Justice League Gal Gadot IS Wonder Woman - Part 1

[Blitzkrieg]

 

[nyyarod]

I'm glad Gal said what she did. The ending of BVS made no sense when you compare it to the ending of WW. Thank god they're correcting that!

 

[Consona]

I'm glad Gal said what she did. The ending of BVS made no sense when you compare it to the ending of WW. Thank god they're correcting that!

What happened?

 

[Zur-en-Arrh]

I still think, all she meant was, going forward, in say a sequel, they're free to show her influencing the world and aren't going to be beholden to MoS, which is really the culprit here. They set it up to be the first time something fantastical happened on earth, but then they wanted to make a shared universe after it's box office was mediocre, brought in Batman, wanted Wonder Woman, too, and had to come up with a backstory as to why she wasn't around during MoS. All things considered, I think Snyder/Terrio came up with a good resolution, but going forward, even with the 'history lesson' in Justice League it seems they're (possibly) divorcing themselves from some of the world building they did in MoS

 

[Dr.]

I'm glad Gal said what she did. The ending of BVS made no sense when you compare it to the ending of WW. Thank god they're correcting that!

Methinks some folks are overthinking this. We’re led to understand that Supes is the first publicly known “meta.” So where has WW (an immortal) been? Well, Diana’s line about a 100-year exile explains that. But why was she absent? See Wonder Woman - Coming Soon to a Theater Near You! for the answer.

Now at the end of BvS, it’s abundantly clear that Bruce has successfully recruited Diana in the upcoming fight (the plot of Justice League). IOW, Diana’s self-imposed exile (whatever its origin) is now over. This is confirmed by the epilogue in WW where Diana heroically springs into action. But strictly speaking, that epilogue wasn’t necessary to explain her participation in JL. The Doomsday fight and the convo in the cemetery does that.

 

[Wanda Detroit]

Methinks some folks are overthinking this. We’re led to understand that Supes is the first publicly known “meta.” So where has WW (an immortal) been? Well, Diana’s line about a 100-year exile explains that. But why was she absent? See Wonder Woman - Coming Soon to a Theater Near You! for the answer.

Now at the end of BvS, it’s abundantly clear that Bruce has successfully recruited Diana in the upcoming fight (the plot of Justice League). IOW, Diana’s self-imposed exile (whatever its origin) is now over. This is confirmed by the epilogue in WW where Diana heroically springs into action. But strictly speaking, that epilogue wasn’t necessary to explain her participation in JL. The Doomsday fight and the convo in the cemetery does that.

She was never in exile for 100 years and Gal just said that.

 

[Dr.]

She was never in exile for 100 years and Gal just said that.

I was using “exile” figuratively. We know that for some part of the last 100 years, Diana has been curating stuff at the Louvre, using bank machines, etc. But presumably, sightings of the costumed Wonder Woman have been comparatively rare.

 

[Primal Slayer]

Now they just have to figure out how old is WW exactly? 500 yrs old? 1000 yrs old?

 

[Flint Marko]

It's not a correction if there was nothing to correct. It's semantics. She used the wrong words. They clarified something by filling in new details. They didn't correct something by changing prior details. Her inappropriate wording has led to headlines about a retcon, which isn't accurate.

Except they did correct something by ignoring the direction they established in BvS and ending WW on a more positive note. This is 100% undeniably true. You and I had this same discussion back in June because it was apparent then that things had changed, and Gal Gadot herself just admitted as such to the press. There’s honestly nothing more that needs to be said to prove this. You can deny this all you’d like and pretend you know more than the actress playing Wonder Woman herself but it’s clear as day.

 

[Zur-en-Arrh]

WW doesn't ignore BvS tho. The movie 'ends' post BvS, so there's no direct contradiction. Any contradiction would be going forward

 

[Bren]

There are multiple routes I can use to get home, but I planned to use my normal one. As I got to the T-junction, I remembered a bad experience from yesterday, so I chose a different route today.

But because I still ended up in the same place as I'd planned to go, some here will tell me a) I never changed my course, and b) I'm actually wrong to say I did.

