jessica Simpson wasn't wearing pantyhose, or are you saying two statements that might not be connected? Because the only person I remember complaining about Simpson's shorts was the guy who played the original Cooter.

[dnno1]

Are you saying that the film was criticized because Jessica Simpson wasn't wearing pantyhose, or are you saying two statements that might not be connected? Because the only person I remember complaining about Simpson's shorts was the guy who played the original Cooter.

Manic, I guess that was not the only reason, but the fact that Simpson wasn't wearing panty hose was one of them. Oh and not only was Ben Jones (the original Cooter Davenport) in opposition to the film, but so was Tom Wopat (http://www.thecheappop.com/wopat.html) (the original Luke duke). At one time there were a group of DoH fans that criticized the film for its portrayal of Dasy Duke without panty hose. Additionally there were fans (more than likely orchestrated by Jones) who also protested the film, and there was also a controversy over the display of the stars and bars on the General Lee (and this is not to mention the negative reviews from the critics). In any case the use of the Dasy Dukes without hose certainly didn't help the film after the first weekend. If you want Wonder Woman to wear panties, I think you will be in for that type of trouble and that type of response at the boxoffice.

[Phatman]

Boyshorts would work best. We need something close to the iconic WW costume that reminds casual viewers of the TV show and is contemporary enough so fans will recognize her. THe changes to the Superman Returns costume and the bad script messed up a sure thing, changing WW's suit from anything but the c

[FVD]

John Schneider didn't like what the film represented either. It completely went against what the TV show was. And wouldn't Catherine Bach have been a perfect Wonder Woman back in the day?

The best thing about that movie was Willie Nelson nothing more. MC Gainey as Rosco???? Talk about total miscasting and my mate who's the biggest Burt Reynolds fan I'll ever know, loved the movie just because of him. Jessica Simpson as Daisy what the frak were they thinking? :rolleyes:

As for her outfit, I think those boyshorts would be a little too skimpy. I like the classic costume as shown in Justice League at the moment and I do think they should go with that outfit. Though I wouldn't mind the battle skirt either.

[ClarkLuther55]

Jessica Simpson wore the Dasy Dukes without hose and look where it got that movie (Dukes of Hazzard). The film was critisized for not being authentic.

I'm sure the film was criticized for not being "authentic" because of a minor thing like not wearing pantyhose (a SUBTLE way of "covering up" a woman's legs, put in their by OBSOLETE network censors from decades ago, and something that many people don't even remember when thinking about Daisy Duke) and not because it was a stupid teen-oriented comedy that was very different from the feel of the show, with lots of crude sexual comedy. :rolleyes:

Manic, I guess that was not the only reason, but the fact that Simpson wasn't wearing panty hose was one of them. Oh and not only was Ben Jones (the original Cooter Davenport) in opposition to the film, but so was Tom Wopat (the original Luke duke). At one time there were a group of DoH fans that criticized the film for its portrayal of Dasy Duke without panty hose. Additionally there were fans (more than likely orchestrated by Jones) who also protested the film, and there was also a controversy over the display of the stars and bars on the General Lee (and this is not to mention the negative reviews from the critics). In any case the use of the Dasy Dukes without hose certainly didn't help the film after the first weekend. If you want Wonder Woman to wear panties, I think you will be in for that type of trouble and that type of response at the boxoffice.

Whatever backlash there was against the lack of pantyhose (I had heard about the Cooter actor calling the whole movie a "hootchie cootchie show" and complaining about the crude content, but NOT this) was marginal. These conservativess didn't get much (if any) mainstream attention, but the sex appeal of Simpson's Daisy Duke DID. Her image as a sex symbol was taken to another level because of this, and I think the movie MORE than made up from the loss of prudish conservative audiences with the gains in the horny teen and young male demographics.

You keep trying to portray movies like Bring it On and The Dukes of Hazard as disappointments or failures to try to boost your claims. You do realize that these movies WEREN'T blockbusters, right? :rolleyes: They're fluffy forgettable teen-oriented movies with no A-list stars, no epic plot, and no spectacular visual effects. And the The Dukes of Hazard was poorly reviewed as well. Their box office was FINE.

Face it, you're deluded. Nobody I've heard of in real life has any problem with WW's legs. Her ICONIC (the way most people see her) look has bare legs. Bare legs are NOT an R-rating risk. You seriously need to get out more if you truly think they are.

[Fused]

Been down that road man. It can get frustrating but nothings gonna crack the fantasyland he's living in. It's like kicking a retarded horse because it refuses to learn algebra.

[CAPT. MARVEL]

I'm sure the film was criticized for not being "authentic" because of a minor thing like not wearing pantyhose (a SUBTLE way of "covering up" a woman's legs, put in their by OBSOLETE network censors from decades ago, and something that many people don't even remember when thinking about Daisy Duke) and not because it was a stupid teen-oriented comedy that was very different from the feel of the show, with lots of crude sexual comedy. :rolleyes:



Whatever backlash there was against the lack of pantyhose (I had heard about the Cooter actor calling the whole movie a "hootchie cootchie show" and complaining about the crude content, but NOT this) was marginal. These conservativess didn't get much (if any) mainstream attention, but the sex appeal of Simpson's Daisy Duke DID. Her image as a sex symbol was taken to another level because of this, and I think the movie MORE than made up from the loss of prudish conservative audiences with the gains in the horny teen and young male demographics.

You keep trying to portray movies like Bring it On and The Dukes of Hazard as disappointments or failures to try to boost your claims. You do realize that these movies WEREN'T blockbusters, right? :rolleyes: They're fluffy forgettable teen-oriented movies with no A-list stars, no epic plot, and no spectacular visual effects. And the The Dukes of Hazard was poorly reviewed as well. Their box office was FINE.

Face it, you're deluded. Nobody I've heard of in real life has any problem with WW's legs. Her ICONIC (the way most people see her) look has bare legs. Bare legs are NOT an R-rating risk. You seriously need to get out more if you truly think they are.
Those actors are nothing but "prudish conservatives" because something they worked on for years was turned from a stupid fun show with a good message into "Wow, look at Jessica Simpson's (fake) ass." How weird of them.

Anyways, they should keep Wondie's undies (or skirt) skimpy. It's iconic, its a good look, and I don't feel that its sexist.

[ClarkLuther55]

Those actors are nothing but "prudish conservatives" because something they worked on for years was turned from a stupid fun show with a good message into "Wow, look at Jessica Simpson's (fake) ass." How weird of them.

I didn't put down supporters of the old show who didn't like how the movie changed everything. In fact, if you look at the first paragraph, I called the movie a "stupid teen-oriented comedy that was very different from the feel of the show." I also pointed out that the movie was poorly reviewed. I'm not supporting the movie, and people who liked the old show probably had good reason to be pissed off at it.

What I did do was say that the fuss over the lack of pantyhose was marginal, because they were. Of all the criticisms of the movie, the lack of pantyhose was NOT one of the ones that got a lot of attention, and it would be a small criticism at best. Seriously, does anyone think that Jessica Simpson not wearing pantyhose under her shorts was anywhere close to the problems Dukes fans had with the movie, as dnno1 claims? I would like to see some evidence of that. Mostly I just heard about complaints that the movie had been massively dumbed down, and much more sexually charged (FAR beyond not doing something outdated like pantyhose under shorts).

[ClarkLuther55]

I just did some searching on the internet for Ben Jones and Tom Wopat's criticisms of the film:

Ben Jones's official site (http://www.cootersplace.com/news_movie.asp)

Ben Jones interview (http://www.thecheappop.com/cooter.html)

Tom Wopat interview (http://www.thecheappop.com/wopat.html) (scroll all the way to bottom for movie comments)

I see lots of talk about sexual situations, profanity, lack of "family values," none of the old cast being invited back, the movie just being plain terrible, etc., but strangely not one mention of something as minor, prudish, and outdated as Jessica Simpson not trying to subtly cover up her legs with pantyhose. Were there really people protesting the movie BECAUSE of the lack of pantyhose, as dnno1 claims?

[Manic]

The really funny thing is that I didn't notice Catherine Bach wore pantyhose until I read this thread. I always thought her legs were bare, if not a little tan.

I say let Diana's legs go bare, and we'll save the see-through leg covering for Black Canary.

[Hades]

Chain mail like skirt.

Underwear would just look stupid.

[CLARKY]

boyshorts: theyre sexy, but not thong ****ty. provides coverage but not like the old school granny panties. maybe something like this in blue leather/vinyl

http://img115.imageshack.us/img115/3457/boyshorts45st.jpg

agreed. In dark blue.
How do you call what is wearing Huntress in birds of Prey done by ED BENES?
that is what Ure talking about, right?

[ClarkLuther55]

The really funny thing is that I didn't notice Catherine Bach wore pantyhose until I read this thread. I always thought her legs were bare, if not a little tan.

Exactly. As I pointed out, the see-through pantyhose was just a subtle way to "cover up" her legs, that most people don't even remember. It was a half-assed but minor change forced by network censors, that isn't a part of the character's image in the public conciousness. That's why I have serious doubts that people were actually up in arms about Jessica Simpson not wearing pantyhose, as dnno1 says.

