Joss Whedon on the villain in Wonder Woman

[CConn]

I agree Abaddon, as I was thinking if the movies about Wonder Woman discovering the "society of man" it would make more sense to have a villain who is directly related to that society than having her going off to fight Ares on Mount Olympus. Y'know, sorta have a Luthor vs. Superman type of battle where the villain hates WW for being different or whatever.

Now obviously, I have no idea what the script involves, and it could very well be a horrible idea, but there is that rationale for it, at least.

 

[Marcus M.]

The only way I would pay to see this moovie is if Kelly Osbourne gets the lead role as Wonder Woman.

 

[Phatman]

Okay, now I'm starting to get scared. In between the casting, the planned costume changes, and reading about this new "original" villain seems like Whedon is channeling Schumacher on this project. I'm beginning to wonder if Batman Begins will be a fluke and not the new normal at WB. I'm holding my breath about Superman Returns which looks uninspired. The more I hear about this project it seems like WB is gone back to its old habits.

Whedon seems to be blowing the opportunity of a lifetime. WW has a great rogues gallery. In the hands of a great scriptwriter Cheetah, Ares and Circe would be amazing onscreen. By creating his own villian seems to be him saying WW's characters are not good enough for him to work with. By him saying he needs to change the costume is him saying WW is not good enough for him to work with. Maybe in the aftermath of Buffy and Angel he's had a glass of George Lucas' Kool-Aid. Joss, come down off that high horse before you hurt yourself. Give Chris Nolan and David Goyer a Call.

 

[CConn]

Chris Nolan and David Goyer changed Batman's costume.

 

[ultimatefan]

I think Ares could have been a good villain if done right. I always had my reservations with Whedom doing WW, and this seems to confirm it. He says he´s doing more rewrites than usual, and my feeling is that it´s because he wasn´t the right writing voice for this to begin with.

 

[The Question]

I agree Abaddon, as I was thinking if the movies about Wonder Woman discovering the "society of man" it would make more sense to have a villain who is directly related to that society than having her going off to fight Ares on Mount Olympus. Y'know, sorta have a Luthor vs. Superman type of battle where the villain hates WW for being different or whatever.

Well, he said the villain is based in Greek mythology. Maybe it'll be like in Neil Gaiman's "American Gods." A mythological figure, but modernized. He or she has changed with the times and learned to exist in a modern world. The Amazons haven't, which is why they're reclusive.

Okay, now I'm starting to get scared. In between the casting, the planned costume changes, and reading about this new "original" villain seems like Whedon is channeling Schumacher on this project. I'm beginning to wonder if Batman Begins will be a fluke and not the new normal at WB. I'm holding my breath about Superman Returns which looks uninspired. The more I hear about this project it seems like WB is gone back to its old habits.

Joel Shumacher's movies, in terms of the character's stories and personalities, were rather acurate to the books. They just had a very campy tone to them and crappy one liners, which didn't work for a Batman movie.

Whedon seems to be blowing the opportunity of a lifetime. WW has a great rogues gallery. In the hands of a great scriptwriter Cheetah, Ares and Circe would be amazing onscreen. By creating his own villian seems to be him saying WW's characters are not good enough for him to work with. By him saying he needs to change the costume is him saying WW is not good enough for him to work with. Maybe in the aftermath of Buffy and Angel he's had a glass of George Lucas' Kool-Aid. Joss, come down off that high horse before you hurt yourself. Give Chris Nolan and David Goyer a Call.

Nolan and Goyer changed the batsuit alot. And all Whedon said about the costume was "no star spangled panties." And I agree with that. They'd look bad on screen. He'll probably go for a look like this:

Or this:

Or this:





As for the villain, he said it would be based in Greek Mythology, so that's not straying particularly far from the source.

 

[ImperfectIcon]

I think Ares could have been a good villain if done right. I always had my reservations with Whedom doing WW, and this seems to confirm it. He says he´s doing more rewrites than usual, and my feeling is that it´s because he wasn´t the right writing voice for this to begin with.

I agree. Unfortunately as far as we know WB does not. Looks like I'll be taking cover when this bomb hits the cinemas.

