Discussion in 'DC Comics Films' started by Thread Manager, Nov 16, 2012.
Cuaron's better, but Yates is good too, imo.
I want Yates for Shazam!
Character traits ie sassy, quick tempered aren't what I'd call character development.
The Minotaur or Etta could have easily held a mini-series on their own cause they can operate independent of WW.
Zola's entire existence is dependent on her involvment to the Gods. Her reactions to being a pawn in their games and such. Hera... Who or what Zola is once this is all over?
That's the crux of the approach to WW I don't get from some people.
Sure. Learning how to order a venti coffee instead of large coffee at Starbucks would be confounding.
But understanding the need for revenge or that people can act irrationally because of jealousy are things people learn no matter what their cultural differences are. She wouldn't need Trevor or anyone else to hold her hand to understand it.
When people say "ways of man" like stuff. It makes it seem like WW doesn't understand human emotions/reactions cause she's from the planet Omicron Persei 8.
I was thinking Patty Jenkins. I figure since WW has a lot more in common with Thor than any of Marvel's most prominent ladies, they could do a lot worse than the director of Monster who was Marvel's second choice to direct Thor 2.
No, but she is from a society with a VERY antiquated code of conduct. And she's spent her entire life learning only the Amazon women's version of that realm of human behavior. There's A LOT about our world she will no doubt find a little difficult to wrap her head around - from the justice system to American politics to the contemporary social constructs between men and women to race relations to entertainment to consumer culture to modern parenting to technological dependence to...well, you get the idea. She can adapt and survive in our world on her own, sure. But it seems like Trevor's role would be to change her outlook towards it and help her to actually appreciate it for what it is, rather than judge it based on her literally ancient point-of-view.
I understand what you are saying and agree with it to a point, but the part about finding it even a little difficult to wrap her head around parts of human society I disagree.
I think that does Wonder Woman a little injustice. My take is that she would very quickly be able to wrap her head around pretty much everything and adapt quite quickly, but that doesn't mean should would accept it. Which I believe you also touched on your idea of learning to appreciate it and I agree that Steve Trevor would be an important part of her appreciating how human society works, but I think there is a need to be careful of how much he holds her hand in that process.
This is why I like the setting of World War II because that setting gives the story chances to discuss human society, with both the good traits and the questionable ones. One thought that keeps popping into my head is Wonder Woman seeing the Germans bombing English cities, and then later seeing the Allies bomb German cities.
Some of those aren't the "Ways of Man(kind)". Some of those are the same differences someone going between the courts of US and Canada. Or someone moving from New York to Mississippi. Sure ask questions but you aren't a child either.
Learning new cultural differences wouldn't really help Trevor's cause as a character cause he's only an American(which has its own complexities. Blonde haired, white guy explains women's/minorities. Okay.). WW needs to go beyond American shores. He'd be just as ignorant as her.
As to contemporary constructs between men and women or race relations, not really. It's the same reason we still read Shakespeare today. I don't need a course on the Moors in Europe to understand the basic tensions of Othello.
Sure, WW should have to learn stuff. But she should be able to understand the basics human interactions just because she's human too, and actually listen to what other characters are saying to figure things out.
I'm not saying she's perfect, but making Steve the go-to binary for everyone else's opinion makes WW's world small. She should have all kinds of supporting characters so she actually understands the complexities and not making Steve the mouthpiece/Mary Sue for whatever she needs to know.
I would understand that take on it if she didn't turn right back around and teach mankind to be better, and iirc, Steve doesn't teach her the ways of mankind, he just teaches her what it's like to be weak and powerless, something that she wouldn't have experienced no matter how smart or savvy she was as the princess of paradise island. So, maybe you're thinking about a different idea other than Joss'?
Good one! I'd like her too...
So my list right now is:
1. All the un-gettable people like Spielberg and Cameron
2. Brad Bird
3. Patty Jenkins
4. Alfonso Cuaron
Understanding it isn't the problem. She's from Paradise, that's her natural perception. She would understand Othello, but she's not going to think of Iago as sympathetic, and the world is full of Iagos. All Steve is teaching is the basic principle: Weak people do dumb/evil things, but don't judge them too harshly.
It's not my favorite take on her origin character arc, but it seems valid to me and it works. It might work better than the 'men aren't all bad' arc from the '09 cartoon movie, which, iirc, involved a bit of naivete on her part as well.
brad bird again lol is he the most suggested director on SHH lol
now WW lol
I think Jenkins would be pretty good, or Refn, or Branagh
I get sad discussing this potential movie. Nothing ever comes to fruition, I love discussing possible cast story etc. I wish we could just get a director with a vision for the story which Refn seemed to have. I'd just like him to do it without Hendricks, or cast her as a villain Barbara Minerva perhaps.
As for Cheetah herself, I definitely prefer the were-cheetah and Circe as the one who grants her that power.
