Wonder Woman Script

Heading out for a bit. Will be back tomorrow if there are any more questions.
 
I'm just glad Batman is my favorite superhero. At least WB can get him right (albeit in spite of themselves, methinks).
 
One thing thats missing to that is that WB/DC were/are in a legal situation with the Siegel family and needed to have a Superman movie in production by a certain date. I know all about the "Goyer's idea" story, but honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if that story wasn't entirely truthful. People make up PR stories all the time in hollywood.

I forgot about that. You do have a point that WB got off their lazy a**** to reboot Superman only because of the legal situation but the way I see it, they got lucky with Goyer getting a story just in time. Of course I have no solid evidence but I don't see a reason why they would be lying in the first place. If you believe that though, then fair enough. It's not too crazy of a notion in the first place given WB's poor track record and almost-shamefulness of their properties.

Listen to what this script reader is saying. WB wants ALL of their superhero films to be "Gritty, realistic" much in the same way TDK trilogy was. Mark Waid has gone on record saying that WB essentially dosen't like Superman and they constantly wonder how he could be more like Batman. They get a bunch of creators known for "Dark, realistic superheroes" to do Superman. IMO, WB was/is very motivated to have Superman films more in the tone of Batman, a proven success.

I....didn't know that :dry:. I just skimmed through the whole discussion. All I got was just Wonder Women being dark/gritty and her being a mutated human from Kryptonian bacteria.

If that is the case though, then any hope I had for the future of DC films just went down the drain.
 
I forgot about that. You do have a point that WB got off their lazy a**** to reboot Superman only because of the legal situation but the way I see it, they got lucky with Goyer getting a story just in time. Of course I have no solid evidence but I don't see a reason why they would be lying in the first place. If you believe that though, then fair enough. It's not too crazy of a notion in the first place given WB's poor track record and almost-shamefulness of their properties.



I....didn't know that :dry:. I just skimmed through the whole discussion. All I got was just Wonder Women being dark/gritty and her being a mutated human from Kryptonian bacteria.

If that is the case though, then any hope I had for the future of DC films just went down the drain.

Well it can't be criticised for being unoriginal. :o
 
Listen to what this script reader is saying. WB wants ALL of their superhero films to be "Gritty, realistic" much in the same way TDK trilogy was. Mark Waid has gone on record saying that WB essentially dosen't like Superman and they constantly wonder how he could be more like Batman. They get a bunch of creators known for "Dark, realistic superheroes" to do Superman. IMO, WB was/is very motivated to have Superman films more in the tone of Batman, a proven success.

Man of Steel wasn't really done in the tone of Nolan's Batman trilogy in my opinion. It aped the visual aesthetic at some points (but was wholly Snyder), and kind of borrowed the non-linear narrative origin from Begins. But other than that, I thought tonally it was on the other end of the spectrum. Goyer even went out of his way to exclaim they he was explicitly not trying approach Superman the way he did Batman.

David Goyer said:
Relatable and realistic doesn't necessarily mean dark. I think it would be inappropriate for us to approach a Superman film as if we were doing The Dark Knight. The Batman films are a lot more nihilistic; Superman has always been a story about hope.
 
Also, I don't know how true this is, but Goyer's Flash script was supposed to be dark too.

Man of Steel wasn't really done in the tone of Nolan's Batman trilogy in my opinion. It aped the visual aesthetic at some points (but was wholly Snyder), and kind of borrowed the non-linear narrative origin from Begins. But other than that, I thought tonally it was on the other end of the spectrum. Goyer even went out of his way to exclaim they he was explicitly not trying approach Superman the way he did Batman.

Obviously, its not going to be the exact same thing. But I think there's a reason why people criticize the tone of the movie, and its not just a matter of "I hate Snyder" or "I have Donner bias", not to say that hasn't played a part.
 
Last edited:
Also, I don't know how true this is, but Goyer's Flash script was supposed to be dark too.



Obviously, its not going to be the exact same thing. But I think there's a reason why people criticize the tone of the movie, and its not just a matter of "I hate Snyder" or "I have Donner bias", not to say that hasn't played a part.