 

[ImperfectIcon]

Personally I'd stick with the "Star Spangled Panties". I would like to watch Wonder Woman, not Xena. I don't see any problem with the satin tights.

If WW comics readers had a problem with it then a permanent change would have resulted.

Not too many people have a problem with Superman wearing his underwear on the outside. That is his identity, and should not be messed with. Look what happened when DC had the new look "Electric blue" Superman...it didn't really catch on did it? Last time I checked Superman still wears the classic costume that he is famous for, so really...why would you change Wonder Woman's.

Don't mess with the tights!

 

[The Question]

Changing Wonder Woman's star spangled panties to a more armored skirt look is nowhere near as extreme a change as Superman Blue. And, personally, I liked the Superman Blue look. Just not the power change. And really, the star spangled panties wouldn't work on screen. They wouldn't make sense. Why would a warrior from a society modeled after ancient greece and rome where blue star spangled panties? Besides, she's worn the armored skirt in the comics before.

 

[ImperfectIcon]

Changing Wonder Woman's star spangled panties to a more armored skirt look is nowhere near as extreme a change as Superman Blue. And, personally, I liked the Superman Blue look. Just not the power change. And really, the star spangled panties wouldn't work on screen. They wouldn't make sense. Why would a warrior from a society modeled after ancient greece and rome where blue star spangled panties? Besides, she's worn the armored skirt in the comics before.

Diana Trevor, a US Womens Auxillary Air Corps Test Pilot, and mother of Steve Trevor, got lost in a storm and crashed her XP-86 Sabre jet on Themyscira. She helped the Amazons fight the evil that was trying to come out from under the island, losing her life in the process.

In tribute the Amazons designed a costume to be worn by their representative to Man's World that was modelled on the uniform, specifically the insignia Diana Trevor was wearing (Stars and Bars, U.S. Flag etc).

The Bullets And Bracelets test, the final trial for Princess Diana (who was named after the late Mrs Trevor) involved her namesake's Colt 45, which she obviously passed in order to offically become Wonder Woman.
The competition for a representative to Man's world, as you know, came about because the Greek God's and Goddesses were worried about Ares and his plans to start WW3.

The job of the Amazonian representative was to go into Man's world and counteract Ares plans, preaching and teaching about peace, tolerance and friendship among the people.

The urgency of the matter increased when a nuclear bomb detonated near Themyscira, which was dropped by an F-4 Phantom jet fighter piloted by Colonel Steve Trevor and one of Ares' minions, who tried to kill the war-weary U.S. Air Force hero in flight. Wonder Woman pulled him from the submerged wreckage of his jet and he received treatment on the island. Diana was then mandated to take him back to Man's World and stop Ares.

And thats how it all came about!

 

[The Question]

Still, panties over a more traditional armored skirt? Doesn't seem practical. I think the armored skirt would look alot better. 'Sides, she's worn it before in the comics. Not that huge of a change.

 

[BrianWilly]

Okay, now I'm starting to get scared. In between the casting, the planned costume changes, and reading about this new "original" villain seems like Whedon is channeling Schumacher on this project. I'm beginning to wonder if Batman Begins will be a fluke and not the new normal at WB. I'm holding my breath about Superman Returns which looks uninspired. The more I hear about this project it seems like WB is gone back to its old habits.

What exactly have you heard about the casting, pray tell? Whedon has said close to absolutely nothing about his casting choice, and he has said absolutely nothing about any specific actresses.

Whedon seems to be blowing the opportunity of a lifetime. WW has a great rogues gallery. In the hands of a great scriptwriter Cheetah, Ares and Circe would be amazing onscreen. By creating his own villian seems to be him saying WW's characters are not good enough for him to work with. By him saying he needs to change the costume is him saying WW is not good enough for him to work with. Maybe in the aftermath of Buffy and Angel he's had a glass of George Lucas' Kool-Aid. Joss, come down off that high horse before you hurt yourself. Give Chris Nolan and David Goyer a Call.

Whedon is not changing the costume.

 

[NotFadeAway]

What do you mean? What has he received "over" GL and Flash? All three have solo books, all three are usual members of the League, and all three have some great villains.

Well Aqua is getting a live action series, and even though it will suck because it's the WB, I really want to see GL or Flash in live action sometime in the next 5 years!!!