[Fused]

agreed. In dark blue.
How do you call what is wearing Huntress in birds of Prey done by ED BENES?
that is what Ure talking about, right?

Yeah Huntress wears those. Those are boyshorts.

[Clouseau]

http://img183.imageshack.us/img183/4529/wonderwomands6.jpg
that gets my vote! :cool:

[Clouseau]

...and i don't buy the whole idea that Simpson's lack of pantyhose had anything to do with the Dukes movie flopping... there were way too many other problems with that movie to pin it all on that one thing!

[terry78]

Point blank, having massive amounts of ass cheek showing isn't going to help, as there will be a huge amount of females that are fans of the character.

[The Kid]

*droools*

Huh what's this thread about again?

[Dark Knight]

this is what i meant by the battle skirt with star studs and the star-spangled panties/ boyshorts underneath:

http://img231.imageshack.us/img231/1780/wwsamp315gv.jpg
http://img164.imageshack.us/img164/8905/wwsamp413vf.jpg

images drawn by the fantastic Nicola Scott :)




this is what I would like to see used also. :up:

[Clouseau]

Point blank, having massive amounts of ass cheek showing isn't going to help, as there will be a huge amount of females that are fans of the character.
so? they'll still pay their $$$ and fill their seats, either way! you can't honestly tell me that women would be outraged enough to cause a problem just because there's a sexy woman on the screen! you'll have a handful of feminists who say it's degrading and a handful of feminists who'll say it's empowering, and that'll be all there is to it! as long as the story's halfway decent, none of 'em'll care too much about the rest... :p

[LongshotRules]

Although boy shorts would make the most sense I would love to see mini skirts with thongs underneath. You won't see a lot of her booty but when the wind lifts up her skirts... ooooh boy all the guys would drool.

Make WW a strong woman but you got to make her sexy as well. Why covers up the body of the sexiest superhero in DC?

[Chris Wallace]

Point blank, having massive amounts of ass cheek showing isn't going to help, as there will be a huge amount of females that are fans of the character.
No it won't. When I suggested covering her legs, a lot of people got the wrong idea. I just want to lessen the "eye candy" perception that WW might have. I want her to be treated as a serious superhero, & given the same respect as Superman. Can this be achieved in her star-spangled panties? Yes. But it'd be harder. Too many female action heroes run around half naked & that proves to be the major selling point of the film. Let's do something different here.

[Steelsheen]

so? they'll still pay their $$$ and fill their seats, either way! you can't honestly tell me that women would be outraged enough to cause a problem just because there's a sexy woman on the screen! you'll have a handful of feminists who say it's degrading and a handful of feminists who'll say it's empowering, and that'll be all there is to it! as long as the story's halfway decent, none of 'em'll care too much about the rest... :p

so what you're saying is Wonder Woman will sell itself?

you know lots of folks at the Superman forum thought the same way. well we all know how that turned out.

[Lex Luthor]

http://img183.imageshack.us/img183/4529/wonderwomands6.jpg

*drool*

What a beautiful view. :up:

[superion]

so what you're saying is Wonder Woman will sell itself?

you know lots of folks at the Superman forum thought the same way. well we all know how that turned out.

Yep Wonder Women doesn't have half of the fan base that Superman does. I doubt if she has a quarter of the fan base Superman has based on comic sales so I don't see why people are so confident this movie will put butts in the seats.

Also the bathing suit uniform will give critics a reason to trash the movie and call it sexist which also won't help the Box Office any.

[Fused]

Yep Wonder Women doesn't have half of the fan base that Superman does. I doubt if she has a quarter of the fan base Superman has based on comic sales so I don't see why people are so confident this movie will put butts in the seats.

Also the bathing suit uniform will give critics a reason to trash the movie and call it sexist which also won't help the Box Office any.


Well if a quarter to a third of the type that went to see superman see wonder woman thats fine considering WW will likely get close to that fraction of a budget. Supes already made money which doesnt include the monstrous DVD sales that SR will garner. People always mistake that just because SR didnt make Spider-Man/Harry Potter numbers that it was a flop.

Wonder Woman's "bathing suit" is no sillier than Supes "red outside undies". And whatever you think gave critics a reason to bash that movie, it was NOT because they stayed remarkably true to his iconic costume. Your flawed logic does not cut the proverbial mustard here. Sorry, try again.

[Banshee]

battle skirt is easily the most practical, yet is reasonably faithful too. i dont get how a thong even makes sense to some people

[ClarkLuther55]

Also the bathing suit uniform will give critics a reason to trash the movie and call it sexist which also won't help the Box Office any.

Please tell me you don't live in the same 19th century fantasyland that dnno1 is apparently in. WW's costume is classic. It's well known and accepted. It's not a **** suit, it's just what people think when they think of WW. And to think that covering her up would HELP the box office is just stupid. Sex sells, except to a few people on this forum.

[superion]

Well if a quarter to a third of the type that went to see superman see wonder woman thats fine considering WW will likely get close to that fraction of a budget. Supes already made money which doesnt include the monstrous DVD sales that SR will garner. People always mistake that just because SR didnt make Spider-Man/Harry Potter numbers that it was a flop.

Wonder Woman's "bathing suit" is no sillier than Supes "red outside undies". And whatever you think gave critics a reason to bash that movie, it was NOT because they stayed remarkably true to his iconic costume. Your flawed logic does not cut the proverbial mustard here. Sorry, try again.

I don't recall ever stating that critics bashed Superman Returns and Supermans costume is not at all comparable to WW. Superman costume may seem silly but it still covers his body and is not intended to be eye candy for teen age boys like WW.

As for Superman's monstrous DVD sales I'll just put that prediction along side all the other predictions I've read from people on these boards about how Returns would rule the summer and crush Pirates and X3 and make $300 to $400 million domestically at the box office blah, blah, blah.

[Fused]

No but you do assume a costume gives critics a reason to bash a movie, which is why the Superman comparison is 100% analagous. The DVD notion was only to reinforce SR's success. See it already made a profit. If it didn't make money (I'm sorry but it did ) WB wouldnt be optioning a sequel, which they are.

You dont think Superman was ever intended to be eyecandy? You're kidding yourself if you don't think Brandon Routh in his tights doesnt serve as a heart-melter for the fairer sex. Or the alternative for that matter.

[dnno1]

http://mud.mm-a4.yimg.com/image/1188837159

Not for guys, but for the gals the crotch area was the eyecandy.

[Manic]

For the ladies, and Mr. Singer.

[terry78]

^Oh no you did'ent.

[Manic]

Oh yes I did.
*triple snap, neck roll*

[superion]

No but you do assume a costume gives critics a reason to bash a movie, which is why the Superman comparison is 100% analagous. The DVD notion was only to reinforce SR's success. See it already made a profit. If it didn't make money (I'm sorry but it did ) WB wouldnt be optioning a sequel, which they are.

You dont think Superman was ever intended to be eyecandy? You're kidding yourself if you don't think Brandon Routh in his tights doesnt serve as a heart-melter for the fairer sex. Or the alternative for that matter.

No it hasn't made a profit yet. WB said it would eventually make a profit (after the DVD sales and other movie rights) which is why they greenlighted the sequel.

There is still no comparison to someone wearing tights and someone running around in what is essentially a bathing suit. Someone cited Baywatch in a previous post to defend the use of the bathing suit. Well Baywatch was one of the most reviled shows in recent memory by critics and was derisively referred to as boob watch for its emphasis on T&A.

[Fused]

Ok everytime you post all youre doing is making your argument not only moot, but laughable. There's, let me get this straight here, "no" comparison, I did read that right, "no" comparison between tights and a bathing suit? Dude the only person your fooling on these boards is yourself if you think that's remotely accurate.

Not only that but you state blatant inaccuracies as argumentative support:

Superman Budget:
$377,977,353 total grosses
-$270,000,000 budget =
__________________
107,977,353 DOLLARS

And wuddya know, I don't believe a single Superman Returns DVD has even made it to press yet. I guess in your world not only does a guy wearing undies outside his tight blue spandex hold "no" comparison to an immodest one-piece bathing suit, but over 100 million dollars apparently doesn't count as profit either.

But hey, it's all good. Nothing fuels the imagination better than living in a dreamworld.

[superion]

Ok everytime you post all youre doing is making your argument not only moot, but laughable. There's, let me get this straight here, "no" comparison, I did read that right, "no" comparison between tights and a bathing suit? Dude the only person your fooling on these boards is yourself if you think that's remotely accurate.

Not only that but you state blatant inaccuracies as argumentative support:

Superman Budget:
$377,977,353 total grosses
-$270,000,000 budget =
__________________
107,977,353 DOLLARS

And wuddya know, I don't believe a single Superman Returns DVD has even made it to press yet. I guess in your world not only does a guy wearing undies outside his tight blue spandex hold "no" comparison to an immodest one-piece bathing suit, but over 100 million dollars apparently doesn't count as profit either.

But hey, it's all good. Nothing fuels the imagination better than living in a dreamworld.

You're obviously completely ignorant about how the Box Office works. The studio only gets about 55% of the Box office receipts the theaters and other distributers take the rest.

