Wonder Woman 1984 General Discussion and Speculation

[misslane38]

Yup. Gal’s already publicly admitted that the BvS line was a mistake, and we’ve already seen them play loose with continuity given BvS and JL couldnt agree on when Cyborg was activated. I dont see this movie being any different, because like you say here, no one is going to care.

The Cyborg thing is so trivial and minor, and so nothing compared to the magnitude of the change Diana being public would be.

WW1984 is likely going to show Diana fighting and using her powers out in public in full view of civilians. That in and of itself is enough to break continuity, but I am looking forward to see how people bend over backwards to argue otherwise.

Nope, not if magic is involved. People can forget or not perceive things clearly because they're under a spell. Recall how in Batman Begins Crane's gas made people see things that warped reality. Perhaps in normal cinema offering such an explanation would be bending over backward, but this is comics, sci-fi, fantasy storytelling. In that context, almost anything can happen.

As for the continuity, I dont much care how it plays out and neither will the vast majority of the people seeing the film. If the movie is good only the people who still fight about BvS and JL will make a big deal out of it.

Sure, maybe people won't care, but it will be a distraction. The clickbait controversy media will make a big deal out of it to inflame fans and get site traffic. Threads, like this one, will get bogged down in arguments about it. GA's members who may not care will still probably come out of the movie being a little confused, which isn't exactly an ideal feeling to add to the mix. I think it's quite easy to made a good film and not contradict continuity so badly that it undermines the entire DCEU, including Patty's first WW film.

Exactly.

Here's the thing. You can claim that BvS Diana says she gave up on humanity and blah blah blah, and just with that film in mind, you're still wrong. Diana claims she has killled things from other worlds before, so she has been fighting. She immediately suits up and joins the fight against Doomsday so she helps out whenever she can. She just has not been a public hero, and has chosen not to interfere with mankind's self made wars. THAT SAME NARRATIVE was shown in Wonder Woman, Patty Jenkin's film. So she had the chance to retcon that, and she didnt. The film starts with "I used to want to save the world"...but she realises in the end that she cant "save the world". There's no one big bad, there's good and evil in everyone. And she cant just be a god and solve humanity's issues. And as we see in Wonder Woman, she is not a known public figure. The same in JL, where she reiterates that she helped people out when she could in that 100 year period, but she didnt become a public hero. Which she finally did by the end of the film. So they have established a timeline, and story throught these three films, and Patty Jenkins and Zack Snyder have chosen this story for her. They havent contradicted themselves so far, and there's a clear narrative. So it would be very strange if they ignore all that in WW84 because then Patty would be retconning her own film as well.

What's the problem with that you say? Well the biggest problem, and the one which I think the creators had in mind when setting her history is that Superman is the first public hero. If Diana is known as a public hero by humanity before Superman comes out, that changes the whole narrative of the DCEU, its not just a character thing or something. And before someone says "yeah the GA wont care" well the GA wont care either if you change IMPORTANT character details like say her costume, lore or personality, yet you guys will complain like hell about that, and rightly so. So saying "GA wont care" is a copout. GA dont care about a lot of ****, doesnt mean decisions cant be criticised.

Patty Jenkins has made all the right decisions so far, and there's an established character history that she helped create. I dont see why they will throw a curveball now. But they can, anything's possible. So I'll wait and see.

This, all of this, but especially the last two paragraphs.

 

[Longshot777]

Exactly!!!

The beginning and end of the first WW would also be contradicted if WW in 84 is unveiled to the public.

Plus having Trevor alive in 84 means all that happened in the first and end scenes of WW would just go out the window.

Thanks for the pic Bruce but I actually saw Steve decades ago and that line when I said about how I used to want to save the world...well disregard that because I did fight in the 80s and that Steve sacrifice in 1918 means nothing because it doesn’t compare to what he did in 1984.

But hey it is a great movie just edit out the first and last parts of the first WW.

 

[Wanda Detroit]

WW seeing Steve in 1984 doesn’t contradict anything in her first film, it brought back memories of how they met and how he died and what she learned from that experience. Y’all are jumping through hoops to bring Wonder Woman when it only affects the oh so precious bvs and JL.