 

[jfurioso]

I still think, all she meant was, going forward, in say a sequel, they're free to show her influencing the world and aren't going to be beholden to MoS, which is really the culprit here. They set it up to be the first time something fantastical happened on earth, but then they wanted to make a shared universe after it's box office was mediocre, brought in Batman, wanted Wonder Woman, too, and had to come up with a backstory as to why she wasn't around during MoS. All things considered, I think Snyder/Terrio came up with a good resolution, but going forward, even with the 'history lesson' in Justice League it seems they're (possibly) divorcing themselves from some of the world building they did in MoS

Giving the WW movie a downer ending of Diana being disillusioned that mankind was fighting on its own initiative and Ares was just going along with the ride for his benefit would have made sense but given us a rather depressing conclusion, and after BvS WB did not trust that the cbm audience could accept another downbeat conclusion. Also, the Jenkins/Gadot portrayal of Diana emphasized her positive qualities and remaining optimistic despite the surrounding events gelled with that, thus the more change to more upbeat ending and no reference to a long-term disillusioned Diana.

There is certainly leeway in the stated events/dialogues in WW and BvS to allow for a less strict interpretation. She could have remained active under the scenes but become gradually disillusioned over the years as more wars, deadlier and deadlier, convinced her that mankind was just not learning the lessons, and focusing just on keeping an eye on the mythical threats for which she felt more responsible. Her powers are not quite in the scale of magnitude of Superman, thus her being unable to fly instantly to Metropolis for the Black Zero event. Clark did lots of undercover rescues without the Superman suit/identity and Diana could have done the same, her actions adapting gradually to a more media conscious age until dedicated observers like Lex Luthor could begin to trace the evidence of her presence.

But considering how hardly receptive the general audience and fandom has been to ambiguity in this universe, this kind of take may be seen as wanting to have the cake and eat it too. So I understand why a modified version is being put forward.

Still, if we get a WW sequel shortly, it may be wise to ease the continuity friction by having via flashbacks show Diana working "under the scenes" and showing her growing disenchantment at the follies of man, not as a main plotline, but as a references to fill in the gaps in Diana's history and conciliate the larger continuity while dealing with a larger story with its own heroic development and upbeat ending.

 

[Zur-en-Arrh]

Great thoughts, jfurioso, thanks for taking the time to write all that out. And maybe they'll reference some of this in Justice League to give an idea of how they're going to approach it going forward. Although I just finally saw Wonder Woman three or four nights ago, and didn't even give it my undivided attention, so I can't say I'm overly invested one way or the either, but I do ultimately trust Gadot knows more about the direction of her character than any of us

 

[jfurioso]

finally saw Wonder Woman three or four nights ago, and didn't even give it my undivided attention

Gal/WW gets my undivided attention all the time, though.

 

[misslane38]

Except they did correct something by ignoring the direction they established in BvS and ending WW on a more positive note. This is 100% undeniably true. You and I had this same discussion back in June because it was apparent then that things had changed, and Gal Gadot herself just admitted as such to the press. There’s honestly nothing more that needs to be said to prove this. You can deny this all you’d like and pretend you know more than the actress playing Wonder Woman herself but it’s clear as day.

No direction was explicitly established in BvS. It was ambiguous. I agree with jfurioso and others who have said the same.

There are multiple routes I can use to get home, but I planned to use my normal one. As I got to the T-junction, I remembered a bad experience from yesterday, so I chose a different route today.

But because I still ended up in the same place as I'd planned to go, some here will tell me a) I never changed my course, and b) I'm actually wrong to say I did.

The problem with this analogy is plans that aren't executed aren't actions taken. When discussing retcons, which is what the media did with Gal Gadot's comments and what Gadot did when she used words like "correct," the implication is that the filmmakers definitively already chose one direction or canon and followed it, then they decided to do something completely different. For your driving analogy, you can say that happened by saying you definitively drove that route the previous day and had a bad experience, then chose something different next time. However, in DCEU filmmaking terms, no one ever actually drove that route ever, or made it explicit that walking away from humanity meant losing all faith in them and abandoning them with no help in any form. Therefore, it's incorrect to describe it as a retcon or course correction when that continuity or decision was never explicitly made in the first place.

