|
Brother Entropy posted:was it really just the quips or what what does your heart tell you
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2017 23:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 22:10 |
|
|
Equeen posted:what does your heart tell you to love the snyder haters unconditionally like my boy supes would've wanted but also yes the quips thing
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2017 23:55
|
|
|
I've been seeing posts on the internet about a script for WW written by Joss Whedon, is that real?
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 00:30
|
|
|
Toady posted:Diana, whose name is similar to Adonai, initially appears to represent a neo Old Testament war god. As Yahweh and Zeus were storm gods, Diana inherits lightning powers. In the final battle, she embraces the New Testament view that love will save everyone, and she forms an electric cross in the sky, yet her actions are hypocritically full of bloodshed. Her superhero uniform is battle armor. Her link with humanity is a dead man whose imagery she cherishes. She leads humanity in modern-day wars for alleged humanitarian reasons. She shrugs her shoulders and accepts that mankind will do whatever it wants instead of educating humanity through character refinement (Da'at Torah). The film effectively acts as a Jewish critique of Christianity.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 00:46
|
|
|
SgtSteel91 posted:I've been seeing posts on the internet about a script for WW written by Joss Whedon, is that real? real lovely, yeah
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 00:56
|
|
|
Equeen posted:real lovely, yeah Speaking of the script, one of the things I liked about WW was how even though she was naive and innocent to the real world she wasn't portrayed as being dumb. I find that naive characters can sometimes being annoying because their naïveté becomes stupidity and weakness. I guess that's why I like the "fish out of water" description a bit more and it doesn't carry the same implications to me when someone is described as naive or innocent. Another thing I liked was how quickly Steve stepped back and realized his role was to support Diana. There was none of the usual tropes of "I'm not going to be lead by a woman" from anyone on the team. They all quickly realized that she was an absolute badass and could handle things herself. The "terrified and aroused" line was dumb though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 01:27
|
|
|
There's not much Christian about Wonder Woman. There's a split second where she's in the sky with her arms apart, but it's much more a 'god gently descending from the heavens' pose than a crucifixion - which makes sense, since she's just obliterated Ares with divine might. Broadly, Wonder Woman in this movie serves as a mirror to Batman in BvS. Where Batman was so cynical that he'd kill a man because he thinks they're God, she's so idealistic she'd kill a man because she thinks they're God. The difference lies in why killing God is such a good idea.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 02:37
|
|
|
WW had a spectacular 3rd weekend, only dropping 30%. Domestic is now 274 million, Global total 570 million. http://www.boxofficemojo.com/news/?id=4300&p=.htm
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 02:59
|
|
|
ungulateman posted:There's not much Christian about Wonder Woman. There's a split second where she's in the sky with her arms apart, but it's much more a 'god gently descending from the heavens' pose than a crucifixion - which makes sense, since she's just obliterated Ares with divine might. I think I should bring up the scene where she body checks a steeple, toppling it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 03:30
|
|
|
But snipers would often hide in church steeples and destroying the steeple or entire church was sometimes the only way to stop them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 03:33
|
|
|
And that sniper...was Jesus Christ
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 03:46
|
|
|
404notfound posted:The movie almost doesn't even pass the Bechdel test, once we get out of Themyscira. There was the brief "trying on outfits" scene between Diana and the secretary, but after that we don't even have female characters interacting with one another. Stop bringing up the Bechdel test as some authority on a film's feminism. It's an especially strange film to use it as a criticism on, since the film unambiguously passes it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 04:03
|
|
|
Okay it passes the Bechdel Test, but on a scale of 1-5, did it just technically pass or totally ace the test?
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 04:10
|
|
|
I always preferred the lamp test, invented by Kelly Sue DeConnick. Replace the female lead with a sexy lamp. Does the film change?
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 04:19
|
|
|
Can it be the leg lamp from A Christmas Story?
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 04:47
|
|
|
Mr. Apollo posted:But snipers would often hide in church steeples and destroying the steeple or entire church was sometimes the only way to stop them. Diana is the God Killer.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 05:10
|
|
|
Snowman_McK posted:I always preferred the lamp test, invented by Kelly Sue DeConnick.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 05:24
|
|
|
BrianWilly posted:I'ma be honest, I never understood how that test is supposed to work. Are these some sort of...sentient sexy lamps that can move from place to place and carry a conversation? Do leading men like Tom Cruise and Christian Bale know that they're speaking to faceless lamp creatures from some hellish dimension and kissing them and loving them, Clive Barker-style? 'Cuz right now I'm imagining an island filled with nothing but sexy lamps who train and ride horses and are ruled by the Lamp Queen who hosed Zeus and begat a precocious Lamp Princess. Well, that's the point. The amazonians do things. A lamp does not. A half assed lady character does not. It merely exists and is moved around at the behest of other characters. Princess Leia couldn't be a lamp, since a lamp could not rescue the heroes moments after herself being rescued. The complete non entity of a female lead in Jurassic World could totally be swapped with a lamp, and the only change would be that it would need help smearing itself in dino poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 05:45
|
|
|
I mean I thought the woman in Jurassic World was a little one-dimensional but I'm pretty sure her nephews and Chris Pratt would notice if they were interacting with a lamp all this time. It's possible I'm thinking of this too literally. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 05:51
|
|
|
Schwarzwald posted:Diana is the God Killer. I'm happy to be proven wrong though. Mr. Apollo fucked around with this message at 06:03 on Jun 19, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 05:52
|
|
|
BrianWilly posted:I mean I thought the woman in Jurassic World was a little one-dimensional but I'm pretty sure her nephews and Chris Pratt would notice if they were interacting with a lamp all this time.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 05:56
|
|
|
Schwarzwald posted:Diana is the God Killer. You know, she did give Doomsday the blade that killed Superman...