Perhaps the sequel will be lighter.

This is quite interesting. MS movies are criticised by some for being "campy, corny, popcorn movies with little depth" and MOS is already being criticised for being "dark, gritty and humourless". Not that I agree with any of these criticisms but maybe this difference in tone between the movies of the two companies is a good thing.
 
If an agency likes it enough, that is one way it happens. yes. WB can also pick writers to write it.

More than likely this. If I'm the new head of WB since Robinov left, I'm not buying a spec script from an unknown writer for a tentpole franchise with a complicated development history like WW. No, I would get a hired gun with great record for making money and have whatshername at DC fill him in on the character details.
 
Wonder Woman and the Amazons should not be reduced to a bunch of infected chimera at the beginnings of human civilisation.

More than the themes of sexism/feminism, a huge theme to be explored is religion, and how the world reacts to her.

Recently, the planet had just been shaken to its core (literally) in the discovery that we are not alone. We are no longer the top if the food chain and we are neither special nor unique in the universe. However, those religious types can take solace in the fact that their belief system comforts them. But what then happens when a bastion/icon/representative of a dead religion springs forth? How would The Vatican react to such an event? What would be the implications to those people, the Greek pantheon as a religion would no longer be belief, but fact.

Then introduce Flash, challenging that which we thought we knew about the physical world, then Aquaman with the historical and Green Lantern showing everybody there's always a bigger threat.

The potential for building tension amongst the public and the JL are ripe, and WB would be fools to not pursue it.
 
Let's just keep in mind folks this is (supposedly) a spec script, not an official script of any kind, and there's no guarantee that WB will accept it or move forward with it.
 
So I've read through this thread and I'm not gonna lie, whether any of this is true or not (no offence to jd23 but this is the internet), I'm actually quite ok with what I've read about this supposed WW script. The reason being is that Man of Steels world is essentially a sci-fi world more than a superhero world, and the biggest issue I had with that world was it's inability to expand beyond that genre to incorporate characters like WW, FL, AQM etc, these changes to the characters' back story using Krypton as a foundation actually work in the context of that sci-fi world. I always wanted a Greek Mythology based WW film, but that was only going to work if she had her own universe to play off of. Given the cards MoS dealt the entire pantheon of DC heroes these changes I've read not only make sense, but they're alterations I kinda have to tip my hat towards because they've managed to navigate a very difficult track. Krypton being the catalyst for accretion in the DC universe is something that not only can I live with, I find it kinda brilliant.
 
...Krypton being the catalyst for accretion in the DC universe is something that not only can I live with, I find it kinda brilliant.

I don't necessarily mind the idea, but I think they'd have to be very careful in their execution of it. One wrong move and certain plot points might come across as contrived.
 
Wonder Woman and the Amazons should not be reduced to a bunch of infected chimera at the beginnings of human civilisation.

More than the themes of sexism/feminism, a huge theme to be explored is religion, and how the world reacts to her.

Recently, the planet had just been shaken to its core (literally) in the discovery that we are not alone. We are no longer the top if the food chain and we are neither special nor unique in the universe. However, those religious types can take solace in the fact that their belief system comforts them. But what then happens when a bastion/icon/representative of a dead religion springs forth? How would The Vatican react to such an event? What would be the implications to those people, the Greek pantheon as a religion would no longer be belief, but fact.

Then introduce Flash, challenging that which we thought we knew about the physical world, then Aquaman with the historical and Green Lantern showing everybody there's always a bigger threat.

The potential for building tension amongst the public and the JL are ripe, and WB would be fools to not pursue it.

Oh, how I wish you were working at WB. :csad:

Martian Manhunter also has the potential to bring in allegorical themes for racism. I read Lex Luthor: Man of Steel a couple of months back and one of the ideas in that book is that people trust Superman despite being an alien simply because he looks human. Obviously that Superman won't be as trusted in this universe as in the comics (pre-New 52) but there will be a level of trust the general public has for Superman at some point (the military has it already to an extent). However, Martian Manhunter would be looked at in the same way people would look at Brainiac and Darkseid, and would suffer discrimination due to it despite being arguably the most peaceful JL member. He would serve as a great allegory for racism and for the fact that humans only look on what is present on the outside instead of the inside.

