All Things Wonder Woman: An Open Discussion - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Part 24

[Willi Berg]

It's going to seem disjointed as hell if Wonder Woman keeps jumping from the present to the past. In the Wonder Woman movie it sort of had to jump back to the past from Batman v Superman to set up her origin.
But after Justice League it sort of ruins the pacing to have Wonder Woman in the past yet again. Like are there no current threats that deserve her attention?

I don't know...WW is dealing with current threats in the JL movie and possibly again in JL2. WB may be satisfied with that modern storyline for her in those movies for now.

These DCEU movies look to keep jumping around time periods. The Batman movies have a lot to explain with Robin/Nightwing, Batgirl, the villains etc. Flash and Aquaman (and Cyborg) look to have a lot of origin material.

I would want WW in the modern day but that could be something they're building up to, say, in a trilogy. They may want WW to be a figure prominent throughout history in her movies.

BTW:

This is what WB Chief Toby Emmerich said last month in Variety:

Emmerich says that Jenkins is already working on a “Wonder Woman” sequel. It won’t take place in World War I, as the first film did, but it will also likely be set in the past.

“It will take place somewhere between 1917 and 2017,” Emmerich says coyly.

Big help!

 

[2kt09]

Whenever it's set, just make sure to skew more towards the mythological side as Patty really seems to excel at crafting that.

 

[jaymes_e06]

Charlize Theron on the success of Wonder Woman: “We’ve had moments like this, where women really showcase themselves and kind of break glass ceilings. And then we don’t sustain it. Or there’s one movie that doesn’t do well, and all of a sudden, no one wants to make a female-driven film….And look, I am ashamed that I’m part of an industry that has never allowed a woman to work with a budget higher than what the budget has been on ‘Wonder Woman.’ That’s so f—ing caveman-like. I am always hoping that this is the movie that’s going to change it and keep it for us.”

Can we get her as Cheetah or Circe?

 

[Willi Berg]

Charlize Theron on the success of Wonder Woman: “We’ve had moments like this, where women really showcase themselves and kind of break glass ceilings. And then we don’t sustain it. Or there’s one movie that doesn’t do well, and all of a sudden, no one wants to make a female-driven film….And look, I am ashamed that I’m part of an industry that has never allowed a woman to work with a budget higher than what the budget has been on ‘Wonder Woman.’ That’s so f—ing caveman-like. I am always hoping that this is the movie that’s going to change it and keep it for us.”

Can we get her as Cheetah or Circe?

Very true what she says. That it might not be sustained or if there's one flop after this then all female-led movies suffer.

 

[2kt09]

Very true what she says. That it might not be sustained or if there's one flop after this then all female-led movies suffer.

That's not how it works.
Hollywood has been pushing ladies in major franchises for a while now.

Just...lay off having to reboot with an all female cast...

 

[Willi Berg]

That's not how it works.
Hollywood has been pushing ladies in major franchises for a while now.

Just...lay off having to reboot with an all female cast...

Well, I don't think Theron means something superficial like a reboot with an all-female cast like Ghostbusters. But female writers, directors, actors...where women are major players in all aspects of Hollywood.

 

[Flemm]

She also references the question of women directing the films, which is a bit different.

For example, people talk about The Force Awakens, Rogue One, Beauty and the Beast, and the Hunger Games also having female leads, which they do, of course, but they have male directors.

Wonder Woman has both, which is more unusual. Those comments seem to suggest that WW has one of the highest budgets of any Hollywood movie directed by a woman. I think Kung Fu Panda 2 had a similar budget, which was the highest grossing movie directed by a woman previously, according to recent news on the topic anyway (I haven't verified it other than simply following news stories about this movie).

 

[whenforeverisnt]

She also references the question of women directing the films, which is a bit different.

For example, people talk about The Force Awakens, Rogue One, Beauty and the Beast, and the Hunger Games also having female leads, which they do, of course, but they have male directors.

Wonder Woman has both, which is more unusual. Those comments seem to suggest that WW has one of the highest budgets of any Hollywood movie directed by a woman. I think Kung Fu Panda 2 had a similar budget, which was the highest grossing movie directed by a woman previously, according to recent news on the topic anyway (I haven't verified it other than simply following news stories about this movie).

