|
Equeen posted:So are you purposely ignoring the fact that she's Jewish or what? Yeah, she definitely checks a lot of Western beauty standard boxes, but it's not very often that you see an olive-skinned foreign actress star in a big American blockbuster. Israelis are Western, white and European up until the time comes to score some points.
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2017 20:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 22:36 |
|
|
I’m waiting for someone to present the argument that WW is a step forward other than “She’s inspiring because the movie was so successful” or “The movie was so successful because she’s inspiring.” Extra points if your response doesn’t include “It has a message of love conquers all.”
gohmak fucked around with this message at 23:00 on Aug 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2017 20:54
|
|
|
gohmak posted:I’m waiting for someone to present the argument that WW is a step forward other than “She’s inspiring because the movie was so successful” or “The movie was so successful because she’s inspiring.” The film was directed by a woman, and starred a woman and made a whole bunch of money.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2017 21:00
|
|
|
Made a whole bunch of money for whom, though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2017 21:04
|
|
|
gohmak posted:I’m waiting for someone to present the argument that WW is a step forward other than “She’s inspiring because the movie was so successful” or “The movie was so successful because she’s inspiring.” She is inspiring and also the movie is successful. Ferrinus posted:Made a whole bunch of money for whom, though. Youre right, a true step forward would be everyone doing this movie pro bono and no charge for admission at theatres. MariusLecter fucked around with this message at 21:07 on Aug 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2017 21:05
|
|
|
MariusLecter posted:She is inspiring and also the movie is successful. I can't wait to see the Wonder Woman
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2017 21:06
|
|
|
MariusLecter posted:Youre right, a true step forward would be everyone doing this movie pro bono and no charge for admission at theatres. drat... I guess I've got no choice but to celebrate the continued concentration of wealth in the Koch brothers' hands.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2017 21:10
|
|
|
MariusLecter posted:Youre right, a true step forward would be everyone doing this movie pro bono and no charge for admission at theatres. Some theaters do get hosed by the companies on the first week of the movies when they ask for like 80% or some other high amount for ticket sales. If your interested in knowing more, you can do a google search why you should buy a soda at the movie theater. One thing though they get to keep operating costs from the tickets so I guess that's one thing if you like having a run down theater at one point. Tenzarin fucked around with this message at 21:14 on Aug 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2017 21:11
|
|
|
gohmak posted:I’m waiting for someone to present the argument that WW is a step forward other than “She’s inspiring because the movie was so successful” or “The movie was so successful because she’s inspiring.” I've presented my argument to you that is neither of those things. I've been waiting for a decent response as to why you see Wonder Woman, both the film and character, being an idol to little girls is something you find problematic because I refuse to believe you legit think it's because she's a beautiful white woman, as you have stated twice now. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt here. But if that's really the case... teagone fucked around with this message at 21:17 on Aug 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2017 21:14
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:Made a whole bunch of money for whom, though. Who cares. This film showed Hollywood that women can and should direct big budget action films.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2017 21:16
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:drat... I guess I've got no choice but to celebrate the continued concentration of wealth in the Koch brothers' hands. Yes, the movie is good and a lot of people can like it without it being literally Transformers 5. Good post.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2017 21:19
|
|
|
MariusLecter posted:Yes, the movie is good and a lot of people can like it without it being literally Transformers 5. Good post. What the gently caress? I can't even construct a shamelessly disingenuous way to get from my post to this one. What do you mean?