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 06:26
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:WW had a spectacular 3rd weekend, only dropping 30%.  http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/c...ad/Man-of-Steel It ain't slowing down 
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 06:41
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:WW had a spectacular 3rd weekend, only dropping 30%. Snowglobe of Doom posted:It's looking like it'll overtake BvS sooner than I expected ... This is amazong  [edit] I was going to correct that typo, but nah.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 06:46
|
|
|
It's a solid movie, but more than that, it's a case of right place, right time.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 06:51
|
|
|
teagone posted:This is amazong It'll also overtake Deadpool pretty soon and it's closing in on Guardian Of The Galaxy Vol. 2 pretty fast. After that we'll see if it can catch Spider-Man, Captain America: Civil War and Iron Man 3, which would make it the 5th most successful superhero film in the domestic front with only Avengers, The Dark Knight, Avengers: Age of Ultron and The Dark Knight Rises ahead of it. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 07:10
|
|
|
I like how overtaking BvS is treated like an actual goal.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 07:14
|
|
|
Tenzarin posted:I like how overtaking BvS is treated like an actual goal. If you're talking about movies making money then why wouldn't it be?
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 07:26
|
|
|
Tenzarin posted:I like how overtaking BvS is treated like an actual goal. The goal of a film, any tentpole/blockbuster film, is not only to be critically successful but also commercially successful. That's the movie business. So, yeah. Wonder Woman clearly is a success among fans and critics, so why wouldn't overtaking another film's box office returns, especially one in its own franchise/series, be an actual goal? [edit] There are exceptions though. Like Transformers. Their goal is to be complete poo poo but still have large box office returns. teagone fucked around with this message at 07:33 on Jun 19, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 07:30
|
|
|
He thinks because he didn't like Beavis and it got slammed by critics that it didn't make a lot of money. However, it did
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 07:34
|
|
|
Wonder Woman was never expected to outperform Batman v Superman, especially by WB. Its budget was $100 million lower than BvS and there's practically zero merchandise out there compared to the tidal wave of toys and branded snack products they rolled out for BvS. They backed BvS way way way harder than they backed WW. I was in one of the bigger department stores in my local CBD last week and they have a huge toy department and they still had aisles and aisles of BvS toys and still had lifesize Batfleck and Superman statues as part of their display:  Someone in the toy department had tried to set up a Wonder Woman display up the back of the store and only managed to fill 2/3 of a shelf with WW toys. Most of them were from DC's generic range and the only DCEU WW figure they had was from BvS. They had zero toys specific to the Wonder Woman film.  For some reason WB just didn't bother trying to cash in on WW. I know they released action figures and toys for the film but I never saw any, whereas there was no avoiding the BvS toys. teagone posted:The goal of a film, any tentpole/blockbuster film Wonder Woman isn't a tentpole film. BvS and Justice League are the tentpoles in the franchise, they had much bigger budgets and masses and masses of tie in merchandise. WW is the hammock between the tentpoles which means they expected the popularity of the bigger films to carry it along. DeimosRising posted:He thinks because he didn't like Beavis and it got slammed by critics that it didn't make a lot of money. However, it did No one said that BvS didn't make a lot of money Snowglobe of Doom fucked around with this message at 07:56 on Jun 19, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 07:49
|
|
|
Snowglobe of Doom posted:No one said that BvS didn't make a lot of money Then why wouldn't Wonder Woman overtaking it be an "actual goal"?