And Wonder Woman getting her own movie means less money for either for a movie, which is also BS!!!!

 

[NotFadeAway]

Your statement is wrong and outdated, not to mention offensive and rude.

Well sorry but it's true, this movie will TANK because the general audience, the principle money makers for tentpole movies such as this one and not little fanboys/girls, honestly don't care about women kickin arse. The women are the cute yet vulnerable damsels in distress.

 

[The Question]

Well Aqua is getting a live action series, and even though it will suck because it's the WB, I really want to see GL or Flash in live action sometime in the next 5 years!!!

Well, Mercy Reef'll probably suck from what I've heard so far. But if done right, and Aquaman series could kick ass. He's a very solid character.

And Wonder Woman getting her own movie means less money for either for a movie, which is also BS!!!!

Why? Wonder Woman is just as good a ncharacter as GL or The Flash. And don't give me that "damsel in destress" crap. There are plenty of women, both in real life and in fiction, who could probably kick alot of guys' asses.

Well sorry but it's true, this movie will TANK because the general audience, the principle money makers for tentpole movies such as this one and not little fanboys/girls, honestly don't care about women kickin arse. The women are the cute yet vulnerable damsels in distress.

That's not the opinion of the general audience. That's the opinion of the general sexist.

 

[GL1]

Well, as much as this is not what I would've done, this is HARDly surprising... Whedon made it VERY clear from the VERY beginning that this movie would be particularly story-driven. And while the story revolves around Wonder Woman, the story is NOT character-driven... the story defines the characters, not the other way around, in this case... in this particular style of movie-development. Good examples of story driven movies include Lord of the Rings and Phone Booth. The characters are selected and created in order to serve the story, as opposed to a story being created to serve the characters...

While selecting an origional villain is certainly not that of a huge Wonder Woman fan (and I've seen the sales, there's only two of you)... keep in mind that her rogues gallery is seVEREly limited... anyone who doesn't want to tell a tale about Sexism or decidedly female issues is SEVERELY hampered. Perhaps if you want to dwell on themes of peace vs war, you could bring in Ares, but if the direcor is not trying to make a big statement about the war in Iraq or Women in Society today, then Wonder Woman's rogue's gallery is all but useless, not to mention that many of them are inferior in raw power to the woman herself.

And the villain is a part of Greek Mythology. That means they're part of Wonder Woman's mythos already, they just haven't been featured in the comic books... assuming of course this is an established part of Greek Mythology, they're already a part of Wonder Woman's world... they've already heard of her, IN THE COMICS, even if they haven't been shown in the comics yet....

Also, no big changes have been made...

 

[Lestat74]

First off, I'm a HUGE Wonder Woman fan, I have the entire run of the current comic as well as many earlier ones, not to mention a ton of WW products. But the people here who are who are saying things like Joss Whedon is gonna make it like Buffy and have her use wooden stakes, or saying he's uncreative for not using any of the comic book villains are really just being plain ignorant. Let's take this point by point, shall we?

#1: A Wonder Woman movie needs to have the elements that make her iconic. By iconic I mean things that the casual fan, or someone who is merely exposed to her via other media, might know. These things are: She's a tall, brunette Amazon named Diana, the first to go to Man's World in centuries; she has a magic lasso and bullet proof bracelets; Her mother is Queen Hippolyta; and she is super strong and fast;and finally,The costume. Also, to most of the world she has an invisible plane. Because of the TV show, as well as Superfriends, that is what most people know.

Joss Whedon has stated numerous times that he plans to keep ALL those elements. Yes, even the costume. All he said was it won't be panties, that it would have a little more "Greek in it", much like the costume is often drawn these days. Wonder Woman's villains, unlike Superman's or Batman's, are NOT iconic. No one outside comics fandom knows them, and even in comics fandom lots of people don't know them. Just the fact that he is using a villain steeped in Greek Mythology should be enough to keep the rabid fans happy, but of course it's not. Also, most of these very same fanboys totally revere the old Wonder Woman TV Show, when, aside from the pilot, NEVER touches upon the Greek Mythology aspect again, and never used ANY of her villains. Hell, Joss Whedon is even using Steve Trevor, an once vital part of WW mythos that has been all but ignored for the past 15 or so years.