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2017 21:24
|
|
|
not my female action hero lead
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2017 21:48
|
|
|
CelticPredator posted:This film showed Hollywood that women can and should direct big budget action films. So the movie amounts to a message to corporations to be more "nice". The fascinating thing is that no one is appealing to anything the movie actually says, just its marketing value and how Iconic Wonder Woman is.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2017 23:05
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2017 23:07
|
|
|
[quote="“teagone”" post="“475773870”"] I’ve presented my argument to you that is neither of those things. I’ve been waiting for a decent response as to why you see Wonder Woman, both the film and character, being an idol to little girls is something you find problematic because I refuse to believe you legit think it’s because she’s a beautiful white woman, as you have stated twice now. I’m giving you the benefit of the doubt here. But if that’s really the case... [/quote] No you haven’t. I presented that all superheroes are problematic idols including those that are white, skinny and commit violence in a bikini. It’s not helped that the movie was mediocre yet heralded because of its success as an archetype to emulate. In that sense I agree with Cameron that this movie is regressive.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2017 23:11
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:The fascinating thing is that no one is appealing to anything the movie actually says, just its marketing value and how Iconic Wonder Woman is. teagone posted:Wonder Woman 2017 in comparison has a lot of heart and the film's/character's core message of "love conquers all" is about as wholesome as you can get. With all the dreary real world poo poo going on right now, a movie like Wonder Woman is a great thing to have around imo.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2017 23:12
|
|
|
The movie is not actually wholesome. It's a rather transgressive affair about World War I being influenced by Greek deities, where the hero talks about love conquering all while about to kill a god. The movie is somewhat banal for such a fantastical premise because of it's direction, so you might have just mistaken that banality for wholesomeness. So not appealing to what the movie says.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2017 23:24
|
|
|
Best part about wonder woman is after she thinks she stopped the war, there's this quiet moment where she's just trying to shake off the adrenaline of the moment.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2017 23:25
|
|
|
gohmak posted:I presented that all superheroes are problematic idols including those that are white, skinny and commit violence in a bikini. It’s not helped that the movie was mediocre yet heralded because of its success as an archetype to emulate. In that sense I agree with Cameron that this movie is regressive. You're singling out Wonder Woman. Regardless of whatever you thought of the film, because that doesn't matter, I don't see what the problem is with Wonder Woman's costume and her fighting for a just and righteous cause, let alone her being white, according to you (which is moot since she's not white). Further, she's not fighting for revenge, and she's not some world-weary, jaded hero either. Sure she's naive, but her heroism doesn't come from a place rooted in pain or anger or regret or fear. She's arguably one of the most genuine heroes on film who was already a hero before she even knew it, and that alone puts her ahead of a lot of cinematic superheroes/protagonists imo. [edit] BravestOfTheLamps posted:The movie is not actually wholesome. It's a rather transgressive affair about World War I being influenced by Greek deities, where the hero talks about love conquering all while about to kill a god. The movie is somewhat banal for such a fantastical premise because of it's direction, so you might have just mistaken that banality for wholesomeness. I mean, sure this is true, if you view the film through a pessimistic lens. Diana's character challenges you not to though. teagone fucked around with this message at 23:35 on Aug 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2017 23:30
|
|
|
teagone posted:I mean, sure this is true, if you view the film through a pessimistic lens. Diana's character challenges you not to though. Diana's character is so crestfallen from her stint as Wonder Woman that she stops being her after the war.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2017 23:41
|
|
|
Schwarzwald posted:Diana's character is so crestfallen from her stint as Wonder Woman that she stops being her after the war. Are you referring to the whole "I walked away from mankind" line in BvS not lining up with how the film ended? Because Patty divulged on that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2017 23:47
|
|
|
teagone posted:Are you referring to the whole "I walked away from mankind" line in BvS not lining up with how the film ended? Because Patty divulged on that. I mean Diana stopped being Wonder Woman for a century between the two films, a fact Patty Jenkin's doesn't dispute.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2017 23:52
|
|
|
Schwarzwald posted:I mean Diana stopped being Wonder Woman for a century between the two films, a fact Patty Jenkin's doesn't dispute. True, but since Jenkins doesn't dispute that Diana may have abandoned her duty as Wonder Woman after her origin film, we won't know if she did for sure until we see what happens in the WW sequel (rumored to take place in the 80s apparently). There's a good amount of time between WW and BvS after all.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2017 00:01
|
|
|
