• Secure your account

    A friendly reminder to our users, please make sure your account is safe. Make sure you update your password and have an active email address to recover or change your password.

  • Xenforo Cloud has scheduled an upgrade to XenForo version 2.2.16. This will take place on or shortly after the following date and time: Jul 05, 2024 at 05:00 PM (PT) There shouldn't be any downtime, as it's just a maintenance release. More info here

Joss Whedon's Wonder Woman

My brother told me about Whedon's idea. I believe it was going to embrace her Mythological ties greatly...and I definitely would like that. Comic movies, regardless of which company, need to treat certain superheroes different. Wonder Woman, Thor, and Aquaman, for instance...are not like most heroes.

And, I always hated that as well, I mean she can be punched in the face by Ares, Darkseid, or Superman and survive? But a bullet hurts her, that ALWAYS bothered me.

Despero can hold off Supes, Wondie, PG, and Captain Marvel all at once...but that is only because of his strength. His durability, however, is another story. Aquaman was able to throw a metal rod through his shoulder. Wondie is like that. She is strong, but her durability is not bullet-proof.
 
My brother told me about Whedon's idea. I believe it was going to embrace her Mythological ties greatly...and I definitely would like that. Comic movies, regardless of which company, need to treat certain superheroes different. Wonder Woman, Thor, and Aquaman, for instance...are not like most heroes.



Despero can hold off Supes, Wondie, PG, and Captain Marvel all at once...but that is only because of his strength. His durability, however, is another story. Aquaman was able to throw a metal rod through his shoulder. Wondie is like that. She is strong, but her durability is not bullet-proof.

Yes but a punch from Darkseid is far more powerful than a bullet.
 
Yes but a punch from Darkseid is far more powerful than a bullet.

You're not thinking of physics. While comics to tend to ignore certain aspects of physics? Bullets is not one of them. The sharpness, the speed, etc. Darkseid's big old fist won't tear a huge hole at her; especially when it is not as fast as as speeding, narrow, sharp, bullet.

Only time they ignore that, is when the character is "bullet-proof".
 
Lestat:

Bullets and Bracelets hasn't been an Amazon game since Pre-Crisis IIRC.

In Perez run it was simply another test in the contest to be Wonder Woman. They could use that in a film.


weren't the bracelets a sign of the oppression of the amazonians by men pre-crisis? They were handcuffs. I think that may have been way too preachy today.
 
Nah, at the start of the film they could tell the tale of Heracles and how Hippolypta (sp?) and the Amazons fought for their freedom.

How would the symbolic meaning behind the Amazons' bracelets be bad for our time and day? Forgive me if I am misreading your post, but it seems as though you feel that the bracelets would not go well with today's audience.
 
Nah, at the start of the film they could tell the tale of Heracles and how Hippolypta (sp?) and the Amazons fought for their freedom.

How would the symbolic meaning behind the Amazons' bracelets be bad for our time and day? Forgive me if I am misreading your post, but it seems as though you feel that the bracelets would not go well with today's audience.

I'm a woman but there is the issue of making this movie too feminist. You can't do wonder woman without the bracelets but the back story may be an issue. we don't want guys coming out of the movie thinking that they have been talked down to or made to feel awful about their gender.
 
I'm a woman but there is the issue of making this movie too feminist. You can't do wonder woman without the bracelets but the back story may be an issue. we don't want guys coming out of the movie thinking that they have been talked down to or made to feel awful about their gender.

I think you are looking at it the wrong way and reading too much into it. Just because they show the backstory of Heracles and Hippolypta would not all of a sudden make it a feminist film.

The way I would prefer they go with the movie, is tell that tale in the beginning, and then have it all centered around her relationship with the Gods. Have her battle some mythological creatures, maybe make Circe and/or Ares the antagonist and at the end of the film have Steve Trevor's plane crash in their domain. That would hint and allow for a second film.
 
You're not thinking of physics. While comics to tend to ignore certain aspects of physics? Bullets is not one of them. The sharpness, the speed, etc. Darkseid's big old fist won't tear a huge hole at her; especially when it is not as fast as as speeding, narrow, sharp, bullet.

