|
I feel like DC has a whole thing explaining only some super heroes have true super strength and a majority have tactile energy manipulation powers and that that goes with speed force for "actually if you point out why the power wouldn't work like that you just don't know the deep lore of it"
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2021 18:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 3, 2024 16:49 |
|
|
I assume it's like how Diana is immune to electricity because she's Zeus's daughter, but they respect the audience enough not to give you in-movie exposition about it and trust you'll figure that out. The first movie tells us Wonder Woman is an animated statue and, simply enough, in WW84 you can see that she temporarily turns the kids into dummies for the bit where she uses them to break her fall.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2021 19:17
|
|
|
Were there this many complaints about the lack of physical realism in Shazam? I mean there's always a few weirdos but in my memory that film wasn't scrutinized in this manner to such an extent. Strange
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2021 19:37
|
|
|
Are those rockets usually heavy enough and fired with enough force that one could drag a human behind it for several meters without changing course? That seems even more far fatched than Diana's impact
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2021 19:50
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:I feel like DC has a whole thing explaining only some super heroes have true super strength and a majority have tactile energy manipulation powers and that that goes with speed force for "actually if you point out why the power wouldn't work like that you just don't know the deep lore of it" Marvel does it from time to time too, mostly in the context of mutant powers (Cyclops actually has portals to an alternate dimension where his eyes would be! And Ice Man is actually insanely powerful, he's just lazy and uncreative so he makes snow balls a lot), although other heroes occasionally get in on the fun (I think I've read all his appearances and I'm not entirely sure what's going on with The Sentry, but that's probably be design). The underlying issue is that Marvel's heroes generally don't top out at "functionally omnipotent," and where they do get that powerful, collateral damage is part of the design.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2021 20:02
|
|
|
Blood Boils posted:Were there this many complaints about the lack of physical realism in Shazam? It's not that strange, people liked SHAZAM.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2021 20:08
|
|
|
Hobo Clown posted:Are those rockets usually heavy enough and fired with enough force that one could drag a human behind it for several meters without changing course? That seems even more far fatched than Diana's impact  Blood Boils posted:Were there this many complaints about the lack of physical realism in Shazam?
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2021 20:59
|
|
|
I think it's because the first WW movie was so much better compared to WW84.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2021 21:10
|
|
|
Blood Boils posted:Were there this many complaints about the lack of physical realism in Shazam? Physical realism isn’t the problem, it’s that it all just looks like poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2021 23:55
|
|
|
action scenes not being realistic is fine. it's just that the movie's not doing a good job at selling the audience on the fantasy of its action. While I poo poo on Snyder a lot for various reason, his movies are actually pretty good at this. The Superman vs Zodd fight isn't even remotely realistic or even trying to be. It's warped and exaggerated to create a larger-than-life sense of speed and impact. You never think "wow Superman just fell off a building shouldn't he be, like, super dead" because the movie's spectacle has thoroughly sold you on the idea that Henry Cavill can dish out a punch strong enough to shatter the sound barrier and take one just as easily. Wonder Woman slamming into two kids is not that. It'd be one thing if she just swooped down and grabbed them but she catches them and then slams to the ground really really hard while they're in her arms. not just  "well realistically that would be a really sudden and harsh stop," no, the movie has her slam to the ground loudly and then roll a few times with two small children in her arms. "Children are fragile" is a very basic truth that every single person watching this movie is going to know instinctually. so it causes a bit of confusion to a viewer when they just walk away unscathed from a really heavy impact.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2021 00:21
|
|
|
Augus posted:Wonder Woman slamming into two kids is not that. It'd be one thing if she just swooped down and grabbed them but she catches them and then slams to the ground really really hard while they're in her arms.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2021 00:26
|
|
|
Also to save the children who are in danger because they are playing in the road, she grabs them and … holds them down in the middle of the road right in front of the oncoming vehicles.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2021 04:31
|
|
|
th3t00t posted:But It's not like I'm some DC fanboy who left gushing reviews for the other DCU films and then let his latent misogyny boil to the surface in his WW84 critique. This is the first DCU movie I've seen, because I've been avoiding the DCU because they all look really bad! I'm sure I'd have just as many criticisms of the DCU films featuring male super heroes as WW84, that is, if I was actually forced into watching them. This is your first DC movie?! DUDE Watch swamp thing
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2021 05:11
|
|
|
Blood Boils posted:This is your first DC movie?! Swamp Thing is not a DCU movie in the way WW84 is, but nevertheless this is solid advice.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2021 05:26
|
|
|
Splint Chesthair posted:Swamp Thing is not a DCU movie in the way WW84 is, but nevertheless this is solid advice. It's canon  Constantine too!