How would you say Batman would impact "the general public" in your pitch?
 
Last edited:
I don't necessarily mind the idea, but I think they'd have to be very careful in their execution of it. One wrong move and certain plot points might come across as contrived.

That's true but it really only applies to WW and Flash (maybe Aquaman, he's still a tricky character to work in the MoS universe). Green Lantern can work easily given the sci-fi nature of the character, as well as Martian Manhunter. Batman is the lone character I'm struggling to see fitting given he's human.
 
I don't necessarily mind the idea, but I think they'd have to be very careful in their execution of it. One wrong move and certain plot points might come across as contrived.

And a wrong move the other way and they become Superman-lite.

For years, I've tried not jump on the "DC/WB can't do anything right" bandwagon.

But between GL trying to be Iron Man, MOS trying to be a Superman version of The Dark Knight trilogy, and this script sounding more forced than "Iron Man 2" when it comes to tying in to a larger superhero universe, I have to believe that...they don't know what they're doing.

Their plan is to rip off anything popular (Dark/Gritty, MCU) instead of letting the characters be the characters. And since DC/WB has no faith in their non Batman characters, no one else does either.

You have spoken truth. WB doesn't know their characters well enough to have faith in them.
 
That's true but it really only applies to WW and Flash...

I was specifically referring to Wonder Woman. The others (besides maybe Aquaman) either can or do already fall under the sci-fi category and don't necessarily need to be tied to Krypton.

And a wrong move the other way and they become Superman-lite.

What? How?
 
So I've read through this thread and I'm not gonna lie, whether any of this is true or not (no offence to jd23 but this is the internet), I'm actually quite ok with what I've read about this supposed WW script. The reason being is that Man of Steels world is essentially a sci-fi world more than a superhero world, and the biggest issue I had with that world was it's inability to expand beyond that genre to incorporate characters like WW, FL, AQM etc, these changes to the characters' back story using Krypton as a foundation actually work in the context of that sci-fi world. I always wanted a Greek Mythology based WW film, but that was only going to work if she had her own universe to play off of. Given the cards MoS dealt the entire pantheon of DC heroes these changes I've read not only make sense, but they're alterations I kinda have to tip my hat towards because they've managed to navigate a very difficult track. Krypton being the catalyst for accretion in the DC universe is something that not only can I live with, I find it kinda brilliant.

You summed up the great thing about the whole concept of the Justice League. These are characters that are essentially from different worlds and genres who came together to battle one common threat. They are vastly different from one another, but that is also why they compliment each other so well in the first place.

Obviously, its not going to be the exact same thing. But I think there's a reason why people criticize the tone of the movie, and its not just a matter of "I hate Snyder" or "I have Donner bias", not to say that hasn't played a part.

I thought the tone was just fine. The only problem I would say the film had regarding the whole dark/gritty idea was that the color palette they used was too bleak and moody. The sequel should use a brighter color palette. Other than that, I don't see a lot of room for more lightheartedness that can be added in for the sequels. The sequel will almost naturally bring more humor and lighter moments in through Clark's interactions and life at the DP.

The reason I think writers often have it easier with Batman than with Superman is not due to Batman being more realistic or more relatable, but due to Batman being cynical while Superman is optimistic. I feel that a lot of writers don't know what to do with a character as optimistic as Superman in today's world. We see the world through a far more cynical and critical lense than we did in the past, and part of that translated on film. I think the perfect way to put emphasis on the image of hope and optimism that is Superman is to have it contrast with the world around him. As Jor-El said, Superman is here to save Earth from becoming what Krypton became, which is the direction we are slowly heading in according to the film. Maybe Superman needed a bit of that "dark" tone (which, as I said, I don't think is that dark to begin with but you know what I mean).
 