 

[misslane38]

WW seeing Steve in 1984 doesn’t contradict anything in her first film, it brought back memories of how they met and how he died and what she learned from that experience. Y’all are jumping through hoops to bring Wonder Woman when it only affects the oh so precious bvs and JL.

It affects MOS, BvS, SS, WW1, and JL. It just does. Diana was not public in WW1. As for Steve and the rest, just like Diana doing things publicly in 1984, I'm not ready to make assumptions about Steve's WW84 storyline. Things may not be what they seem, so I think it's silly to declare anything one way or the other so soon, which is why this discussion is so irritating and pointless.

Arguing about things we don't about a year before the film comes out and we know the truth is such a waste. We might as well just press the pause button on this and come back to the debate when we have some actual facts to discuss.

 

[boocherhix]

Thanks for the pic Bruce but I actually saw Steve decades ago and that line when I said about how I used to want to save the world...well disregard that because I did fight in the 80s and that Steve sacrifice in 1918 means nothing because it doesn’t compare to what he did in 1984.

 

[Aurakles]

Arguing about things we don't about a year before the film comes out and we know the truth is such a waste. We might as well just press the pause button on this and come back to the debate when we have some actual facts to discuss.

Hit the nail on the head.

Changing/scrapping DCEU continuity and keeping it are both possible outcomes of WW84, nothings been proved by a couple of shots of filming.

Unless you can tell us the story behind the eye-rock, and how Trevor is back, you don't know about DCEU continuity either.

 

[The Guard]

I know the film and I don’t need it explained to me. The whole movie was about her learning the different facets of mankind and wanting to save them anyway. She fights Ares and doesn’t kill Dr. Maru because she knows that all mankind is not bad or evil. “So, I stay and I fight”, is all that needed to be said.

Aside from the fact that her final speech is largely about conflict and war, I'm not explaining the film to you. I'm discussing a very specific concept as it relates to the film and the character.

What you are saying now is like when Superman does heroic acts as Clark, is he trying to hide? No, when he rips his shirt open he making a choice to be a beacon of hope and when Diana, steps out of her civilian clothes and puts on that tiara she is making that same choice.

No, I'm not saying anything about Superman. I never said "Diana doing heroic acts as Diana means she's hiding". I said that pretending to be Steve Trevor's secretary and seeking to blend in was a form of hiding and operating in the shadows.

And for the second time...I never said she is always covert, or that she was always hiding. I'm not sure why you have such an issue with the fact that she does, in fact, seek to stay under the radar at times. It's been part of her character since BVS.

 

[The Guard]

0
What's the problem with that you say? Well the biggest problem, and the one which I think the creators had in mind when setting her history is that Superman is the first public hero. If Diana is known as a public hero by humanity before Superman comes out, that changes the whole narrative of the DCEU, its not just a character thing or something. And before someone says "yeah the GA wont care" well the GA wont care either if you change IMPORTANT character details like say her costume, lore or personality, yet you guys will complain like hell about that, and rightly so. So saying "GA wont care" is a copout. GA dont care about a lot of ****, doesnt mean decisions cant be criticised.

Patty Jenkins has made all the right decisions so far, and there's an established character history that she helped create. I dont see why they will throw a curveball now. But they can, anything's possible. So I'll wait and see.

Eh. They never really leaned heavily on the "first hero" portion of the narrative. It was an idea Snyder had, but it's never been developed all that much. The world's reaction to Superman is more about his level of power and his alien nature...not so much that he's "the first public hero". It could be argued that he's not all that public, as he keeps to himself quite a bit. I don't think this is the element of the narrative that the GA is going to rail against.

Also, people seemed to know about Batman prior to the events of BVS...at least it would be reasonable to assume that a decent amount of people know that The Bat operates in Gotham based on what we see in the film.