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2021 06:04
|
|
|
Mr. Apollo posted:I think it's because the first WW movie was so much better compared to WW84. Eh WW1 is boring and kinda hosed up WW84 was a fun mess
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2021 09:51
|
|
|
Mr. Apollo posted:I think it's because the first WW movie was so much better compared to WW84.  The first WW movie was flawed and the liberal white feminism was there, but I could ignore it. WW84 had worst action scenes, a worst plot, and just bad pacing. At the end of movie, I actually felt kinda demoralized lol. Jenkins had a great opportunity to at least try to meaningfully explore the 80's, female friendship, and (if the WB weren't cowards) queerness. And... she didn't! Just a weird, boring movie that had nothing to say except a woman is only empowered if she's white, conventionally pretty, well-off, and cishet.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2021 19:59
|
|
|
All I can remember from the first movie is the excessively awkward campfire scene where all the characters explain themselves.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2021 21:29
|
|
|
Equeen posted:
The first Wonder Woman was just kind of bland like an MCU origin film with moderately better action scenes, in contrast Wonder Woman 84 was a shining diamond of inexplicable stupidity, I honestly enjoyed it alot more just for being such a weird and baffling experience. How did this get past however many studio commitees and test audiences these things go through?? Why did anyone think any of the plot elements in the film were a good idea? Why does the action choreography look worse than an 80s sequel film?!? It's like a perfect case of how being extravagently bad is in many ways better than being blandly mediocre
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2021 23:24
|
|
|
"Blandly mediocre" is straight up historical revisionism of the first movie, lol. Especially in comparison to this one, which made a fight between a demigod in golden eagle armor and a literal catwoman listless and muddled.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2021 01:17
|
|
|
McSpanky posted:"Blandly mediocre" is straight up historical revisionism of the first movie, lol. Especially in comparison to this one, which made a fight between a demigod in golden eagle armor and a literal catwoman listless and muddled. I said it had nice fight scene, but it was a pretty paint by numbers superhero origin story film with Gal Gadot as a lead
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2021 01:23
|
|
|
McSpanky posted:"Blandly mediocre" is straight up historical revisionism of the first movie, lol. Especially in comparison to this one, which made a fight between a demigod in golden eagle armor and a literal catwoman listless and muddled. This is a great point. Especially considering the toxic cisheat bro stuff I've been seeing about this movie. One question, do you think there are any similarities between this and Dr. Mabuse The Gambler Part 1? I can see a lot in terms of the plot synopses, but I'm looking for that goon opinion before I jump in.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2021 11:03
|
|
|
Wonder Woman had restraint in comparison to Marvel movies, there's absolutely no way they'd be as subtle about No Man's Land as the movie was.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2021 16:47
|
|
|
McSpanky posted:"Blandly mediocre" is straight up historical revisionism of the first movie, lol. Especially in comparison to this one, which made a fight between a demigod in golden eagle armor and a literal catwoman listless and muddled. Did you fall asleep for the last 10 minutes of that movie? It's a paint-by-numbers CGI fight.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2021 02:00
|
|
|
No, and that "paint by numbers" fight still has thematic significance and a payoff that isn't a slap in the face to the entire disadvantaged world.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 11:10
|
|
|
I do like that Ares literally uses tank treads as a weapon- that any weapon of war is a weapon of his. It's understated compared to what it could be, but I remember the final fight being fun enough. Also did like that Steve Trevor is "If that is who I think it is..." that all along, while he's never believed that Ares was behind the whole thing, he's not unwilling to believe that he's involved, which makes sense when you're recruiting a demigod to consider your enemy may have countermeasures.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 15:51
|
|
|
McSpanky posted:No, and that "paint by numbers" fight still has thematic significance and a payoff that isn't a slap in the face to the entire disadvantaged world. The payoff to Wonder Woman 2017 is you shouldn't seek peace or even value it, because the guy who says he wants it is actually a devious manipulator who must be destroyed with a big laser blast. Consider the possibility that both movies are bad.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2021 07:56
|
|
|
That seems a rather uncharitable reading of WW1. Was it not the case that both sides were willing to accept the armistice until Ares provided the supervillain of Germany the means with which to reject it for total victory?
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2021 16:49
|
|
|
Prince Myshkin posted:The payoff to Wonder Woman 2017 is you shouldn't seek peace or even value it, because the guy who says he wants it is actually a devious manipulator who must be destroyed with a big laser blast. do you know what World War I was actually fought over
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2021 16:56
|
|
|
KVeezy3 posted:That seems a rather uncharitable reading of WW1. Was it not the case that both sides were willing to accept the armistice until Ares provided the supervillain of Germany the means with which to reject it for total victory? The whole point is also that the armistice in question is implied to be the leadup to the Treaty of Versailles, which pretty much guaranteed WW2 down the line.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2021 06:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 3, 2024 16:49 |
|
|
WW84 is one half about how capitalist accumulation and military expansion is destroying the world but all of gal gadots stuff is about the director coming to terms with her dads death and having him and wonderwoman tell her to let him go, then at the end admitting to the audience that she still cant
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2021 01:08
|
|