Your calculation looks more like this:

$378 million * .55 = $207.90 million
-270 million budget
-$62 million and the production budget does not include advertising cost which is probably another $50 to $60 million.

The last time I saw Superman's tights still covers his entire body WW bathing suit does not. A guy wearing his underwear on the outside is just usually considered stupid so no I don't see how that compares to a women wearing a bathing suit.

[Fused]

You know what's considered stupid? Trying to equate a costume iconic in 60 years worth of printed storytelling media that still holds today in serious comic book lore to Baywatch. Hows that for unfair comparisons?

Numbers and percentages aside,

"Superhero Hype was reporting via an article Variety magazine had on investors, Legendary Pictures, the production studio behind Superman Returns, was entirely supportive of investing again in a sequel with Bryan Singer at the helm. They have made a profit now on Superman Returns and are interested in co-financing a sequel."

http://www.firstshowing.net/2006/08/30/hopeful-outlook-on-superman-sequel

Later, dreamweaver.

[superion]

You know what's considered stupid? Trying to equate a costume iconic in
60 years worth of printed storytelling media that still holds today in serious comic book lore to Baywatch. Hows that for unfair comparisons?

Numbers and percentages aside,

"Superhero Hype was reporting via an article Variety magazine had on investors, Legendary Pictures, the production studio behind Superman Returns, was entirely supportive of investing again in a sequel with Bryan Singer at the helm. They have made a profit now on Superman Returns and are interested in co-financing a sequel."

http://www.firstshowing.net/2006/08/30/hopeful-outlook-on-superman-sequel

Later, dreamweaver.



New friends help fund-loving H'w'd
Investors still on board despite summer slump

By PAMELA MCCLINTOCK

Hollywood hedged its bets this summer -- all of Hollywood.

Studios don't tout it, but almost every pic slugging it out at the box office was co-financed by the myriad of private equity funds infiltrating the movie biz. List not only includes "Superman Returns" and "Poseidon," but also "Talladega Nights: The Ballad of Ricky Bobby," "X-Men 3" and "Monster House."

At first glance, the honeymoon would seem to beover for the funds, thanks to high-profile disappointments "Poseidon," "Lady in the Water" and "The Ant Bully." And while pulling in a sizeable $375 million so far worldwide, "Superman" still fell below expectations. Virtual Studios co-financed "Poseidon"; Legendary, the rest. Both companies are based at Warner Bros.

Are investors ready to throw in the towel? No, even if the summer has left them with a mild case of the jitters.

There have been a number of quiet successes for other funds this summer (following similar hits in this past winter and spring). And last year, Legendary turned a nice profit on "Batman Begins."

"I think it's been a rough summer," one financial analyst says. "Across the board, profitability has been down. Budgets and advertising costs have skyrocketed. "But I don't think these new investors are too nervous.

U and Sony share the two Gun Hill Road funds. Gun Hill is likely to enjoy multimillion-dollar profits after funding half of Sony's sleeper summer hit "Talladega Nights" and a slew of profitable U pics over the past year, including "The Inside Man," "Nanny McPhee" and "The Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift."

At Par, the Melrose fund will see some sort of return on "Mission: Impossible III." Same goes for Fox's co-financing partner Dune Capital, which is financing 20%-25% of every Fox pic, including "X-Men 3."

Disney's "Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Curse" may be the only big pic this summer not financed to some degree by a private equity fund. Even Sony's "The Da Vinci Code" is thought to have gotten some aid.

By far, Warners and Legendary ---- which considers itself a production company as well -- have been the most open about their partnership, and which movies Legendary is co-financing.

Why all the secrecy elsewhere?

Directors and talent have sometimes taken it personally when a studio sloughs off some of the cost, fearful that it sends a message that the project is in trouble.

But times have changed.

Almost overnight, a movie costing more than $200 million to make doesn't seem that unusual. At that pricetag, studios find themselves in a chokehold, especially when marketing costs are added in.

A studio like Warners, a devotee of tentpoles, needs co-financing partners if it is to continue on the same course. Already, Legendary and Virtual have proven their worth in blunting the losses for Warner Bros.

If Legendary is unnerved, it isn't showing. Like Warners, Legendary insists it will turn a profit on "Superman Returns," and has given all indications that it's on deck to co-finance a sequel.

Like Legendary, all the funds argue that they won't be made, or broken, by just one pic. By investing in a slate of pics over the course of several years, they're virtually guaranteed a return of 10%.

Then again, this is the movie business.


Date in print: Mon., Aug. 28, 2006, Weekly

The is the entire Variety article. No where does it state that Legendry said it had made a profit now on Returns only that they insist they will. The Legendary has made a profit now was added by a poster on some message board. I'll wait for more concrete evidence thank you.

As for WW iconic costume being around for 60 years well she hasn't been doing that well in print or the general media for most of the past 30 years so maybe a change would not be a bad idea. The "60 years worth of printed storytelling media that still holds today in serious comic book lore" is just your opinion by the way.

[Manic]

*check's Diamond's sales charts from last year, pre-Infinite Crisis crossover*

Wonder Woman doesn't sell too badly. Barely making the top 60 is decent, right?

[CaptainCanada]

Something like the Alex Ross's loin cloth conception from Kingdom Come would work well.

[Fused]

The "60 years worth of printed storytelling media that still holds today in serious comic book lore" is just your opinion by the way.

Wow thanks for telling me what my opinion is. Otherwise I woulda needed a MENSA member to tell me that this entire thread is opinion based. But if your "opinion" is what equates the creator of Baywatch to the merit of the creator of the polygraph as equal then you truly are only kidding yourself. This message board is not fooled, only you.

[buggs0268]

For the ladies, and Mr. Singer.
Heh heh heh. I am glad you did.

[buggs0268]

Ok everytime you post all youre doing is making your argument not only moot, but laughable. There's, let me get this straight here, "no" comparison, I did read that right, "no" comparison between tights and a bathing suit? Dude the only person your fooling on these boards is yourself if you think that's remotely accurate.

Not only that but you state blatant inaccuracies as argumentative support:

Superman Budget:
$377,977,353 total grosses
-$270,000,000 budget =
__________________
107,977,353 DOLLARS

And wuddya know, I don't believe a single Superman Returns DVD has even made it to press yet. I guess in your world not only does a guy wearing undies outside his tight blue spandex hold "no" comparison to an immodest one-piece bathing suit, but over 100 million dollars apparently doesn't count as profit either.

But hey, it's all good. Nothing fuels the imagination better than living in a dreamworld.
The studios did say that it had not made it's money back yet, but they hope to turn a profit with the DVD. First they were talking domestic gross. Second, your tally does not include the split with the exhibitors. So, as of now, even with WW, SR has not made what was spent on it back.

[buggs0268]

You're obviously completely ignorant about how the Box Office works. The studio only gets about 55% of the Box office receipts the theaters and other distributers take the rest.

Your calculation looks more like this:

$378 million * .55 = $207.90 million
-270 million budget
-$62 million and the production budget does not include advertising cost which is probably another $50 to $60 million.

The last time I saw Superman's tights still covers his entire body WW bathing suit does not. A guy wearing his underwear on the outside is just usually considered stupid so no I don't see how that compares to a women wearing a bathing suit.
Advertising and print costs have been estimated at 90-100 mill, and also there is a split between Warner's and Legendary, which is a hedge fund.

[superion]

Wow thanks for telling me what my opinion is. Otherwise I woulda needed a MENSA member to tell me that this entire thread is opinion based. But if your "opinion" is what equates the creator of Baywatch to the merit of the creator of the polygraph as equal then you truly are only kidding yourself. This message board is not fooled, only you.


How does Marston creating the polygraph equate to any kind of creative ability in writing?

You know what is not opinion the fact that Superman Returns has not made a profit contrary to your fanboy fantasy that its already made over $100 million in profit.:cwink:

[Clouseau]

wow, you guys have transformed this from an interesting and fun discussion into a boring debate over numbers... that takes talent!

[Fused]

Good idea let's steer this back on topic.

While were talking "fantasy" (original by the way) I'm still happy I've punched a few numbers on a calculator wrong versus uttering these conceptual conversation travesties:

1.) Wonder Woman in her actual uniform apparently = Baywatch!!! Critics bash a show where a thigh is exposed and will thus bash any movie with exposed thighs!
(Don't school's provide tests in elementary school with faulty analogies to train people from thinking in this flawed logic?)

2.) "the bathing suit uniform will give critics a reason to trash the movie and call it sexist"
(John Peters anyone?)

3.) "There is still no comparison to someone wearing tights and someone running around in what is essentially a bathing suit."
(Watch out gang. I'm about to show you all 2 costumes that hold absolutely "no comparison". Put the kids away because it may be offensive, trashy and sexist.)

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.


http://www.miezekatze.net/images/worlds04/wednesday_24/wednesday24_tm2.jpg

http://www.miezekatze.net/images/worlds04/wednesday_24/wednesday24_tm3.jpg

[Manic]

OMG bare legs! That's inappropriate and offends my virgin eyes!!!!111one

[superion]

Good idea let's steer this back on topic.