#2: The argument that Joss Whedon isn't a "fan" of Wonder Woman so therefore should not get the job. I didn't know that Huge Wonder Woman fanboys like Spielberg, Peter Jackson, David Fincher and Ridley Scott were not asked to direct this!! Oh wait, maybe they never wanted it. Sure, there may be some director out there who is also an uber WW fanboy....ummm....can you name him? Joss Whedon is simply the best person for the job because unlike a LOT of male directors, he is a true feminist, and has written very strong female roles for all his characters in every series. He created the best Female action show ever, AND understands the world of comics. He never said he didn't like Wonder Woman, only that he wasn't a fan of her comic for the most part and, let's face it, the WW comic has had some serious creative droughts over the decades. For the most part, she has ALWAYS been a better character than a comic. ( Yes, there are exceptions to this rule, but you all know I'm not wrong ) He's even said he's read alot of the Perez stuff as well as the Rucka stuff, so it's not like he didn't do research. And I'll go out on a limb and say that he knew more about WW coming into this project than, say, Bryan Singer did when coming onboard X-Men.

Seriously, some of you guys should do a google search and read some reviews of the previous WW scripts...one had Wonder Woman be Donna Troy, the daughter of the original WW and who was a Super spy! I'm serious. Look it up, and then come back here and whine.

Now, it may still bomb at the box office, but if Joss does it, it WILL be good. Mark my words.

 

[JesusOfNazarath]

It'd be cool if they had Dr. Pycho, but I think this will be more of a family film.

 

[The Question]

Okay. Based on what we've heard, and what I know of Joss' work, this is my guess for how the villain's turned out:


1) It is either a greek god of some sort (most likely candidates being Eres, Ares, Hera, or Hecate from what I know of Greek Mythology), or the child of a greek god. Since he said the character is of his creation, I'm assuming that the latter is the case.

2) The god (or demi god) has succesfully reinvented his or herself for modern times. He or she learned to adapt as things changed. The Amazons did not, which makes the villain and WOnder Woman foils for one another.

3) The villain could, easily, first apear guised as a human and become an aquaintence of Diana.

4) Knowing Joss' love for metaphores, the villain could possibly serve as a metaphore for the corruption of modern times, or to show the point that modern times are no more corrupt than the past, and we simply look at past decades through the beer goggles of nostalgia.

 

[ImperfectIcon]

First off, I'm a HUGE Wonder Woman fan, I have the entire run of the current comic as well as many earlier ones, not to mention a ton of WW products. But the people here who are who are saying things like Joss Whedon is gonna make it like Buffy and have her use wooden stakes, or saying he's uncreative for not using any of the comic book villains are really just being plain ignorant. Let's take this point by point, shall we?

#1: A Wonder Woman movie needs to have the elements that make her iconic. By iconic I mean things that the casual fan, or someone who is merely exposed to her via other media, might know. These things are: She's a tall, brunette Amazon named Diana, the first to go to Man's World in centuries; she has a magic lasso and bullet proof bracelets; Her mother is Queen Hippolyta; and she is super strong and fast;and finally,The costume. Also, to most of the world she has an invisible plane. Because of the TV show, as well as Superfriends, that is what most people know.

Joss Whedon has stated numerous times that he plans to keep ALL those elements. Yes, even the costume. All he said was it won't be panties, that it would have a little more "Greek in it", much like the costume is often drawn these days. Wonder Woman's villains, unlike Superman's or Batman's, are NOT iconic. No one outside comics fandom knows them, and even in comics fandom lots of people don't know them. Just the fact that he is using a villain steeped in Greek Mythology should be enough to keep the rabid fans happy, but of course it's not. Also, most of these very same fanboys totally revere the old Wonder Woman TV Show, when, aside from the pilot, NEVER touches upon the Greek Mythology aspect again, and never used ANY of her villains. Hell, Joss Whedon is even using Steve Trevor, an once vital part of WW mythos that has been all but ignored for the past 15 or so years.