gohmak posted:I’m waiting for someone to present the argument that WW is a step forward other than “She’s inspiring because the movie was so successful” or “The movie was so successful because she’s inspiring.” In the most general sense, Wonder Woman places its female superheroic power fantasy on an equal footing with other male superheroic power fantasies. It gives a female superhero the same thematic and narrative power as a male superhero, which is so completely rare that I will go ahead and suggest that it has literally never happened in mainstream cinema before. Sarah Connor is a cool character, but she's honestly barely a power fantasy and not remotely a superhero. Katniss Everdeen is not a superhero. There has been no female equivalent to Superman or Batman or Spider-Man or Iron Man in theaters until Wonder Woman happened. Now, if you have problems with superheroic power fantasies in this general sense then that's your own personal issue to work through, but the reason this movie takes a step forward for the genre, and thereby cinematic representation in general, is that it does this thing that virtually no other film does. The very definition of equality in this context is giving female characters the same opportunities and footing as male characters. The fact is that there has been this boys-only playhouse for a while in the cinema scene and now a girl has broken down the door. Again, I'll say that if you just don't like superheroes in general then you obviously won't like that there's also a powerful female superhero alongside all the other powerful male superheroes, but that's not actually an argument against the fact that this film takes this significant step forward. In the fields of equality and representation, it honestly matters little if you personally don't like the genre it takes place in or even the specific character being represented. The whole point is that everyone is allowed the shot to be just as good or just as lovely as the people who already occupy these spaces. I hate pretentious indie romances and I hate Brokeback Mountain for sinking into an actual litany of pretentious indie romance pratfalls, but I would never refute that putting a same-sex romance into this high-profile Hollywood wheelhouse that usually censors such content was a big step forward in terms of same-sex representation and culture. On top of which, Wonder Woman shares the distinction of having its title hero draw her power and motivation from primarily female sources, female mentors, female upbringing, female relationships. This is also something that Mad Max: Fury road did for its co-lead character which I believe to be a huge part of why the film gained such renown in feminist discourse, because this is also something extremely rare. Women raising other women at all is not a theme you see often in media and literature, much less women teaching other women to fight, to be combatants, to be heroes. The very conception of DC Comics' Amazon race is rife with feminist ideology and concepts, and it was good to see much of that represented in the film as well.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2017 00:06
|
|
|
In other words, it's about integrating people into the liberal-capitalist order.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2017 00:18
|
|
|
It's pretty damning that your wrote six paragraphs about why Wonder Woman was a step forward and never once talked about the contents of the film.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2017 00:25
|
|
|
Schwarzwald posted:It's pretty damning that your wrote six paragraphs about why Wonder Woman was a step forward and never once talked about the contents of the film. What's worse is that by his description, Wonder Woman's character boils down to the fact that she is a woman, as opposed to a man, and that she associates with women.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2017 00:31
|
|
|
Schwarzwald posted:It's pretty damning that your wrote six paragraphs about why Wonder Woman was a step forward and never once talked about the contents of the film. Except the whole post sums up and generalizes the contents of the film in response to "why the film is a step forward."  You've some how managed to ignore one explicit example provided in the last paragraph too.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2017 00:37
|
|
|
I think Diana being a woman who has studied sex and is genuinely interested in it, and not in some awful anime harem girl way, is a pretty good step forward. And this is in the context of superhero movies where men themselves are often shown having very immature/childish senses of sexuality. Also, the scene where she's so happy to see a baby, not necessarily for any maternal reason, but because she's literally never seen a baby. It was a funny twist, and shows Wonder Woman having a confidence that means she does what she wants even if someone might view her as a feminine stereotype as a result. And I think that kind of confidence is exactly what Jenkins is arguing with Cameron about; it's not just that Patti thinks a character can be any kind of woman, but that Wonder Woman herself thinks that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2017 00:43
|
|
|
This is so good. BrianWilly posted:In the most general sense, Wonder Woman places its female superheroic power fantasy on an equal footing with other male superheroic power fantasies. It gives a female superhero the same thematic and narrative power as a male superhero, which is so completely rare that I will go ahead and suggest that it has literally never happened in mainstream cinema before. Halle Berry was Cat Woman. Jennifer Garner was Electra. They both had their own movies. Before you said no one saw these movies, I'll say, I did see them both. Halle Berry are you kidding, have you seen Swordfish? BrianWilly posted:Again, I'll say that if you just don't like superheroes in general then you obviously won't like that there's also a powerful female superhero alongside all the other powerful male superheroes, but that's not actually an argument against the fact that this film takes this significant step forward. Did you not see X-Men: The Last Stand? It's almost all about the Pheonix for the wrong reasons. Scarlet Witch, so strong they have to keep her under house arrest in Civil War. Tenzarin fucked around with this message at 01:47 on Aug 27, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2017 01:04
|
|
|
teagone posted:Except the whole post sums up and generalizes the contents of the film in response to "why the film is a step forward." The first five paragraphs do not discuss the contents of the film at all except that the action lead was a woman, and if you believe that "sums up and generalizes the contents of the film," then we have gone from pretty damning to significantly damning. The final paragraph states that the film features women in the position of teachers, mentors, combatants and heroes, and that women are able to form meaningful relationships with each other. (Just like men!) To the effect that's a step forward, it means that blockbuster films have finally caught up with 60's era second-wave feminism.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2017 01:34