Only time they ignore that, is when the character is "bullet-proof".

Actually Darkseid does have superspeed, it's just been basically forgotten about with the *****fication of old Seid who used to have telepathy more powerful than MM's (acorrding to J'onn himself) as well. :(
 
You are missing what I'm saying though. The fact that the bullet is so small, designed to be narrow and sharp; the physics of that impact. Darkseid's huge fist is simply not. Yea, him hitting her is going to hurt like hell but it is not so shocking that a bullet can pierce her skin. They just decided to make her not bullet proof: hence her bracelet gimmick. And as I pointed out with a villain like Despero--whom it took the efforts of the JLA, one time the JLA and JSA, to take down--that just because they can take hits from someone's fist does not change the fact that a sharp object, exerted with such speed and force, can pierce their skin.

All I'm saying is that it is not farfetched reason. She is just not a bullet proof character.
 
Speed and force is what I mean his punch can go through layers of concrete wall but not bone? I'm aware she's not bullet proof, I've read WW from archives to Perez to Byrne :down to Messner-Loebs to Jiminez to Rucka and so on.
 
Oh I know, the Perez run is my favorite run of the book. I just highly doubt Whedon ( or anyone ) was going to use the whole convoluted explanation of having Diana Trevor crash on the island in WWII and that's why the Amazons have a gun. I liked it in the comics just fine, I just see it as being overly complicated exposition for a movie.

You're right.

Plus, I kinda like the idea that Dian can be shot, but can heal pretty fast. I mean, she's second only to Superman in strength, but any old Bullet will kill her? I've never liked that really.

Agreed.

She's always had more complex powers then Superman. Makes it more difficult for people to know what she can do. It isn't black and white. That's kinda why I like her.

Her weaponry is pretty sweet, too. The Sword of Haphaestus alone would be bad ass in a movie.
 
I hated the story concept of Whedon's WW. Steve Trevor is going to teach Diana how to be a better person? That's a total reversal of the classic origin. It's like Lois Lane teaching Superman how to be an inspiration to others. Or Mary Jane teaching Spider-Man how to buck up to responsibility.

Whedon's very good at characters on a journey of self discovery. That's not WW though.

I also think that WW learning to block bullets the hard way is a story choice that doesn't make a lot of sense. A projectile hurtling at you at great speed isn't some great mystery any more than a sling stone or arrow. It's just a more powerful form of that basic weapon.
 
Nah, at the start of the film they could tell the tale of Heracles and how Hippolypta (sp?) and the Amazons fought for their freedom.

Yes.

How would the symbolic meaning behind the Amazons' bracelets be bad for our time and day? Forgive me if I am misreading your post, but it seems as though you feel that the bracelets would not go well with today's audience.

Perez origin makes the bracelets more relevant in this era.

Mankind has always had a horrible treatment of women for centuries or those weaker then themselves like children or less advanced, less brutal cultures then they are.

The Amazons managed to overcome all that. That could make them very inspirational to audiences.

A WW movie could even have an arc where Phillipus, one of the Amazons who loathed men from that experience for centuries, where she learns to trust men.

It wouldn't be good for a first movie, though. They should set up Phillipus and a vague history in the first and the sequels could flesh it out.
 
I'm a woman but there is the issue of making this movie too feminist. You can't do wonder woman without the bracelets but the back story may be an issue.

It should be fine. All it needs to do is not be preachy. They can do this in the comics, no reason Hollywood can't.

we don't want guys coming out of the movie thinking that they have been talked down to or made to feel awful about their gender.

You really think every man in the audience will feel awful about their gender about a fictional society which gets enslaved by a fictional demi-god and their army centuries ago?
 
I think you are looking at it the wrong way and reading too much into it. Just because they show the backstory of Heracles and Hippolypta would not all of a sudden make it a feminist film.