 

[idiot09]

Ehh I dont see any retcon. BvS left the whole thing ambigious.

Look three possibilities were there :

1. WW completely abandoned humanity 100 years ago.
2. WW went into secret mode 100 years ago, working BTS, and not becoming a public hero till the Doomsday fight
3. WW being a public hero between 1917 and 2017.

Now if the 3rd one is the one they decide to use in the future films, then yes its a retcon. And the first scenario is NOT WHAT they showed in BvS because we saw she was working undercover and helped with Doomsday. Its a misconception and a misinterpretation of that line.

The thing THAT happened is basically the 2nd scenario, which is what BOTH BvS and WW backs up. So basically no retcon.

 

[Limonade]

Ehh I dont see any retcon. BvS left the whole thing ambigious.

Look three possibilities were there :

1. WW completely abandoned humanity 100 years ago.
2. WW went into secret mode 100 years ago, working BTS, and not becoming a public hero till the Doomsday fight
3. WW being a public hero between 1917 and 2017.

Now if the 3rd one is the one they decide to use in the future films, then yes its a retcon. And the first scenario is NOT WHAT they showed in BvS because we saw she was working undercover and helped with Doomsday. Its a misconception and a misinterpretation of that line.

The thing THAT happened is basically the 2nd scenario, which is what BOTH BvS and WW backs up. So basically no retcon.

For now.

I say lets see where Jenkins and Gadot takes the character in her sequel.

From what I heard, it seems that a retcon may be on the table.

 

[2kt09]

[YT]XVmWsSnnevQ[/YT]

 

[Vlyse]

If Jenkins gives us another period piece, she will have to give a reallyyy good sales pitch as to why she is going there vs a modern Wonder Woman solo film. Just cause WW was really good does not give her a free pass from me. I made that mistake with MOS to BVS and Snyder. I was extremely let down. I'm keeping my guard up with Jenkins.

 

[jmc]

[YT]XVmWsSnnevQ[/YT]

This video actually kinda misses the point of who Wonder Woman is. Yes Superman represent ‘Hope’, and Batman represents ‘Fear’, but Wonder Woman doesn’t represent ‘Challenge’, she represents ‘Love’, she always has. Perhaps this is where the disagreement lies, because her character doesn’t possess that trait in BvS and yet she does in WW.

 

[misslane38]

This video actually kinda misses the point of who Wonder Woman is. Yes Superman represent ‘Hope’, and Batman represents ‘Fear’, but Wonder Woman doesn’t represent ‘Challenge’, she represents ‘Love’, she always has. Perhaps this is where the disagreement lies, because her character doesn’t possess that trait in BvS and yet she does in WW.

Wonder Woman saves Batman and the world from Doomsday. She shows compassion for Lois's loss. She remarks on the world's ability to honor Superman. Wonder Woman definitely represents love in BvS.

Anyway, I always thought the Trinity represented Truth, Justice, and Hope. Diana is Truth, Bruce is Justice, and Superman is Hope.

 

[jmc]

You’ve got an odd interpretation of what showing love is.

 

[idiot09]

Wonder Woman saves Batman and the world from Doomsday. She shows compassion for Lois's loss. She remarks on the world's ability to honor Superman. Wonder Woman definitely represents love in BvS.

Anyway, I always thought the Trinity represented Truth, Justice, and Hope. Diana is Truth, Bruce is Justice, and Superman is Hope.

Yep agreed. Also +1 on the whole Diana represents truth thing.

 

[misslane38]

You’ve got an odd interpretation of what showing love is.

It's not odd. One of the big themes in WW is the idea that to choose love is to make a choice between doing something and doing nothing. In BvS, Diana could have chosen to do nothing, but she chose to do something. Even though she has walked away from mankind because she believes gods and men cannot stand together, she still fights and gives for them. She saves Batman; she saves the world. And she does it in a way that has the same triumphant feeling in No Man's Land. She's been sitting on the sidelines, yet when she sees the threat Doomsday poses, she does something. The only way in which I am interpreting love is how Diana herself demonstrated love in her own film.

 

[idiot09]

When WW saved Batman in BvS, that was one of the most truimphant fist pumping moments I have ever had in the theatre.