You summed up the great thing about the whole concept of the Justice League. These are characters that are essentially from different worlds and genres who came together to battle one common threat. They are vastly different from one another, but that is also why they compliment each other so well in the first place.

Those crossing of genres doesn't really mesh well on film, especially when one that's starting the series is cemented as a sci-fi movie. The thing about a lot of sci-fi films is that they tend to always be more of a 'what if' type of thing, they try to create a world that is believable, where as straight up superhero films are never really concerned with the world they inhabit, they're very neutral in their setting where it's not really a fantasy world and yet not really trying to depict a believable world. This is why I thought MoS being the starting point for an expanded universe was a terrible way to kick things off because its feet are firmly planted in trying to be a believable sci-fi world making expansion for other characters based off their back story and genre difficult. But if Krypton is the foundation of everything about the DC universe then that changes the ballgame. Characters back story would have to change, some to a substantial degree, but as long as the core foundations of who the character are remain then I think those could be changes for the good.
 
Nolan may have reinvented the character looks in his Batman series, but the core of the characters was still there.

precisely and those who can't tell the difference should stay well away form any CBM or actually almost any adaptations all together.
 
Those crossing of genres doesn't really mesh well on film, especially when one that's starting the series is cemented as a sci-fi movie. The thing about a lot of sci-fi films is that they tend to always be more of a 'what if' type of thing, they try to create a world that is believable, where as straight up superhero films are never really concerned with the world they inhabit, they're very neutral in their setting where it's not really a fantasy world and yet not really trying to depict a believable world. This is why I thought MoS being the starting point for an expanded universe was a terrible way to kick things off because its feet are firmly planted in trying to be a believable sci-fi world making expansion for other characters based off their back story and genre difficult. But if Krypton is the foundation of everything about the DC universe then that changes the ballgame. Characters back story would have to change, some to a substantial degree, but as long as the core foundations of who the character are remain then I think those could be changes for the good.

Crossing genres in live-action is harder than in comics indeed, but not impossible or even close to it. Marvel essentially did the same thing and managed to pull it off. For the most part, Iron Man focuses solely on the tech side of the Marvel universe with zero focus on the rest. Favreau even stated that Iron Man's realism was inspired by Batman Begins' realism, and even incorporated a lot of real life issues such as terrorism to give it more of a real feel. Sure that the MCU toned down Thor's mythos to an extent (which they seem to be fixing with The Avengers and Thor: TDW) but ultimately, everything fit in well for the most part.

Also, MoS was not trying to expand on the DCU outside of small cameos to WE and things of that nature. What it mainly does is expanding the Superman mythos. The Batman films will expand the Batman mythos, the WW films will expand the WW mythos, the GL films will expand the GL mythos, etc. Obviously that the concept of magic won't be alluded to in MoS due to that. I prefer things to be this way. I was never fond of the way Marvel turned most of their solo films into Avengers promos as opposed to letting them stand on their own.
 
The execs and creative people whose responsibility it is to make a DCCU a reality have nowhere near the obsession fans on message boards have for the believed need for some UNIFIED FEILD THEORY of superhero universes. Thanos shows up at the end of Avengers and will be featured across their line of films most likely. Do you think that they are going to go into depth with his origin? Do you think they are going to go into the Celestials, and The Eternals, and the split that brought the Eternals to Titan and the Deviants and the Deviant genes Thanos was born with, just so they can justify his existence?
 
Heading out for a bit. Will be back tomorrow if there are any more questions.

Broad question here, because I know you can't divulge how long the screenplay is: But if I did want to try my hand at writing a script, on average, how many Microsoft Word pages are we talking about? 100? 200? 500?

Also, from your knowledge are WB really still trying to rush out a JL movie in 2015? If Goyer is writing is the script complete? I also remember hearing rumors awhile back that a Flash script was already finished.

Thanks.
 
I'm just glad Batman is my favorite superhero. At least WB can get him right (albeit in spite of themselves, methinks).

You're lucky. I'm burdened with an undying love for WW which means a world of pain and misery for me. :(.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"