While were talking "fantasy" (original by the way) I'm still happy I've punched a few numbers on a calculator wrong versus uttering these conceptual conversation travesties:

1.) Wonder Woman in her actual uniform apparently = Baywatch!!! Critics bash a show where a thigh is exposed and will thus bash any movie with exposed thighs!
(Don't school's provide tests in elementary school with faulty analogies to train people from thinking in this flawed logic?)

2.) "the bathing suit uniform will give critics a reason to trash the movie and call it sexist"
(John Peters anyone?)

3.) "There is still no comparison to someone wearing tights and someone running around in what is essentially a bathing suit."
(Watch out gang. I'm about to show you all 2 costumes that hold absolutely "no comparison". Put the kids away because it may be offensive, trashy and sexist.)

.

And your living in a dreamworld comment was so clever.

1. Maybe not but critics do tend to bash movies that they deem to be exploiting sex for purely commercial purposes. If you have your main character walking around in a bathing suit for half the movie I don't know how you can avoid giving off the impression that you are trying to use sex to sell the movie.

In addition getting back to the sexism issue, comics have long been criticized for depicting female heros wearing tiny bathing suit like outfits with giant breast to pander to its male audience. I don't think its a stretch to think the same issue will pop up when WW shows up wearing her bathing suit outfit.

2. I don't get the Jon Peters comment.

3. If you are implying that the short dress the female skater is wearing is the same as the WW suit. I suggest you take another look.

[dnno1]

And your living in a dreamworld comment was so clever.

1. Maybe not but critics do tend to bash movies that they deem to be exploiting sex for purely commercial purposes. If you have your main character walking around in a bathing suit for half the movie I don't know how you can avoid giving off the impression that you are trying to use sex to sell the movie.
I think that's part of what has been keeping the title going for all these years.

In addition getting back to the sexism issue, comics have long been criticized for depicting female heros wearing tiny bathing suit like outfits with giant breast to pander to its male audience. I don't think its a stretch to think the same issue will pop up when WW shows up wearing her bathing suit outfit.
You hit it right on the nail.

2. I don't get the Jon Peters comment. Jon Peters is a film producer famous for being associated with the "Superman Reborn" project (you know, the one that Kevin Smith wrote the screenplay for). Peters is infamous for his alledged changes to the Superman character. Here is a video interview (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vgYhLIThTvk) of Kevin Smith giving the details of what Peters told him. I suggest you take it with a grain of salt since Smith gives a comedic monolog about the whole affair. Smith indicates that Peters mandated that Superman not wear the iconic costume, not fly and to include a gay side kick to Braniac in the script. To me it is dubious as to weather or not this actually went down since neither the script or the actual film that Peters did produce ("Superman Returns") had any of what was suggested. I think that Smith was just trying to be funny for his audience although it is very possible that the studio and producer may have acted that way just to see if Smith had any real knowledge about the (Superman) character.

[ClarkLuther55]

1. Maybe not but critics do tend to bash movies that they deem to be exploiting sex for purely commercial purposes. If you have your main character walking around in a bathing suit for half the movie I don't know how you can avoid giving off the impression that you are trying to use sex to sell the movie.

Maybe with some quality writing? :whatever: Sexy and appealing clothes aren't exploitative as long as they're not too ridiculous, and the sex isn't provided too gratuitously.

In addition getting back to the sexism issue, comics have long been criticized for depicting female heros wearing tiny bathing suit like outfits with giant breast to pander to its male audience. I don't think its a stretch to think the same issue will pop up when WW shows up wearing her bathing suit outfit.

WW's iconic costume has been around for decades, and wasn't even a problem 30 or 40 years ago. There's a HUGE difference between WW's costume and ridiculous outfits like this (http://www.waynescomics.com/images/Cards/Promos/witchblade%20promo.jpg). WW's outfit is like a one-piece, and unless you're living in the 19th century, those are NOT too sexed up and gratuitous for most people.

How many times does it need to be said? The people in this thread who think that WW's classic costume will be an R-rating risk or an issue with audiences do NOT represent the normal moviegoer. You guys do NOT have a normal view on this subject.

[Steelsheen]

anybody here remember the initial fan reactions of seeing the Batman '89 costume?

wasnt a pleasant memory innit?


expect something like that for Wonder Woman if the new costume differs too much from the original. i'm betting the farm-- nay the island-- on this one.

[Red Arrow]

Guys, I've already said it before. WW naked, walking along Theymiscara and all it's beauty. :o:up:

[dnno1]

Oh yes I did.
*triple snap, neck roll*

I saw a kid do that on "The Grim Adventures of Billy and Mandy" while watching it with my kids. I thought it was hillarious.

[dnno1]

...How many times does it need to be said? The people in this thread who think that WW's classic costume will be an R-rating risk or an issue with audiences do NOT represent the normal moviegoer. You guys do NOT have a normal view on this subject.When you are ready to put up several million dollars to finance this film and take some risk on that statement, I might start believing it. But I doubt you would.

[Fused]

place is a laugh riot

[ClarkLuther55]

When you are ready to put up several million dollars to finance this film and take some risk on that statement, I might start believing it. But I doubt you would.

SNAP OUT OF IT. The old adage is "Sex sells," NOT the other way around. In what alternate universe does COVERING UP an already widely-accepted image HELP a movie make money?:whatever:

place is a laugh riot

I actually find it quite scary that some people can be this out of step with reality.

[dnno1]

SNAP OUT OF IT. The old adage is "Sex sells," NOT the other way around. In what alternate universe does COVERING UP an already widely-accepted image HELP a movie make money?:whatever:



I actually find it quite scary that some people can be this out of step with reality.

Oh yeah, sex sells... to a smaller audience. Like I said before, the expectations will be to see "Wonder Woman" as a blockbuster film, and you can't make blockbuster revenues selling sex to minors. They tried to do that with both the Charlies Angels and Tomb Raider franchises. The first films did well alright but when they added more sex in the second ones... well, as you can see, they are not making "Charlie's Angels" or "Tomb Raider" films anymore. I'm living in the real world alright. It's just that you guys are failing to see the reality of it.

[Fused]

Ok might we have gotten a little heated in this discussion but such is the way of the internet. See thing is, I don't necessarily hope to prove we're right so much as I truly hope you're wrong. See, a pants suit or something similar really damages the perceptions of what people aesthetically associate as the Wonder Woman costume. Sure it may be no big deal to people that hold no personal investment to this character but many fans love her as a comic character and are headfast to a faithful representation for how Wonder Woman looks. And fans, and there are much more than some of you guys seem willing to believe, want something faithful. A pantsuit or something of its ilk, simply is not.

[superion]

anybody here remember the initial fan reactions of seeing the Batman '89 costume?

wasnt a pleasant memory innit?


expect something like that for Wonder Woman if the new costume differs too much from the original. i'm betting the farm-- nay the island-- on this one.

Why can't you alter WW costume slightly just because its been around 60 years. What about Robin for most of his first 30 to 40 years he was depicted with those stupid green shorts and bare legs. It wasn't a problem at first but Robin started to become somewhat of a joke because of that look as time passed. Someone at DC finally realized he looked like a wimp in that get up and put some pants on him. I think almost all Batman and Robin fans are grateful for that change.

In my opinion WW has much the same problem because of her costume. When the character gets as many snarky sexual comments as she seems to elicit from fans I think maybe they need to try a different approach with the character to get people to take her more seriously.

[ClarkLuther55]

Oh yeah, sex sells... to a smaller audience.

NO, sex sells to every red-blooded male. And WW's classic costume sells to everyone who knows the character, or merely knows how she looks like. Which is just about EVERYONE.

Like I said before, the expectations will be to see "Wonder Woman" as a blockbuster film, and you can't make blockbuster revenues selling sex to minors.

OMG, bare legs!!!11!1 Will somebody PLEASE think of the children?! :whatever:

They tried to do that with both the Charlies Angels and Tomb Raider franchises. The first films did well alright but when they added more sex it the second ones... well, as you can see, they are not making "Charlie's Angels" or "Tomb Raider" films anymore.

Oh sure, people avoided those sequels because they had sexy women, and not because they were crappy sequels to first movies that were mediocre or crappy to begin with. :whatever:

I'm living in the real world alright. It's just that you guys are failing to see the reality of it.

A "real world" where one-piece bathing suits can get a film an R-rating.

In my opinion WW has much the same problem because of her costume. When the character gets as many snarky sexual comments as she seems to elicit from fans I think maybe they need to try a different approach with the character to get people to take her more seriously.

What "many" snarky sexual comments? People do NOT look at WW and think "****." They just think WW. Stop confusing YOUR views with those of the average person, who DOESN'T have a problem with the way WW looks.

[superion]

What "many" snarky sexual comments? People do NOT look at WW and think "****." They just think WW. Stop confusing YOUR views with those of the average person, who DOESN'T have a problem with the way WW looks.

Well just looking at this thread alone. When people were asked what WW should wear in the movie some of the replies included a thong, body paint, the skimpier the better, naked and bubble wrap. I've been on some of the other boards like the X-Men and FF which have female heros and I don't ever recall ever seeing these types of comments.

Also I don't have any problem with the WW costume personally. But given the crticisms I have read of the way female heros are depicted in comics and film I don't think I am out of line in some of my views.