 

[misslane38]

Eh. They never really leaned heavily on the "first hero" portion of the narrative. It was an idea Snyder had, but it's never been developed all that much. The world's reaction to Superman is more about his level of power and his alien nature...not so much that he's "the first public hero". It could be argued that he's not all that public, as he keeps to himself quite a bit. I don't think this is the element of the narrative that the GA is going to rail against.

They leaned on the "first hero" idea a lot in MoS and BvS. Jonathan's concerns would seem overblown in a universe that currently included a public Wonder Woman. BvS referenced everything from a metahuman thesis to the changing relationship between mankind and god. If Wonder Woman is a relative of actual Greco-Roman deities, then her debut to the public would have been a catalyst for similar discussions. Plus, Wonder Woman is not significantly less powerful than Superman. He couldn't stop the Capitol bombing, after all. Indeed, one of the most critical voices against Superman in BvS was Wallace Keefe. Keefe, if you recall, was not troubled by Superman's omnipotence but rather the fact that Superman did not prevent civilian casualties during the BZE. For Keefe, this impotence made Superman a False God.

Moreover, much of the public discourse surrounding Superman in BvS related to state level interventions, which is part of the narrative of Diana's superhero career from the beginning due to her alliance with Allied powers during World War I. Indeed, if Diana has been operating as a public superhero since the armistice in 1918, then she would undoubtedly been involved in several state-level interventions. Throughout comics and media, it is Diana more than any other superhero who takes an active role in reshaping society. She is a UN Ambassador as well as someone who has no problem inserting herself into international conflicts. She also has no problem killing, including government and public officials like Ludendorff. Political assassinations that take place outside state or UN approval would provoke similar if not more intense responses than those we saw against Superman in BvS.

Regardless of how open Superman is to the public, he's still public in the DCEU. Articles were written about him. Demands for his surrender were broadcast internationally. Monuments with his likeness were erected in public spaces. He appeared in front of the media and in the halls of the U.S. Capitol building. His name was on the lips of every modern media personality ranging from Neil deGrasse Tyson to Jon Stewart.

Also, people seemed to know about Batman prior to the events of BVS...at least it would be reasonable to assume that a decent amount of people know that The Bat operates in Gotham based on what we see in the film.

Batman is irrelevant. He's an urban legend, a vigilante, and a human. His existence does not prompt an existential crisis nor does his debut mark the beginning of a metahuman genesis event.

 

[Dark Raven]

Maybe Superman just thought he was the first hero, and so did his parents or the Daily Planet. But then it maybe turned out he wasn't the first, and maybe not as much of a hero as he thought.

Wonder Woman was around in WWI, and she was out there in the public eye, even if seen by a relative minority. So whatever Superman thought about himself, WW already existed before him.

 

[valmont]

 

[Longshot777]

Maybe Superman just thought he was the first hero, and so did his parents or the Daily Planet. But then it maybe turned out he wasn't the first, and maybe not as much of a hero as he thought.

Wonder Woman was around in WWI, and she was out there in the public eye, even if seen by a relative minority. So whatever Superman thought about himself, WW already existed before him.

He is technically never the first superhero BUT as the whole world is concerned, he is the first PUBLIC superhero while WW and Batman are urban legends.

This could have been easily avoided even if Steve being alive if they made WW2 in modern day.

Why try being cute and put her on a period film?? The 2010s is where the female liberation is at. Not Reagan’s 80s.

That BVS montage of the media talking about Superman is out the door.... wait how about WW in the 80s??? Oh yeah disregard that montage

 

[valmont]

Academy award winning prosthetics artist David Malinowski (Darkest Hour, The Revenant) has joined Wonder Woman 1984. #WW84


https://***********/WonderWomanHQ/status/1009576186253541376

 

[jmc]

Hopefully this means Cheetah is practical.

 

[jmc]

Gal looks like she's making the trip to San Diego.

https://deadline.com/2018/06/wonder...gadot-footage-warner-bros-aquaman-1202414752/

 

[sup101]

Is wonder woman going to take a visit to the.

Spoiler

https://www.google.com/amp/s/superb...984-will-take-a-visit-to-the-white-house/amp/

 

[sup101]

Yeah cheetah has to be practical or at least a mixture of practical and CGI.. Can't have her looking terrible like Steppenwolf..