Not only that, but Hollywood has a reputation of taking successful franchise films that began with a female director and when it became successful they replace her with a man. (twilight, 50 shades of grey)

 

[DlAMONDZ]

I don't know...WW is dealing with current threats in the JL movie and possibly again in JL2. WB may be satisfied with that modern storyline for her in those movies for now.

These DCEU movies look to keep jumping around time periods. The Batman movies have a lot to explain with Robin/Nightwing, Batgirl, the villains etc. Flash and Aquaman (and Cyborg) look to have a lot of origin material.

I would want WW in the modern day but that could be something they're building up to, say, in a trilogy. They may want WW to be a figure prominent throughout history in her movies.

BTW:

This is what WB Chief Toby Emmerich said last month in Variety:



Big help!

This is interesting because just days before Patty told THR the complete opposite

This could explain why Patty hasn't officially signed on to direct the sequel

 

[Willi Berg]

This is interesting because just days before Patty told THR the complete opposite

This could explain why Patty hasn't officially signed on to direct the sequel

It's actually all quite vague. In the THR article there's no quote from Patty about WW's time setting. It just says:

And if it all goes according to plan, Jenkins is more than ready to return to the character for a contemporary-set Wonder Woman sequel (she and Gadot are contractually committed to a second film).

But then there's this interview with Patty from UpRoxx:

Wonder Woman doesn’t end like Captain America: The First Avenger with her waking up in modern day. She has 100 years left.

PATTY JENKINS: Exactly.

In the next solo movie would you want it to be set in modern day or somewhere in the 100 years prior? Like it could be set in the 1930s?

It is for sure – I’m definitely planning something more interesting using that period of time. Definitely, it’s the plan. I can’t say what it is! But it’s definitely right in the pocket of what you’re talking about.

There’s so much to work with there.

Exactly! That thrills me.

This article thinks it could be a mixture of both, especially since the script is still in flux:

There's Some Confusion As To When A Wonder Woman Sequel Would Be Set

 

[DlAMONDZ]

Not only that, but Hollywood has a reputation of taking successful franchise films that began with a female director and when it became successful they replace her with a man. (twilight, 50 shades of grey)

Hollywood is ****ed up

 

[Wanda Detroit]

I'm pretty sure I read an article where Patty said directly that she wants to bring WW into current times to be the modern hero we all know(paraphrasing of course).

There are ways for the movie to be in the present and use flashbacks to parallel both what is happening in the present and what happened in the past. Maybe that is why it seems she is saying different things because they both may be true.

 

[Willi Berg]

I'm pretty sure I read an article where Patty said directly that she wants to bring WW into current times to be the modern hero we all know(paraphrasing of course).

There are ways for the movie to be in the present and use flashbacks to parallel both what is happening in the present and what happened in the past. Maybe that is why it seems she is saying different things because they both may be true.

I remember reading something like that recently. But it was more the writer interpreting Patty's words that way. Not Patty's words directly. If I find it again I will post it here.

 

[Willi Berg]

I'm pretty sure I read an article where Patty said directly that she wants to bring WW into current times to be the modern hero we all know(paraphrasing of course).

There are ways for the movie to be in the present and use flashbacks to parallel both what is happening in the present and what happened in the past. Maybe that is why it seems she is saying different things because they both may be true.

I found the article. These are Patty's words:

"It's a continuation of the same character, but there's a great, entirely different story to be told. With this character in our—in the world, that's fun, because now she exists, just funny, and also says something profound about the world we're in right now."

She could've just meant WW being relevant and modern again in our world because of her renewed popularity with the movie. But the article writer thinks it is about the sequel. Again, this is an interpretation and not directly said by Patty.

www.advocate.com/film/2017/6/29/breaking-patty-jenkins-confirms-shes-directing-wonder-woman-sequel

But, we've had her in modern times in the first WW movie and the flashbacks were the bulk of the movie. We can't know right now just how much will be modern and how much will be flashbacks. It could very well be a mixture or a parallel story.

 

[dhandler01]

Nothing is certain. Patty has confirmed nothing except that she wants to set it in America. The rest has been interpretation of her comments, where she is obviously trying not to give much away.