[Manic]

I've been on some of the other boards like the X-Men and FF which have female heros and I don't ever recall ever seeing these types of comments.
That's because FF already gave us Invisible Woman in her undies.

[ClarkLuther55]

Well just looking at this thread alone. When people were asked what WW should wear in the movie some of the replies included a thong, body paint, the skimpier the better, naked and bubble wrap.

That's not a strike against the actual Wonder Woman costume. This is a bunch of fanboys being horny fanboys, or just people joking around, in a thread ABOUT what you want WW to wear in the movie.

Also I don't have any problem with the WW costume personally. But given the crticisms I have read of the way female heros are depicted in comics and film I don't think I am out of line in some of my views.

I have never, ever heard anyone in real life criticizing WW's costume. And as I pointed out before, it's nowhere near as ridiculous as some other female costumes in comics, which are the ones drawing criticism.

[Steelsheen]

Why can't you alter WW costume slightly just because its been around 60 years. What about Robin for most of his first 30 to 40 years he was depicted with those stupid green shorts and bare legs. It wasn't a problem at first but Robin started to become somewhat of a joke because of that look as time passed. Someone at DC finally realized he looked like a wimp in that get up and put some pants on him. I think almost all Batman and Robin fans are grateful for that change.

In my opinion WW has much the same problem because of her costume. When the character gets as many snarky sexual comments as she seems to elicit from fans I think maybe they need to try a different approach with the character to get people to take her more seriously.

how slightly is "slightly"?

oh and if you've been paying attention from the start of this thread and the dozen or so threads on this subject matter in the past few years you will know that slight changes-- such as adding a battle skirt-- would be generally acceptable. just like those subtle changes done on the Robin suit, they kept most of his colors the same but changed those briefs to tights. that's pretty much it.

also we're talking about Wonder Woman, not Donna Troy. the expectations and standards for the main superhero has always been higher than the sidekicks. as i mentioned before, there was a huge brouhaha over rubber Batsuit when the '89 movie came out. but for the most part it kept its sillouette, and is still a recognizable batsuit. if they took away his ears-- or worse made them huge like Man-Bat's then you're talking of a real problem.

you all may argue back and forth about whether or not WW should show her assets more-- how high the cuts on the briefs are, how low the bustier should be, i say all should be done in moderation. she is a superhero after all, not a hooker. little girls look up to her. but to make her wear pants for example is a pretty drastic costume change in itself because, like it or not, WW's legs are pretty much part of her costume.

oh and about the snarky remarks, they're joking. of course one can argue that jokes are half meant, and what can you do, half of those following the WW stories are horny guys. each superhero has his share of "snarky remarks". try to recall the ones for Batman and Robin.

[Clouseau]

Guys, I've already said it before. WW naked, walking along Theymiscara and all it's beauty. :o:up:
somehow, i just don't think it'd work (http://www.moondog.freeuk.com/wonder_woman_nude.jpg) (not for kiddies' eyes)... :ninja:

[terry78]

somehow, i just don't think it'd work (http://www.moondog.freeuk.com/wonder_woman_nude.jpg) (not for kiddies' eyes)... :ninja:
She seriously needs a trim. That's weed whacker country.

[Clouseau]

gah, you can barely tell from that picture...:whatever:

[pifpaf]

i think dnno1 is to much pudic

[pifpaf]

a good looking a,, sell sad butt true i prfer to see a woman in g sting than granny's pants

[pifpaf]

http://img183.imageshack.us/img183/4529/wonderwomands6.jpg this kind of costume sale ticke for me

[hippy fascist]

Oh yeah, sex sells... to a smaller audience. Like I said before, the expectations will be to see "Wonder Woman" as a blockbuster film, and you can't make blockbuster revenues selling sex to minors. They tried to do that with both the Charlies Angels and Tomb Raider franchises. The first films did well alright but when they added more sex in the second ones... well, as you can see, they are not making "Charlie's Angels" or "Tomb Raider" films anymore. I'm living in the real world alright. It's just that you guys are failing to see the reality of it.

You don't think sex is used to sell to minors??

Britney spears
Justin Timberlake
Boyzone
Christina Aguilera
Backstreet boys
J-Lo
Shakira
etc


Not just for minors but if you're over the age of consent and still listening to these people you should be sterilized for the good of the general population

[Clouseau]

SNAP OUT OF IT. The old adage is "Sex sells," NOT the other way around. In what alternate universe does COVERING UP an already widely-accepted image HELP a movie make money?:whatever:

I actually find it quite scary that some people can be this out of step with reality.
i'm sorry, i just had to laugh... while i agree with your view in the first paragraph completely, i just found it hilarious that on a forum about superheroes, someone would accuse someone else of being out of step with reality! that's classic! :woot: :woot: :woot:

[dnno1]

You don't think sex is used to sell to minors??

Britney spears
Justin Timberlake
Boyzone
Christina Aguilera
Backstreet boys
J-Lo
Shakira
etc


Not just for minors but if you're over the age of consent and still listening to these people you should be sterilized for the good of the general population

I didn't say that they didn't, I said that it sells to smaller markets (try reading my posts a little closer). The majority of the fans of the people you listed above are not buying their musc just for their sexuality (that's just a minority of them) they are buying it because they like their style of music. If they couldn't sing worth anything *cough*Paris Hilton*cough* I don't think that their records would be selling all that well and it would be the sex appeal that would be bolstering the sales (and that would only be temporary). If you still think that the Wonder Woman outfit isn't inapproprate, I would ask you to take a look at the Rachel Bilson clip (http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Rachel+Bilson+as+Wonder+Woman&search=Search)from "The OC". If the outfit was considered appropriate why is it that the character Summer Roberts put her clothes back on in that scene?

[ClarkLuther55]

If the outfit was considered appropriate why is it that the character Summer Roberts put her clothes back on in that scene?

Yeah, she was trying to cover herself up because the WW suit is just too skanky. Not because she was embarrassingly caught in the act trying to seduce this guy, and felt bad about hurting the other girl's feelings. :whatever:

If the WW suit is so inappropriate, how come the Justice League, or even the Superfriends cartoons were able to get away with it?

[terry78]

On Superfriends and JL, she had full-on coverage with the panties. No ass cheek was showing whatsoever. Would you be cool with that?

[dnno1]

Yeah, she was trying to cover herself up because the WW suit is just too skanky. Not because she was embarrassingly caught in the act trying to seduce this guy, and felt bad about hurting the other girl's feelings. :whatever:

If the WW suit is so inappropriate, how come the Justice League, or even the Superfriends cartoons were able to get away with it?

That's because they are cartoons and even then JL and JLU were aired to a small market (less than a half million at any given time) in the after prime time hours (10:00 PM). It's a different story when it's real life or (in the case of a toon) on network TV. Oh and yes Summer Roberts was caught in the act and was embarrassingly trying to cover up. Don't be so naive.

[drewr15]

I didn't say that they didn't, I said that it sells to smaller markets (try reading my posts a little closer). The majority of the fans of the people you listed above are not buying their musc just for their sexuality (that's just a minority of them) they are buying it because they like their style of music. If the couldn't sing worth anything *cough*Paris Hilton*cough* I don't think that their records would be selling all that well and it would be the sex appeal that would be bolstering the sales (and that would only be temporary). If you still think that the Wonder Woman outfit isn't inapproprate, I would ask you to take a look at the Rachel Bilson clip (http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Rachel+Bilson+as+Wonder+Woman&search=Search)from "The OC". If the outfit was considered appropriate why is it that the character Summer Roberts put her clothes back on in that scene?

Hate to chime in on the debate but if the rachel bilsons' costume was so inappropiate - the clip wouldn't have aired on TV to begin with. The producers knew putting her in a wonder woman costume would be sexy and people would watch and still be talking about the clip long after it happened. her covering up had to do with being caught in the story not because she felt it was inappropiate.

[dnno1]

Hate to chime in on the debate but if the rachel bilsons' costume was so inappropiate - the clip wouldn't have aired on TV to begin with. The producers knew putting her in a wonder woman costume would be sexy and people would watch and still be talking about the clip long after it happened. her covering up had to do with being caught in the story not because she felt it was inappropiate.

But it was realistic. In any normal situation like that you wouldn't expect the reaction to be any different. Why? Because it was inappropriate, else she would have done nothing.

[dnno1]

On Superfriends and JL, she had full-on coverage with the panties. No ass cheek was showing whatsoever. Would you be cool with that?

You shouldn't ask me that question, Terry, you'll have to ask the general public. That's a qustion only they can answer.

[drewr15]

But it was realistic. In any normal situation like that you wouldn't expect the reaction to be any different. Why? Because it was inappropriate, else she would have done nothing.

I kind of hear what you are saying but I disagre on what was inappropiate. Not that she was in a Wonder Woman costume but that she had snuck off and was trying to seduce that guy with it. Here the guy was a comic book fan and she as using the character to turn him on. If she was in the costume at a halloween party the reaction would have been totally different. She used it as a vehicle kind of like lingerie so in that sense I get your point but its more because it was specific to him being a comic fan and her trying to seduce with him with the costume, than the costume itself is my point. She could have worn the old red and black Ms Marvel costume which is alot less revealing and would have had the same reaction - it was her actions that were inappropiate not the costume.