 

[Micromind]

I think Cheetah will be a combination of the two, prosthetics and CGI. Use of CGI is unavoidable, as for action scenes like cheetah jumping, leaping will require CGI.

 

[Micromind]

Exactly.

Here's the thing. You can claim that BvS Diana says she gave up on humanity and blah blah blah, and just with that film in mind, you're still wrong. Diana claims she has killled things from other worlds before, so she has been fighting. She immediately suits up and joins the fight against Doomsday so she helps out whenever she can. She just has not been a public hero, and has chosen not to interfere with mankind's self made wars. THAT SAME NARRATIVE was shown in Wonder Woman, Patty Jenkin's film. So she had the chance to retcon that, and she didnt. The film starts with "I used to want to save the world"...but she realises in the end that she cant "save the world". There's no one big bad, there's good and evil in everyone. And she cant just be a god and solve humanity's issues. And as we see in Wonder Woman, she is not a known public figure. The same in JL, where she reiterates that she helped people out when she could in that 100 year period, but she didnt become a public hero. Which she finally did by the end of the film. So they have established a timeline, and story throught these three films, and Patty Jenkins and Zack Snyder have chosen this story for her. They havent contradicted themselves so far, and there's a clear narrative. So it would be very strange if they ignore all that in WW84 because then Patty would be retconning her own film as well.

What's the problem with that you say? Well the biggest problem, and the one which I think the creators had in mind when setting her history is that Superman is the first public hero. If Diana is known as a public hero by humanity before Superman comes out, that changes the whole narrative of the DCEU, its not just a character thing or something. And before someone says "yeah the GA wont care" well the GA wont care either if you change IMPORTANT character details like say her costume, lore or personality, yet you guys will complain like hell about that, and rightly so. So saying "GA wont care" is a copout. GA dont care about a lot of ****, doesnt mean decisions cant be criticised.

Patty Jenkins has made all the right decisions so far, and there's an established character history that she helped create. I dont see why they will throw a curveball now. But they can, anything's possible. So I'll wait and see.

This.

 

[Willi Berg]

Nice! or uh...sacrilege!

 

[Micromind]

Gal looks like she's making the trip to San Diego.

https://deadline.com/2018/06/wonder...gadot-footage-warner-bros-aquaman-1202414752/

Great, I hope they release the clip online they show at SDCC.


#Hype.

 

[Willi Berg]

Gal looks like she's making the trip to San Diego.

https://deadline.com/2018/06/wonder...gadot-footage-warner-bros-aquaman-1202414752/

Great, I hope they release the clip online they show at SDCC.


#Hype.

I was mainly expecting Aquaman hype but I'm glad there's some WW. I just wonder how much footage they've got by now. But a shot of WW in action would be enough to create a lot of hype.

 

[Aurakles]

Isn't it a bit early for a clip?
We still haven't seen any footage of Aquaman.
Maybe some posters/concept art and Jenkins/cast on stage.

 

[kingcharmingman]

Aquaman scheduled this year but people seems to hype àbout WW84.

Is this a marketing strategy? Any problem with aquaman? I hope not.
Glad nicole kidman in there.

 

[Willi Berg]

Isn't it a bit early for a clip?
We still haven't seen any footage of Aquaman.
Maybe some posters/concept art and Jenkins/cast on stage.

I was not expecting much of anything at this stage so maybe it will just be a poster or Gadot's appearance. I wouldn't complain. We've already gotten more than I was expecting at this stage.

Aquaman scheduled this year but people seems to hype àbout WW84.

Is this a marketing strategy? Any problem with aquaman? I hope not.
Glad nicole kidman in there.

Well WW84 is coming off the great success of the first movie.

I don't think there's a problem with Aquaman. They have put off releasing a trailer. I heard they were trying to distance a bit from Justice League movie...or there are a lot of effects to work on. I'm not sure. But it will definitely be the main event at Comic Con for DC this year. And Shazam!