The way I would prefer they go with the movie, is tell that tale in the beginning, and then have it all centered around her relationship with the Gods. Have her battle some mythological creatures, maybe make Circe and/or Ares the antagonist and at the end of the film have Steve Trevor's plane crash in their domain. That would hint and allow for a second film.

Agreed.
 
What I want to know is why doesn't Joss Whedon like to use any of the villians from the comics. He did the same thing when he pitched his batman reboot. Is it so hard to read the comics and find a villian that is suited for the story your trying to tell?

JOSS WHEDON TALKS ABOUT HIS BATMAN MOVIE THAT NEVER WAS
Never let it be said that superstar writer/director/rabid fanboy Joss Whedon was the type to rest on his laurels. Clearly not content with his work on such fan-favorite franchises like “Buffy,” “Serenity” and the upcoming “Dollhouse,” Whedon regaled MTV News with the details of his proposed plan to reboot the “Batman” film franchise before Director Christopher Nolan got the gig.
“Well, I actually did pitch a ‘Batman’ film when [Warner Bros. began developing "Batman Begins"], and it wasn’t what they did but the vibe was very similar,” said Whedon. “Mine was a bit less epic. It was more about the progression of him and it was more in Gotham City. He didn’t go to Tibet and meet cool people, but it was very similar in vibe [to Nolan's "Batman Begins"].”
After a little prodding, Whedon opened up a bit about his “Batman” idea, even going into detail about what villain he planned on using…or not using.
“In my version, there was actually a new [villain], it wasn’t one of the classics — which is probably why they didn’t use it,” he laughed. “It was more of a ‘Hannibal Lector’ type — he was somebody already in Arkham Asylum that Bruce went and sort of studied with. It was a whole thing — I get very emotional about it, I still love the story. Maybe I’ll get to do it as a comic one day [ed. note: HINT HINT, DC Comics... ].”
Despite losing out to Nolan, Whedon has no hard feelings, and gave nothing but praise to the Director Who Can Do No Wrong. “I just love the respect [Nolan has] for the character and the world,” he said. “I thought Christopher Nolan’s done an amazing job of bringing out the comic book, and I see a lot of movies [coughs “HULK”] — sorry, I had a Hulk stuck in my throat — that don’t really have the aesthetic or the pathos or really get why the comic book works.”

http://splashpage.mtv.com/2008/08/11/joss-whedon-talks-about-his-batman-movie-that-never-was/
 
Batman:

Whedon does tend to use new villains in his licensed work. His Astonishing X-men run dealt almost entirely with them.
 
Yeah but with comics you can experiment with different things and it might turn out great and if doesn't then you can always go back to the classic characters. With a movie fans want to see characters from the comics come to life. I'm sure if he studied the comics more he could of used a villain like Ares for his Wonder Woman movie.
 
Yeah but with comics you can experiment with different things and it might turn out great and if doesn't then you can always go back to the classic characters. With a movie fans want to see characters from the comics come to life. I'm sure if he studied the comics more he could of used a villain like Ares for his Wonder Woman movie.

Just saying it makes sense he'd do in a film, too.

I agree with you, though. WW's rogues gallery is fine enough without adding new ones for the movies just yet.
 
I guess I shouldn't really judge him. I enjoyed his work on Buffy, Angel, Firefly, and Serenity. I would love to read his script to get a better idea on what he wanted to do with the story.
 
I think it would have been great. I'm still waiting to hear more about this movie...
 
I love Joss Whedon, and I actually really liked all that he said about the character before he left. I wish he would have stayed, but I understand why he chose to leave and make something different.
 
Whedon wouldn't be who I'd immediately think on the Batman franchise. Not that it wouldn't be interesting to see what he did with it.

I'd rather he do some other lesser franchise. They need him more then Batman does.

Green Arrow seems to have stalled. Perhaps he could get things moving on that as a director?
 
I don't hate the guy. He can write a solid comic. But he really really didn't get Wonder Woman and that's the most prominent reason he got booted. Also, I checked out Serenity just to see his directing style since I knew he was attached to WW at the time. I was worried after that because Serenity bored me into a coma.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"