#2: The argument that Joss Whedon isn't a "fan" of Wonder Woman so therefore should not get the job. I didn't know that Huge Wonder Woman fanboys like Spielberg, Peter Jackson, David Fincher and Ridley Scott were not asked to direct this!! Oh wait, maybe they never wanted it. Sure, there may be some director out there who is also an uber WW fanboy....ummm....can you name him? Joss Whedon is simply the best person for the job because unlike a LOT of male directors, he is a true feminist, and has written very strong female roles for all his characters in every series. He created the best Female action show ever, AND understands the world of comics. He never said he didn't like Wonder Woman, only that he wasn't a fan of her comic for the most part and, let's face it, the WW comic has had some serious creative droughts over the decades. For the most part, she has ALWAYS been a better character than a comic. ( Yes, there are exceptions to this rule, but you all know I'm not wrong ) He's even said he's read alot of the Perez stuff as well as the Rucka stuff, so it's not like he didn't do research. And I'll go out on a limb and say that he knew more about WW coming into this project than, say, Bryan Singer did when coming onboard X-Men.

Seriously, some of you guys should do a google search and read some reviews of the previous WW scripts...one had Wonder Woman be Donna Troy, the daughter of the original WW and who was a Super spy! I'm serious. Look it up, and then come back here and whine.

Now, it may still bomb at the box office, but if Joss does it, it WILL be good. Mark my words.

As I pour over the Geroge Perez (the first 10 issues of the 86/87 Post-Crisis series) stuff I seem to notice "Star Spangled Panties". Am I seeing things?

Enough with the name-calling...you seem upset??? Calm yourself.

 

[ImperfectIcon]

Well, as much as this is not what I would've done, this is HARDly surprising... Whedon made it VERY clear from the VERY beginning that this movie would be particularly story-driven. And while the story revolves around Wonder Woman, the story is NOT character-driven... the story defines the characters, not the other way around, in this case... in this particular style of movie-development. Good examples of story driven movies include Lord of the Rings and Phone Booth. The characters are selected and created in order to serve the story, as opposed to a story being created to serve the characters...

While selecting an origional villain is certainly not that of a huge Wonder Woman fan (and I've seen the sales, there's only two of you)... keep in mind that her rogues gallery is seVEREly limited... anyone who doesn't want to tell a tale about Sexism or decidedly female issues is SEVERELY hampered. Perhaps if you want to dwell on themes of peace vs war, you could bring in Ares, but if the direcor is not trying to make a big statement about the war in Iraq or Women in Society today, then Wonder Woman's rogue's gallery is all but useless, not to mention that many of them are inferior in raw power to the woman herself.

And the villain is a part of Greek Mythology. That means they're part of Wonder Woman's mythos already, they just haven't been featured in the comic books... assuming of course this is an established part of Greek Mythology, they're already a part of Wonder Woman's world... they've already heard of her, IN THE COMICS, even if they haven't been shown in the comics yet....

Also, no big changes have been made...

So let me understand this...if the story revolves around Wonder Woman but is not character-driven, rather story driven, why is a movie being made about Wonder Woman? You might as well almagamate this with the JLA movie project, if they have one.

 

[GL1]

So let me understand this...if the story revolves around Wonder Woman but is not character-driven, rather story driven, why is a movie being made about Wonder Woman? You might as well almagamate this with the JLA movie project, if they have one.

Because it's a Wonder Woman story? Because someone wanted to make Wonder Woman movie? My logic is rarely perfect, but I don't think you've actually pointed out any flaw...

 

[ImperfectIcon]

Because it's a Wonder Woman story? Because someone wanted to make Wonder Woman movie? My logic is rarely perfect, but I don't think you've actually pointed out any flaw...

...didn't really intend to. However making this movie a story-driven one would seem to me to suggest that the character herself is weak.

 

[Obi-Ron]

Well this new villain had better be damn impressive, because in the past all the "original" villains that have appeared in comic book movies have been really lame.

Indeed.

 

[The Question]

As I pour over the Geroge Perez (the first 10 issues of the 86/87 Post-Crisis series) stuff I seem to notice "Star Spangled Panties". Am I seeing things?

The only reason the panties remain is because of the nostalgia factor. Everyone thinks of Wonder Woman as wearing them. Notice how, in the Perez issues, there were some stories that completely ommited the panties in favor of a more armored look.