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 08:02
|
|
|
LesterGroans posted:Then why wouldn't Wonder Woman overtaking it be an "actual goal"? Because it's a wonderful surprise, not what the film set out to do.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 08:06
|
|
|
MrJacobs posted:Because it's a wonderful surprise, not what the film set out to do. Sure, if that's what you believe Tenzarin meant.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 08:09
|
|
|
Snowglobe of Doom posted:Wonder Woman isn't a tentpole film. BvS and Justice League are the tentpoles in the franchise, they had much bigger budgets and masses and masses of tie in merchandise. WW is the hammock between the tentpoles which means they expected the popularity of the bigger films to carry it along. Uhh, what? Every DCEU film is a tentpole film for WB. WW is one of their Summer tentpoles, along with Dunkirk.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 08:17
|
|
|
LesterGroans posted:Sure, if that's what you believe Tenzarin meant. I'm not exactly sure what Tenzarin meant .... I was trying to use the box office numbers as an indicator of popularity as measured by how many people turned up to watch the movie. I think it's pretty funny that Batman + Superman + Wonder Woman = a truckload of tickets sold but if you subtract Batman and Superman from the equation then you apparently end up selling even more tickets.  teagone posted:Uhh, what? Every DCEU film is a tentpole film for WB. It's one of their Summer tentpoles, along with Dunkirk. I was going by the technical definitions of 'tentpole' and 'hammock'. The amount of merchandise the film is expected to sell is usually a big part of what makes a films a tentpole these days. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tent-pole_(entertainment) Snowglobe of Doom fucked around with this message at 08:20 on Jun 19, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 08:18
|
|
|
Snowglobe of Doom posted:For some reason WB just didn't bother trying to cash in on WW.  Ah yes for some reason she's a female character, very mysterious she's a female character, what could it possibly be SHE'S A(actually, Ike Perlmutter doesn't run the WB so I dunno what their stance on such things would be lol)
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 08:37
|
|
|
Snowglobe of Doom posted:I was going by the technical definitions of 'tentpole' and 'hammock'. The amount of merchandise the film is expected to sell is usually a big part of what makes a films a tentpole these days. Except every news outlet has described Wonder Woman as a summer tentpole film, because it is. I've seen plenty of WW merchandise out there. Maybe not as much as BvS, but it has its share. And, sort of relevant, if you read Uproxx's article about WB not promoting WW enough, Vanity Fair debunked that: quote:“You Aren’t Imagining It, ‘Wonder Woman’ Really Isn’t Being Well Promoted” reads a headline for a Donna Dickens piece on Uproxx comparing the number of trailers and promotional videos for Wonder Woman relative to last summer’s Suicide Squad and next fall’s Justice League. “The lack of marketing worries me,” writes Shana O’Neil at SyfyWire. “It worries a lot of people who are invested in the success of female superheroes in film and television.” [edit] Also relevant, Bloomberg had an article estimating Wonder Woman movie toy sales to bring in 100 million in revenue—less than many of the traditional male superhero tie-ins but still a significant amount of revenue. Article was published on June 5th https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-06-05/wonder-woman-s-secret-power-bridging-the-boy-girl-toy-gap Here's a choice quote: quote:At a Detroit area Walmart last week, Wonder Woman dolls and accessories outnumbered the collection of Spider-man stuff. Clothing items were displayed throughout the store and products even included ready-to-bake cookies from Pillsbury. Target, GAP, Kohl’s and Amazon.com will also carry Wonder Woman merchandise; globally, the product line will include themed underwear, camping gear and home décor. Walmart led the merchandising blitz for WW by launching several toy lines in their stores back in March. And WB/DC also launched an online store specifically to sell Wonder Woman-centric merchandise online: https://wonderwomanshop.com teagone fucked around with this message at 09:07 on Jun 19, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 08:41
|
|
|
teagone posted:And, sort of relevant, if you read Uproxx's article about WB not promoting WW enough, Vanity Fair debunked that: $3 million on TV ads for WW is a pittance. WB dropped $28m on TV ads for BvS and there were an additional $18m of ads paid for by sponsors like Dodge and General Mills and all the toy companies that brought the total ad budget for BvS to $46 million. Fox spent over $23m buying ads for Deadpool. WB also didn't put that much $$$ behind advertising Suicide Squad compared to other movies, it was a cheap move for Vanity Fair to draw that comparison. teagone posted:
For a start you'd expect a superhero movie that had just come out to have more merch on the shelves than a superhero movie that wasn't in theatres for another month yet, especially since Marvel has been downplaying Spider-Man, Fantastic Four and X-Men toys for the last few years. I'd be interested to know if there was more Wonder Woman toys than Batman or Superman toys in those stores, the article very carefully didn't mention that. (The various stores I visited last week had a more Spider-Man: Homecoming toys than Wonder Woman movie toys but they had more BvS and Avengers toys than either.) Snowglobe of Doom fucked around with this message at 09:15 on Jun 19, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 09:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 22:10 |
|
|
Snowglobe of Doom posted:$3 million on TV ads for WW is a pittance. WB dropped $28m on TV ads for BvS and there were an additional $18m of ads paid for by sponsors like Dodge and General Mills and all the toy companies that brought the total ad budget for BvS to $46 million. Fox spent over $23m buying ads for Deadpool. Those estimates were 5 weeks out of the film's release. AdAge reported that, again based on iSpot.tv estimates, the total amount WB has dropped on TV ads for WW to this point is about $24.8 million http://adage.com/article/media/s-a-critic/309360/ quote:According to iSpot.tv estimates, the studio thus far has invested $24.8 million in national TV inventory, which is within shooting range of the initial outlay for Warner/DC's 2016 release, "Batman vs Superman: Dawn of Justice." The comparable TV spend for that film, which introduced Gal Gadot in the Wonder Woman role, was $29 million.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 09:17
|
|