Quote from: The Laughing Fish on Sat, 2 Jan 2021, 03:36Anyone who expected such consequences in a DC film that was tailored to meet mass audience appeal is kidding themselves. After the overblown backlash people raged for MOS and BvS, and how WB butchered JL in an attempt to satisfy current popular tastes, there was no way WB would dare show kids in danger in a Wonder Woman film that was made to be "fun".Weren't kids shown to be have danger towards them in Justice League? And doesn't WW84 show a nuclear strike about hit with a kid standing in the middle of it?
QuoteBut then again, who really knows what mainstream audiences want? They bitched about Batman and Superman killing villains, but never made a single peep when Diana did the same in her first solo outing. We heard of media narratives that the DCEU needs to brighten up to "catch up to the MCU", but WW84 doesn't appear to satisfy that many people, nor did Josstice League before. And the films that did well critically didn't do that great at the box office.Why can't some have different tastes for different characters, in different contexts, that they may think are developed differently?
Quote from: The Dark Knight on Sat, 2 Jan 2021, 02:47There's a desire to fill in the timeline, and usually I would be supportive of that. But not here. The original intention of WonderGal was this:Why does struggling in the path of a hero have to mean giving up for a hundred years? It may not be a lot for her, but it can be for others. Why should I care about a character who doesn't care about humanity, because her boyfriend died and she doesn't like that humans do bad things, as if she has the right to judge us?
"A hundred years ago I walked away from mankind; from a century of horrors."
That statement is cut and dried, but it was deviated from because it's not 'heroic'. I am not interested in pure heroism. I am interested in the struggle people endure while they're on the path of the hero. The whole point of BvS and ZSJL is that Superman woke them all up with his sacrifice. Whether or not they wanted to emerge, the situation demanded it. Superman was not the first hero (that was Diana), but he was the most important. BvS is the true starting point for the DCEU. It's the modern day. It's the grand reveal of not just Wonder Woman, but all the other superpowered beings that followed her.
WW84 may have some decent aspects to it, but the basis for the movie is counterproductive in the context of an established shared universe. The BvS comment of walking away from mankind should have been left alone. What is 100 years for someone who barely ages? If the lack of heroism aspect was too much to swallow, they could've had Diana return to Themyscira during that time.
I think Superman waking them up with his sacrifice is dumb and nonsense. People die in acts of protection of others all the time. What's the difference between Superman doing it and anyone else doing it? Superman's not more important or special than other normal humans. Also, Diana jumped back into the fight, before Superman "died" in that movie. So, I don't think his sacrifice is a big wake up for her, if she's willing to help before that.
Maybe they could've, but none of the movies, Snyder's included, has had that written in them, as far as I think was presented on screen, so far.
QuoteIf that is the mentality of Jenkins, I'd rather she be cut loose. Snyder has the right approach to the characters in the modern context, as Matt Reeves seem to.Who says she should be cut loose and who decides who has the right approach?