[dnno1]

I kind of hear what you are saying but I disagre on what was inappropiate. Not that she was in a Wonder Woman costume but that she had snuck off and was trying to seduce that guy with it. Here the guy was a comic book fan and she as using the character to turn him on. If she was in the costume at a halloween party the reaction would have been totally different. She used it as a vehicle kind of like lingerie so in that sense I get your point but its more because it was specific to him being a comic fan and her trying to seduce with him with the costume, than the costume itself is my point. She could have worn the old red and black Ms Marvel costume which is alot less revealing and would have had the same reaction - it was her actions that were inappropiate not the costume.
http://www.toonopedia.com/msmarvel.jpg
http://www.comixexperience.com/Ms.%20Marvel%20cover.jpg
Ms. Marvel
(circa 1977)

http://www.theartistschoice.com/scans/comm/west/thumbs/Wonder%20Woman.jpg (http://www.serendipityartsales.com/images/west/WonderWoman.jpg)
Wonder Woman by Kevin West
(click to enlarge)

It might be difficult, but it sure would be childs play in a WW outfit. Its good that you are begining to see my point. I have mentioned before that time and place are factors as to the inappropriateness of outwear. That is why I believe that if they choose to go with an outfit like the one above you might be dissapointed by the acutual amount of minutes you will get to see it in the movie.

[ClarkLuther55]

That's because they are cartoons and even then JL and JLU were aired to a small market (less than a half million at any given time) in the after prime time hours (10:00 PM). It's a different story when it's real life or (in the case of a toon) on network TV. Oh and yes Summer Roberts was caught in the act and was embarrassingly trying to cover up. Don't be so naive.

Cartoons marketed towards children would be under STRICTER rules regarding sex than live action shows and movies for adults. The number of viewers and the time slot is also irrelevant when it comes to how inappropriate things are considered. Cartoons on adult swim still get their TV-14 and TV-MA ratings. Justice League is judged to be TV-Y7, suitable for children.

And how do you explain Superfriends, which aired on Saturday mornings 3 decades ago? :whatever:

[omicron]

The costume was introduced in the 40's, and has lasted all this time regardless of the level of censorship of the time. The costume will have to work on screen in 2 ways. It has to look good (meaning cool), and it has to be functional (meaning it's NOT a bathing suit to show off her assets) Her costume is part of her battle armour. She doesn't wear the rest most of the time because it is unnecessary. At the climax of the film she should "armour up" and then as an audience we see why she wears the "simplified" version". Also, WW has always been oblivious to they way men see her in the costume, it can be used as a comic element in the film, albeit in a mature, intelligent way...hopefully. Joss knows fanboys, I pray the costume remains close to the comic version. There are alot of versions out there to choose from. :ww: <-why is this blue?????

[Hawkeye]

Just a mini skirt would be fine with me. :cool:

[The Shredder]

As much as I would like the classic star spangled underwear, I think I would be just as happy with a battle/mini skirt. :up:

[The Shredder]

As much as I would like the classic star spangled underwear, I think I would be just as happy with a battle/mini skirt. :up:

[Clouseau]

But it was realistic. In any normal situation like that you wouldn't expect the reaction to be any different. Why? Because it was inappropriate, else she would have done nothing.
ah! so you think Wonder Woman should only dress the way normal women dress in normal everyday situations!

you seem to be forgetting that Wonder Woman is a SUPERHERO, and SUPERHEROES don't dress like normal everyday people! at least not while they're "on the job"...

look at Superman in his tights! oh my gosh! that's so unrealistic, because you would never catch a normal man wearing his underwear on the outside of a big blue suit with a cape! :eek:

:whatever:

[dnno1]

Cartoons marketed towards children would be under STRICTER rules regarding sex than live action shows and movies for adults. The number of viewers and the time slot is also irrelevant when it comes to how inappropriate things are considered. Cartoons on adult swim still get their TV-14 and TV-MA ratings. Justice League is judged to be TV-Y7, suitable for children.

And how do you explain Superfriends, which aired on Saturday mornings 3 decades ago? :whatever:

First off, you should note that even though Justice League was rated that way it was aired on cable TV and seen by a relatively small audience (less than a half million people). Had it been aired on network television and viewed by millions of people (especially children) it more than likely would have been criticized for its violent content let alone its sexual themes. Besides if you would notice there were a lot of episodes where Wonder Woman wasn't even in it. As for the Superfriends back in the 70's and 80's there was no real ratings system for television (although cartoons like Bugs Bunny and Popeye were heavily critiqued for their violent content) . What I did notice then was that in the 1980's and early 1990's some cartoons were created or revamped to be kid friendly (and it might have been influenced by some intrest groups). Several that come to mind were shows like the Flintstones Kids, The Archies, The Smurfs, and Sabrina the Teenage Witch. I think that this TV rating system is fairly recent (circa 1997) so to answer your question there were no real rules or guidlines during that period.

[dnno1]

ah! so you think Wonder Woman should only dress the way normal women dress in normal everyday situations!

you seem to be forgetting that Wonder Woman is a SUPERHERO, and SUPERHEROES don't dress like normal everyday people! at least not while they're "on the job"...

look at Superman in his tights! oh my gosh! that's so unrealistic, because you would never catch a normal man wearing his underwear on the outside of a big blue suit with a cape! :eek:

:whatever:

I guess circus strongmen (which Superman's costume was modeled after) and professional wrestlers dress that way (wearing tights) so I don't know how inappropriate that is (once again it all depends on time and place). I notice that for the most part the popular Marvel characters are pretty much all covered up (the X-Men wore coats and jackets at one time). The only reason why I think Wonder Woman wears the outfit that she does is to bolster the sales of her comic book. She doesn't sell as well as her male counterparts (Batman and Superman) nor the X-Men so I'm sure she needs any angle she can get to sell an extra copy or two. Besides I understand that they have to keep printing her comic anyway in order to keep the rights to the character.

[drewr15]

http://www.toonopedia.com/msmarvel.jpg
http://www.comixexperience.com/Ms.%20Marvel%20cover.jpg
Ms. Marvel
(circa 1977)

http://www.theartistschoice.com/scans/comm/west/thumbs/Wonder%20Woman.jpg (http://www.serendipityartsales.com/images/west/WonderWoman.jpg)
Wonder Woman by Kevin West
(click to enlarge)

It might be difficult, but it sure would be childs play in a WW outfit. Its good that you are begining to see my point. I have mentioned before that time and place are factors as to the inappropriateness of outwear. That is why I believe that if they choose to go with an outfit like the one above you might be dissapointed by the acutual amount of minutes you will get to see it in the movie.

See here's the thing though...as a kid I read Ms Marvel and Wonder Woman comics and watched the Lynda Carter show - and it never struck me as a woman running around in her underwear so much as a costume. Heck I don't even remember Ms Marvel's being that revealing. And considering there are shows like Survivor with women and men in basically bathing suits the whole time on prime time - I don't think Wonder woman's costume is inappropiate at all. And I'm glad you agree that time and place are factors for inappropiateness - so then you are beginning to see my point of view that Bilson was covering up because of her actions not her costume then. :woot:

Anyway, I'm sure the costume will be altered for the movie but I doubt it will be completely covered up. Granted the X-chicks costumes have been altered but I think that had more to do with story and look than inappropiateness - I mean the Spiderman movies seem to always make sure Dunst has a good wet scene showing off her, ahem, assets, and nobody seems to mind there. I just hope they write a good WW story, and the costume will work itself out I'm sure.

[dnno1]

As much as I would like the classic star spangled underwear, I think I would be just as happy with a battle/mini skirt. :up:

Like this maybe?

http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b188/dnno1/wonderwomancrop.jpg (http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b188/dnno1/wonderwomancrop.jpg)
Add from Demolitioncomics.com

[Steelsheen]

Like this maybe?

http://www.demolitioncomics.com/itempics/frontfeature.jpg (http://www.demolitioncomics.com/main/itemdetail.php?item=17903)
Add from Demolitioncomics.com

the belt and skirt looks like it could be taken from a Supergirl costume.

[ClarkLuther55]

First off, you should note that even though Justice League was rated that way it was aired on cable TV and seen by a relatively small audience (less than a half million people). Had it been aired on network television and viewed by millions of people (especially children) it more than likely would have been criticized for its violent content let alone its sexual themes.

True, it gets away with a little more than it would on a network. But it was STILL judged to be TV-Y7. So obviously people don't think the WW suit is as outrageously ****ty as you do. And TNBA and Batman Beyond have had death and other similar dark things, and they were on network TV.

Besides if you would notice there were a lot of episodes where Wonder Woman wasn't even in it.

Yeah they had to limit WW's appearances because she was just too extreme for the kiddies. :whatever:

The entire Justice League is not always in every episode, since many of them are written for only a few characters. Still, I just looked at an episode guide, and she's in more episodes of Justice League than she's not. Her appearances go down in JLU, but EVERY character's appearances went down because of the vastly expanded cast.

s for the Superfriends back in the 70's and 80's there was no real ratings system for television (although cartoons like Bugs Bunny and Popeye were heavily critiqued for their violent content).