The original ideas I had when I attempted to write a script had Cheetah as an underling and Circe as the as the main baddie. I wanted the Vanessa Silver Swan for my sequel, and the finale with Ares who was pulling the strings all along.
Maybe I'll just do screen grabs, and storyboard out the movie I'd want to see.
I always imagined the Baroness in an updated modern take, that she was the leader of Germany, being a Nazi sympathizer and influenced by Ares' subordinates, to ignite another world war, thereby unknowingly resurrecting the God of War and taking over to reign supreme power.
Circe, being a minor Goddess and with her knowledge of drugs, was to create a special drug with the blood of Ares, and feed it to every unsuspecting soldier who were going to war. Every soldier would be overcome with the insatiable lust to kill and destroy their enemy, feeding Ares' strength...
But I folded in the end trying to write it
I want Peter Jackson do to a WW solo film after Hobbit trilogy
No way could it be a solo film, it would at least have to be a trilogy for Jackson.
I think he could do the first film. But you want him to make WW completely his own, as Nolan did with Bats?
The best way to go, perhaps. Otherwise, lesser directors will make the sequels because the studio think they will make more money this way ("puppet directors", if you have heard this term before?)
And they won't be as good as the first film.
Im sorry but what book you have you been reading that's just not true. In the 4th issue we find out that her mother died and that her dads in prison. Diana and her had a moment verbal about feeling alone in thethe world Hades even used her moms image to trap .her
Thank you for summing up what I was trying to say but much more eloquently
Lol at this point I dunno how you guys keep talking without any news on anything related to Wonder Woman.
Wishful thinking until they decide to finally start production on the flick.
WE ARE TALKING ABOUT EVERYTHING EXCEPT WONDER WOMAN HERSELF!
The main thing people need to be talking about right now is Wonder Woman's personality. Her motivations. You take away the Superhero from a Clark, Bruce, Hal, Wally, Arthur, Ollie, etc, and you know who they are, you know their motivations, you know what they will do, why they will do it, and how they will do it.
Who in the hell is Diana Prince? What are her motivations? What is her personality without Wonder Woman? What makes her tick? If we took away her Super powers, who would she be, how would she handle daily life, and how would she handle threats?
It's funny cause I just realized this. We have spent 5 topics talking about enemies, supporting cast, who is going to don the tiara, but we never really talked about who Diana is.
Eh, all that stuff will come down to the casting. Brad Bird and Emily Blunt will work it out at the appropriate time.
The good news is that WW is a broad enough character (similar to Supes) that the director/writers/actors will have plenty of space to put their own mark on her. But she's never gonna be as complex as Bruce Wayne or Tony Stark. Shes too perfect. Even Thor is more complex.
This is why anything but an A-list, bona fide movie star in the lead role probably wont cut it. WB needs someone who captivates the audience the moment Diana appears on-screen and who can pull off WW's (at times) high falutin dailogue. They probably need someone with the impact of RDJ or Chris Reeve, but I dont think WB would take a chance on a recovering addict or an unknown so im guessing a known quantity like Blunt.
Im still highly skeptical of this movie getting made anytime soon of course. And even if it gets done in the next couple years, its just as likely that WB will hedge its bets with a modest budget (less than 150 mil) and B-list talent.
This could be me being naive to Wonder Woman as a whole, but I don't remember there being much to Diana Prince as a character in terms of differences from WW. She keeps all the same values and characteristics, it's more of just a name she uses for everyday life.
This is a superhero MOVIE thread, right? Unless Diana Prince is going to be the sole character of the movie and the whole movie is going to contain Diana just standing in Themyscira reciting an internal monologue then yes, let's just discuss Diana herself throughout the whole thread (who by the way, is practically Wonder Woman without a tiara).
On the TDKR, MoS, TAS, etc threads there are countless discussions about the plots, enemies, ethics, directors, cast etc. Why can't a Wonder Woman board be the same? It is not like we are arguing/bickering. We are having a civil discussion.
Brad Bird again. Are you really so sure he's GONNA do Wonder Woman?
That's one of the things I look forward to the most; to enjoy a Wonder Woman that works in a live action adaption and not just the comic book character inserted into the film.
And it's naturally the director will have a big say in the matter, because the film will be his/her version of the superheroine. Not a frame-by-frame presentation of the comic book.
Agree. I rather see a familiar face in the role. Doesn't have to be an A-lister, but just someome we have seen before.
Bingo my friend. This is what I was eluding to. Wonder Woman isn't like other heroes who change persona, Diana is the same person. Diana doesn't turn into Wonder Woman, she IS Wonder Woman. Lynda Carter said it best a couple years ago "the key to playing Wonder Woman is not to play her as a Superhero, but as a person".
When creating her personality, we should not be trying to create Wonder Woman, we should be trying to create a Diana as a person, then let that seep through when she is Wonder Woman.