Right but logic pretty much shoots all of it out of the water. If Steve Trevor is somehow in it and it takes place in the 80s that pretty much destroys the entire point to the first movie. The impact of his death on her (and her remembering thanks to the picture) is completely lost.

Anything is possible but I would bet the farm screenrant has this one completely wrong. If WB had a script in place the announcements would have been made already because of WW's run.

 

[Willi Berg]

Right but logic pretty much shoots all of it out of the water. If Steve Trevor is somehow in it and it takes place in the 80s that pretty much destroys the entire point to the first movie. The impact of his death on her (and her remembering thanks to the picture) is completely lost.

Anything is possible but I would bet the farm screenrant has this one completely wrong. If WB had a script in place the announcements would have been made already because of WW's run.

Being set in the 80s during the Cold War and Chris Pine returning are two separate things. The Wrap says that that Diana will face off against the Soviet Union in the 80s, and that WB still has an option for Chris Pine (I remember that he signed a multi-picture deal.) Whether they end up using him is another matter.

These early rumours have gotten some stuff wrong and some stuff right (e.g. sites were right about Ares but wrong about Circe.) So even if Chris Pine isn't returning I think there is still a chance that it may be set during the Cold War.

No one said anything about a script already being in place. These are early days and this could just be early talks about what the setup/setting will be, as Patty Jenkins and Geoff Johns work on the script. There don't have to be announcements about anything. Johns already said he and Patty were working on the script. I believe the only announcement to expect in the near future is Jenkins returning to direct. Things are constantly changing during the script stage.

 

[Micromind]

At this stage they will be throwing around different ideas for the story, each going in a different direction. For WW, they had six writers writing the script treatments, the one written by Jason Fuschs was chosen and got further development.

I expect them to follow a similar procedure, nothing is set in stone right now.

 

[Willi Berg]

At this stage they will be throwing around different ideas for the story, each going in a different direction. For WW, they had six writers writing the script treatments, the one written by Jason Fuschs was chosen and got further development.

I expect them to follow a similar procedure, nothing is set in stone right now.

I don't think it will go so far as something like six writers this time around. I think it will be more in the hands of Johns and Jenkins. There would be more faith in Jenkins now. Still, there could be different scenarios being discussed.

What we need is some official debunking. It's fun to speculate, though. To an extent.

 

[Wanda Detroit]

I found the article. These are Patty's words:



She could've just meant WW being relevant and modern again in our world because of her renewed popularity with the movie. But the article writer thinks it is about the sequel. Again, this is an interpretation and not directly said by Patty.

www.advocate.com/film/2017/6/29/breaking-patty-jenkins-confirms-shes-directing-wonder-woman-sequel

But, we've had her in modern times in the first WW movie and the flashbacks were the bulk of the movie. We can't know right now just how much will be modern and how much will be flashbacks. It could very well be a mixture or a parallel story.

This is not the article I was talking about. It was earlier than this and it wasn't from the advocate.

 

[Willi Berg]

This is not the article I was talking about. It was earlier than this and it wasn't from the advocate.

 

[Wanda Detroit]

I'm not making it up. I've read many articles with Patty being interviewed. I think it was collider or something like that.

 

[Willi Berg]

I'm not making it up. I've read many articles with Patty being interviewed. I think it was collider or something like that.

 

[Wanda Detroit]

Backtracking to find articles is work. I don't get paid for.

She wants it in America. How is she fighting the cold war in America?http://ew.com/movies/2017/06/04/wonder-woman-patty-jenkins-sequel-setting/

 

[Willi Berg]

Backtracking to find articles is work. I don't get paid for.

She wants it in America. How is she fighting the cold war in America?http://ew.com/movies/2017/06/04/wonder-woman-patty-jenkins-sequel-setting/

Well then don't bring up articles in your arguments if you can't remember them.

We discussed the America setting. It doesn't answer the question or prove your point.

 

[Willi Berg]

She wants it in America. How is she fighting the cold war in America?http://ew.com/movies/2017/06/04/wonder-woman-patty-jenkins-sequel-setting/

The Cold War is about US/Soviet relations. Hmmm....there could be travel involved.