Oh yeah, they really got away with MORE three decades ago. :whatever: And do you think mainstream people actually think Looney Toons is very violent, and not just fringe parent group types?

[The Shredder]

Like this maybe?

http://www.demolitioncomics.com/itempics/frontfeature.jpg (http://www.demolitioncomics.com/main/itemdetail.php?item=17903)


That looks ok. But I have to agree with Steelsheen in that it does look similar to something Supergirl might wear. I suppose what I had in mind was something of a battleskirt that was a bit more Xena-ish. Not that this would be my preferred choice, but I could definately live with something like that for a big screen adaptation of WW. As I am aware that changes to the costume we have all grown up with in the Lynda Carter series/DC Comics is very much likely to occur.

[3dman27]

the skirt

[WonderWitch]

the whole argument about whether or not ww's costume is innappropriate or not needs to stop. shes not that bad! ww will always be sexualized because she is strong & beautiful & guys have hormones, it doesn't mean its b/c of the way she dresses, although many artists like to depict her in really high-cut, ****ty, thongish bottoms, and realllly low cut tops, which does not help her female empowerment stance, as in if she were to take one step she'd be falling out all over the place! but, those artists are losers and i digress... the wondersuit can be done tastefully with boyshorts that don't show butt cheek when she bends over, kicks, or runs, and a top that is high enough in front and well-fit enough to not show too much cleavage or fall out when she bends over, punches, or raises her arms high above her head. if that is what the costume will be like few people will have complaints, and those very few that do will be the people who wouldn't have seen it anyways, even if she was in a full nun's habit. i agree it should not be really sexual and should be family friendly, or at least teen friendly, but honestly, have u seen whay kids see these days? ww is nothing compared to that. but ya, to those concerned w/ innappropriateness, i totally see where u're coming from, but i don't think its the basic ww shilouette's problem, just how it is interpreted. if (i hope) joss keeps the ww shilouette, i'm pretty sure we'll be ok, b/c he likes his characters to stand out b/c of their empowered attitudes, not their ****ty looks. i know its easy to be afraid of the movie banking on ww's sexuality, but this is not a new phenomenon. basically every movie w/ a strong female lead always counts on sexuality, sadly enough, let alone superheroine movies. i hope the sexual stuff will be kept to a bare minmum in ww, as it would be impossible to completely eradicate it. but this topic should kinda be put to rest, as both sides of this issue are correct on many points, and wrong on others. honestly, as a female (who dresses modestly to boot), i'm not at all ofended by the decent versions of the wondersuit. in fact, i like it so much i'm gonna be ww for halloween.:yay: so thats all i have to say for now.

[ImperfectIcon]

the whole argument about whether or not ww's costume is innappropriate or not needs to stop. shes not that bad! ww will always be sexualized because she is strong & beautiful & guys have hormones, it doesn't mean its b/c of the way she dresses, although many artists like to depict her in really high-cut, ****ty, thongish bottoms, and realllly low cut tops, which does not help her female empowerment stance, as in if she were to take one step she'd be falling out all over the place! but, those artists are losers and i digress... the wondersuit can be done tastefully with boyshorts that don't show butt cheek when she bends over, kicks, or runs, and a top that is high enough in front and well-fit enough to not show too much cleavage or fall out when she bends over, punches, or raises her arms high above her head. if that is what the costume will be like few people will have complaints, and those very few that do will be the people who wouldn't have seen it anyways, even if she was in a full nun's habit. i agree it should not be really sexual and should be family friendly, or at least teen friendly, but honestly, have u seen whay kids see these days? ww is nothing compared to that. but ya, to those concerned w/ innappropriateness, i totally see where u're coming from, but i don't think its the basic ww shilouette's problem, just how it is interpreted. if (i hope) joss keeps the ww shilouette, i'm pretty sure we'll be ok, b/c he likes his characters to stand out b/c of their empowered attitudes, not their ****ty looks. i know its easy to be afraid of the movie banking on ww's sexuality, but this is not a new phenomenon. basically every movie w/ a strong female lead always counts on sexuality, sadly enough, let alone superheroine movies. i hope the sexual stuff will be kept to a bare minmum in ww, as it would be impossible to completely eradicate it. but this topic should kinda be put to rest, as both sides of this issue are correct on many points, and wrong on others. honestly, as a female (who dresses modestly to boot), i'm not at all ofended by the decent versions of the wondersuit. in fact, i like it so much i'm gonna be ww for halloween.:yay: so thats all i have to say for now.

Stick with the look everyone knows, that's what I say! BTW Post pics Lol!

[jpmuftak]

OK it's time for you people to FACE REALITY!!!!!

For this Wonder Woman movie to be successful, SHE CANNOT WEAR STAR STUDDED UNDERWEAR. PERIOD.

Her costume HAS to be some what remanicent of what an Amazon Princess would wear for it to be anywhere close to believable.

Let's face it, after Batman's Spelunking suit, and Superman's Kryptonian 3d suit with krystalic features.
DC is trying to make their movie counterparts make sense in reality. Including their costumes!

So I say, use the skirt but it's not blue.

http://img231.imageshack.us/img231/1780/wwsamp315gv.jpg
http://img164.imageshack.us/img164/8905/wwsamp413vf.jpg

[Fused]

Yeah, lets all face "reality". The reality where spacemen come to earth in rocketships and save people and the same reality where supermodel amazon warriors live on a secret island. . . No way could her costume exist there. . .

[ClarkLuther55]

OK it's time for you people to FACE REALITY!!!!!

For this Wonder Woman movie to be successful, SHE CANNOT WEAR STAR STUDDED UNDERWEAR. PERIOD.

Did you even read some of my posts earlier in this thread? How would it make the movie more successful to stray from the iconic image of Wonder Woman that the public recognizes and accepts?

Her costume HAS to be some what remanicent of what an Amazon Princess would wear for it to be anywhere close to believable.

Let's face it, after Batman's Spelunking suit, and Superman's Kryptonian 3d suit with krystalic features.
DC is trying to make their movie counterparts make sense in reality. Including their costumes!

So I say, use the skirt but it's not blue.

Oh yeah, high tech armor with "memory cloth" wings is sooooo much more realistic than the spandex used in the comics.

I can't believe people are actually complaining about the realism of "panties" in a movie with mythological characters and superpowers.

[jpmuftak]

Yeah, lets all face "reality". The reality where spacemen come to earth in rocketships and save people and the same reality where supermodel amazon warriors live on a secret island. . . No way could her costume exist there. . .
I can't believe people are actually complaining about the realism of "panties" in a movie with mythological characters and superpowers.
If you took the time to understand my statement before jumping to such a defensive position you would understand that the "reality" i spoke of was that of the Film Industry. Where the producers of said "Wonder Woman" movie are thinking about what the threshold for the audiences suspension of disbelief is.

The masses will likely accept an amazon warrior princess that hails from a undisturbed ancient civilization and can kick a man's ass, but star spangled panties and a truth inducing lasso...um...we will see. It's all about how much the audience is WILLING to believe.

Oh yeah, high tech armor with "memory cloth" wings is sooooo much more realistic than the spandex used in the comics.

Well actually yes. Yes it is.

Did you even read some of my posts earlier in this thread? How would it make the movie more successful to stray from the iconic image of Wonder Woman that the public recognizes and accepts?
Hmmm...how indeed. So this public you speak of ACCEPTS this in 2006?
http://iaith.tapetrade.net/lyndaww.jpg

Ok Ok that's not fair...I understand...You want it to look like this right?


http://home.freeuk.net/moondog/rossi.jpg

So with this picture as our standard for what Wonder Woman's "Iconic and publicly accepted" image is, let me make a point.

-In my teenage years, I LOVED this image of wonder woman!
in fact, I would bet EVERY guy in the world LOVES this image of wonder woman. To take it further, if there was a movie made, and she wore this exact "suit", every guy would LOVE it. (and some girls too)

However, EVERY guy would ALSO LOVE it, if she were...say...naked. right?
I mean, it is VERY appealing and accepted by many for a sexy woman to be naked. It doesn't have ANYTHING to do with the character or her story.

With this thinking, you could justify making porno into a Big Screen Blockbuster hit. Because LOTS of "people" want to see it.

The star spangled panites were only never questioned because all of us comic book geeks, LOVED to see a scantily clad woman in our comics. So what if they had stars all over them. So therefore your reasoning holds NO water. Staying true to the comics is BS in this particular case.

[Fused]

"Staying true to the comics is BS in this particular case."

When a filmmaker goes anywhere near this line of thinking is when a movie adaptation goes the wrong way.

[dnno1]

I guess you can't say that for "Battle Star Galactica" and "Ultimate Avengers".

[Dark Knight]

OK it's time for you people to FACE REALITY!!!!!

For this Wonder Woman movie to be successful, SHE CANNOT WEAR STAR STUDDED UNDERWEAR. PERIOD.

Her costume HAS to be some what remanicent of what an Amazon Princess would wear for it to be anywhere close to believable.

Let's face it, after Batman's Spelunking suit, and Superman's Kryptonian 3d suit with krystalic features.
DC is trying to make their movie counterparts make sense in reality. Including their costumes!