|
|
|
Schwarzwald posted:The final paragraph states that the film features women in the position of teachers, mentors, combatants and heroes, and that women are able to form meaningful relationships with each other. (Just like men!) To the effect that's a step forward, it means that blockbuster films have finally caught up with 60's era second-wave feminism. Yeah, exactly. That's the state of blockbuster films, that Wonder Woman, which is not an especially challenging film in terms of feminism, is still a step forward -- or in other words, better than the rest of the dreck out there.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2017 01:53
|
|
|
Schwarzwald posted:It's pretty damning that your wrote six paragraphs about why Wonder Woman was a step forward and never once talked about the contents of the film. It's not simply that the action lead was a woman, but also that this woman action lead is placed on an equal footing with comparable male characters in a narrative space that has almost always been filled by those male characters. That's kind of important when the topic of conversation is literally "how does this film affect female characters." Tenzarin posted:Halle Berry was Cat Woman. Jennifer Garner was Electra. They both had their own movies. Before you said no one saw these movies, I'll say, I did see them both. Halle Berry are you kidding, have you seen Swordfish? I will grant you that the Halle Berry Catwoman is a bona fide superhero character if you'll grant that no human man, woman, or child ended up being able to relate to this character or her narrative on any conceivable level, all but blunting the film's ability to affect representative progress. Also one of the first things she does with her powers is to steal jewelry and literally ends the film by saying "I'll do whatever I want, good or bad," sooo let's call her an antihero at best. Phoenix was a bloody supervillain in The Last Stand who ends up being crazy and fridged, and the movie was actually about Wolverine. No offense, but this is the worst example you could have possibly come up with. (Please do not take that as a challenge to come up with an even worse example)
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2017 01:53
|
|
|
This is because superhero movies by and large represent a significant regression in fascist power fantasy from even 80s action movies. When faced with the easily foreseen infantilization of American action cinema Cameron, at the top of his game, stopped making them. True Lies is his final entry into that particular genre of the oeuvre. VAGENDA OF MANOCIDE fucked around with this message at 02:06 on Aug 27, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2017 02:03
|
|
|
Am I the only one to watch Supergirl 1984? Red Sonja?
gohmak fucked around with this message at 02:25 on Aug 27, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2017 02:13
|
|
|
BrianWilly posted:We all know every time someone says "I'm just waiting for someone to explain blah blah dufk" is just a transparent attempt at provocative concern-trolling with no actual desire to engage with any responses, but I'll give this a shot as an answer to anyone who's actually interested in the topic. I have nothing to add, other than to say that this is a really good post.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2017 02:28
|
|
|
BrianWilly posted:you'll grant that no human man, woman, or child ended up being able to relate to this character or her narrative on any conceivable level, all but blunting the film's ability to affect representative progress. And little girls are going to be able to relate to a god created by Zeus raised on an island of Amazons?
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2017 02:42
|
|
|
The trouble folks like BrianWilly are running into - the ideological limitation - is that they are talking about characterization in a way that is divorced from socio-economic and political context. "The very definition of equality in this context is giving female characters the same opportunities and footing as male characters". BrianWilly (re)defines equality here to mean equality under the free market, so female brand identities are now freed to compete with male brand identities in the marketplace. And this means both the literal marketplace and the so-called 'free marketplace of ideas'. Of course this not equality at all - and therefore not actually feminism. It's more accurately culturism - focussed on 'women's culture' as something somehow outside the scope of politics proper. This misinterprets 'Wonder Woman' as an expression that women are wonderful, when of course the title actually means that this particular woman does wonderful things as a contrast to normal women. (And note also that Diana has not yet been given this title in any of the films.) If you want to look at Diana as a character, the entire film is summarized by its double frame story. First, the entire story is expressly a myth narrated to us by Diana: we see the Earth as an abstracted cartoon globe, and then zoom in to show that the world is actually 'complicated'. Then, after establishing that the nature of the world is subjective, Diana the narrator segues into the story of Diana the museum curator, who has a photograph delivered to her by the hired goons of a shadowy corporation. This photograph then reminds her of the importance of self-sacrifice and Diana the curator morphs into a cartoon superhero. In other words, the entire story is both literally and figuratively brought to you by Wayne Enterprises, and Diana the narrator has an ambiguous role - somewhere between a historian and a corporate spokesperson.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2017 02:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 22:36 |
|
|
It's easy: Wonder Woman is good in that she allows more people to idly fantasize about smashing walls and crushing skulls with supernatural strength, but bad in that she fails to realize that war is a racket.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2017 02:52
|
|