So I say, use the skirt but it's not blue.

http://img231.imageshack.us/img231/1780/wwsamp315gv.jpg
http://img164.imageshack.us/img164/8905/wwsamp413vf.jpg


this is what I would like to see also.

[ClarkLuther55]

If you took the time to understand my statement before jumping to such a defensive position you would understand that the "reality" i spoke of was that of the Film Industry. Where the producers of said "Wonder Woman" movie are thinking about what the threshold for the audiences suspension of disbelief is.

The masses will likely accept an amazon warrior princess that hails from a undisturbed ancient civilization and can kick a man's ass, but star spangled panties and a truth inducing lasso...um...we will see. It's all about how much the audience is WILLING to believe.


:whatever: Yeah, those star spangled panties are just soooo hard to believe, in the same movie with mythological gods and superpowers. People HAVE believed the WW costume for decades.

Hmmm...how indeed. So this public you speak of ACCEPTS this in 2006?

Why not? That's WW. And if you're trying to use any crappiness specific to THAT costume, it's not going to work. Modern costume designers in a big budget movie can do better than a 1970s TV show.

Ok Ok that's not fair...I understand...You want it to look like this right?

-In my teenage years, I LOVED this image of wonder woman!
in fact, I would bet EVERY guy in the world LOVES this image of wonder woman. To take it further, if there was a movie made, and she wore this exact "suit", every guy would LOVE it. (and some girls too)

However, EVERY guy would ALSO LOVE it, if she were...say...naked. right?
I mean, it is VERY appealing and accepted by many for a sexy woman to be naked. It doesn't have ANYTHING to do with the character or her story.

With this thinking, you could justify making porno into a Big Screen Blockbuster hit. Because LOTS of "people" want to see it.

:whatever: Even answering this crappy argument is beneath me. There's LOTS of reasons why WW shouldn't be naked on film:

1. It's unrealistic. FAR more than her iconic costume. Don't give me any black and white fallacy about how they're both unrealistic, as you say there is only so much people are willing to suspend disbelief for.
2. It's NOT accepted, just in the PRIVATE fantasies of men who are thinking about something else other than the quality of the film.
3. It pisses on the source material, where she's clothed.
4. That's a sure fire way to draw REAL criticism about ****tiness (not the make believe kind that dnno1 believes the iconic suit would get), and would probably not even make it past the ratings board.

Don't bring this weak crap into a debate. :whatever:

[ImperfectIcon]

OK it's time for you people to FACE REALITY!!!!!



No thanks, I watch movies to escape it! That's what it's all about...escape from reality, which is called ENTERTAINMENT, unless you are a fan of reality-TV.

Don't need a lecture on reality, I live it everyday, as you do.

Stick with the star-spangled satin tights...stick with the look that everyone knows.

It is a bad idea to change any aspect of the costume (my concept is of the Perez-style).

Stick with it, and get a credivle actress, and the movie will go alright.

[Fused]

Anything that might be mistaken as ridiculous ceases to be if talented people take the material seriously. Could the "wonder panties" be used in a way that it is cheesy and exploitative? Absolutely. It's taking the concepts and not treating them like a joke that makes them viable interpretations. Could Princess Leia's slave costume, Hulk's tattered purple shorts or a Hobbit's big feet been portrayed in a laughable matter? Absolutely. They weren't though, because the filmakers portrayed the characters seriously and faithfully. The same can be perfectly done with Wonder Woman.

[jpmuftak]

Anything that might be mistaken as ridiculous ceases to be if talented people take the material seriously. Could the "wonder panties" be used in a way that it is cheesy and exploitative? Absolutely. It's taking the concepts and not treating them like a joke that makes them viable interpretations. Could Princess Leia's slave costume, Hulk's tattered purple shorts or a Hobbit's big feet been portrayed in a laughable matter? Absolutely. They weren't though, because the filmakers portrayed the characters seriously and faithfully. The same can be perfectly done with Wonder Woman.
I'll agree with you 100% on this!
I just don't want this movie to suck. and maybe taking away the "possibility" of CHEESE is how i want them to accomplish that.

[ImperfectIcon]

I'll agree with you 100% on this!
I just don't want this movie to suck. and maybe taking away the "possibility" of CHEESE is how i want them to accomplish that.

Yeah we all don't want it to suck...it will be up to WB and in particular Mr Whedon if the movie is going to be a hit.

I don't think the costume is cheesy, and I don't see any good reason to change it.

You can have the skirt in some senarios as well as the add armor but the classic look must be retain, because it is the signature look, that everyone knows.

[dnno1]

"Staying true to the comics is BS in this particular case."

When a filmmaker goes anywhere near this line of thinking is when a movie adaptation goes the wrong way.

Batman's costume in the movies is not true to the comics, but yet they still keep making Batman films that way. I don't understand.

[The Question]

I really don't see a problem with using this version of her costume:


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e6/WWDonna.jpg


Or something like it.

[terry78]

I really don't see a problem with using this version of her costume:


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e6/WWDonna.jpg


Or something like it.
Nor do I. People apparantly just don't like it because they feel it strays from the "iconic look" or they just want to see some ass cheek.

[The Shredder]

Nor do I. People apparantly just don't like it because they feel it strays from the "iconic look" or they just want to see some ass cheek.

Seeing ass cheeks is good and all, but I can definately live with something that isnt exactly a 100% true the comic book costume. A variation wouldnt be the end of the world.

[dnno1]

From Yahoo Buzz (http://buzz.yahoo.com/buzzlog/93808?fp=1).

[BATZARRO WWD]

Nor do I. People apparantly just don't like it because they feel it strays from the "iconic look" or they just want to see some ass cheek.

I think those leather strips...whatever you call em would be good. I mean, I like women asses, but in WOnder Woman: The movie, seriousness should come before asses.

[Octoberist]

how about NONE? :P

[super85]

While superhero costumes are often referred to as "underwear" or "panties" "underpants" in mainstream civilian media , its still pretty tiresome to hear. It's not like you hear commentators and sportsfans talk about the "panties" or "underwear" Olympic Athletes use. Besides ranting, I would like the more armored version that is used in the pic posted by The Question as something a possible movie version could use.

[Metamorpho1977]

I kind of like the new costume. It looks good enough for a movie. Part of me wonders if they changed the costume to inspire a new look in the movie.

[8Diagrams(WU)]

The old look is iconic but outdated as hell. A greek godess wearing american propaganda doesnt make much sense, and as fun as that would be, its difficult for her knockers not to pop out when she is fighting.

DC's characters are great and classic, but their outfits are a tad outdated imo.

The new outfit is fine. The criticism comes mostly from peoples natural reaction to change. I do think its geared towards a movie representation of the character. You cant have the character that represents female empowerment in our society wearing clothing that could be seen as sexual objectification. Im just sayin.

[TruerToTheCore]

it's not underwear. :doh:

[Timstuff]

I'm sorry but WW's new biker outfit looks like the awful results of 50 focus groups. When you've got a hundred people who all think something sucks for different reasons, the only thing that they will agree on is that black leather is OK.

[akfj]

it's not underwear. :doh:

Yeah, really. People wouldn't consider female gymnasts or track and field athletes as wearing "underwear".

[Donut]

Stick with the classic costume damn it

[mego joe]

I kind of like the new costume. It looks good enough for a movie. Part of me wonders if they changed the costume to inspire a new look in the movie.

Aww no, I hope not- it doesn't even look like Wonder Woman. Hey how about the new Superman movie is mostly black and instead of a red cape a black leather jacket or trench coat. No way. No way. Remembe they want people to actually go see a WW movie.

[mego joe]

Stick with the classic costume damn it

Double damn it!

[dnno1]

Joss Whedon's 'Wonder Woman' Designs Revealed? (http://splashpage.mtv.com/2010/07/06/joss-whedons-wonder-woman-designs-revealed/)

[Mac_Hine]

I would prefer a roman type skirt. Looks much cooler.

[thechase]

There's no question. The director's will want to make all the money they can so they will put her in a mini skirt so they it will be acceptable to the younger viewer's parents.

[Mako]

Either a basic skirt or roman warrior type skirt.

[Heretic]

Pants...Amazons dont parade around in underwear or skirts...they wore toga type outfits or long black pants...lets avoid the silliness and be true to the concept at the same time.

[maenalus]

Underwear. Star-spangled underwear.

[super85]

again with the "underwear" talk, maybe we should start calling Ryan Reynolds GL-suit for "Cgi-pantyhose" while we are at it. Geez.

[\S/uperman]

I hope she has the tan tights or pantyhose. About time to see a female superhero in tights.

[batboy99]

Star panties with the leather battle skirt on top FTW!

[maenalus]

I just can't support the battle skirt because it would just feel like WW was copycatting Xena.

[batboy99]

Yes, because Xena is the only person to wear a battle skirt....

[maenalus]

While Xena isn't the only person to wear a skirt, she is the only person in one that various people, for over a decade now, have been touting as what Wonder Woman should be re-fashioned after.

I should have said that's one reason I don't like the battle skirt on her. The main reason of course is I just plain love the starry briefs.