Wonder Woman 1984: Discussion, Set Leaks & Spoilers #WW84

[I'm a Fish]

I finally gave up on waiting for theatres to open here (heck, I'm even unsure if it will be shown in theatres here ever), so foul-shared it.

Given the various reviews and reviewers panning it, including from some fan critics I really trust, I was pleasantly surprised. I'm sure there is stuff that won't look as good as I mull over it more, and it lacked the emotional oomph that the first movie carried, but there was still a lot to like.

I liked the way Barbara Ann Minerva was depicted, how Maxwell Lord used her insecurities against her, the way that her relation with Diana was implied to turn to love but ending up as hate, or her cattiness towards Steve. I still think I'd have liked another main villain than Maxwell Lord, but Pedro Pascal did excellent work as an actor and this was a very different take on Maxwell Lord than the comics versions that I'm familiar with. And the Trump call-outs were really well done.

Chris Pine was probably the weakest of the main side characters, but Steve in this movie is basically a McGuffin. He had no real character arc or conflict to work with, and it showed. He got to show off some comedy, though, and I liked how his talk about flying inspired Diana. Her learning to fly scene was also well done, in a manner entirely different from the Superman first flight scenes. One issue with showing Wonder Woman flying Superman-style is of course that then the camera would look right up her cleavage, and they largely avoided that. Only real trouble is that I think the pacing and sequence undercut the lassoing lightning scene, which turned into a blink and you'll miss it moment rather than a wow moment.

The invisible jet was nice, and the just-in-time nature of Diana willing the jet to become invisible was lampshaded and got a bit of added levity with the invisible lost coffeecup.

A word on the Amazons. The huge crowd at the games was awesome, and much better done than the similar amphitheatre scene in Aquaman—I have no idea how many extras they needed. And I really liked that Hippolyta was shown as proud of her daughter, rather than overprotective.

So was there stuff I didn't like? The golden armour felt tacked-on and lacked purpose other than to be partially torn apart by Cheetah. I wish we could have some superhero final fights that aren't in darkness. The resolution felt like it could have been stronger and lacked preparation prior in the movie. It lacked the allies that were so important to the 2017 movie. It also didn't manage to make the internal conflict that Diana and the world had to handle as visceral as was done there. In a very real way, this was a superhero movie without bad guys. On one hand, that felt fresh and new, on the other, it felt like it failed to manage to make it really work.

But at its core, this was a movie and a story that understood Wonder Woman and what she stands for. It pitted love against truth; I just wish the movie could have made that conflict a little more clear and visceral.

I wonder if the fight was shot in the dark because of the Golden Armor. I remember Patty was talking about the VFX issues that were caused because of the Armor reflective surface. Apparently it would interfere with the mo-cap on Cheetah's actress, since the sensors would pick up the motion tracking dots in the armor as well as the ones one Wiig, which confused the mo-cap tech. They solved this by moving the placements of the mo-cap dots between takes.

She also said the armor would reflect everything, especially the wings which worked like giant mirrors, so the VFX crew had to digitally edit any unwanted reflection in the armor (like crew members).

Shooting it in the dark might have helped limit the amount or unwanted reflection being produced. But I don't know enough about cinematography to confirm.
Also I think Patty just wanted the golden glow of the lasso at night, but she could have had the Cheetah fight take place at sunset.

[kjn]

I wonder if the fight was shot in the dark because of the Golden Armor. I remember Patty was talking about the VFX issues that were caused because of the Armor reflective surface. Apparently it would interfere with the mo-cap on Cheetah's actress, since the sensors would pick up the motion tracking dots in the armor as well as the ones one Wiig, which confused the mo-cap tech. They solved this by moving the placements of the mo-cap dots between takes.

Interesting. Another little data point that aesthetics and technology always interact with each other, and the technology that gives some possibilities at the same time forces other follow-up choices or consequences.

Anyway, I dug through the rest of the thread since the release of the movie, and have some comments and additional thoughts. But I think I'm starting to realise that while WW2017 was interesting because of its virtues, I think WW84 is interesting because of its flaws. That doesn't mean that WW84 lacks virtues—far from it—but it shapes the entire way you discuss and think of the movie.

It has a lot of heart and sincerity but suffers from structural issues. The whole Cairo sequence could have been trimmed out, along with some other stuff. You always want a film to feel shorter than it is, but WW84 feels looooong and as much as I enjoyed Pascal’s performance, I could have done with less scenes of him repeating the same maniacal spiel. The movie kind of hammers it’s message in too hard, to the point where it gets a little exhausting.

Yup. A large part of the movie, basically between the opening sequence on Themyscira and Steve's renewed disappearance, feels like a number of scenes that could come in any order. They do not flow naturally from one to the other, and too many of them do not progress the plot or the relations between the characters. But I actually sorta like Lord's repeated spiel, because we need to see that it is fundamentally the only thing he knows how to do.

And while we're on some controversial topics like the Steve-body-hijacking stuff, it seems the scene with Barbara beating up her attacker didn't quite land with a lot of people. It was supposed to show her going dark and too far, but it's hard not root for her against a sexual harasser/potential (and likely) rapist. I don't think the film expects us to feel an ounce of sympathy for the guy, but be more concerned with Barbara losing her empathy, but I can see why it'd not signaling to audiences that we should start to view her as seriously in the wrong. One of my roommates said last night, not knowing much about the character beyond knowing she's a WW baddie, said "wait, how is Cheetah a villain? She's awesome and that guy deserved it!" during that scene.

Interesting. For me everything about the scene signalled that Barbara was losing her empathy and compassion, with the music, her dialogue, her acting, and her reaction to the black man questioning her actions.

It is kind of interesting how this movie is so much more divisive than the previous one. Any idea's why that is?

Myself, I kind of think that if it didn't have the previous movie behind it, it would have been received more positively.

I don't think it's one big factor as many small factors that interact with each other. For one, on a very basic level, WW2017 was easy to understand. It broke just enough with the standard modern superhero template to feel fresh, and kept enough about it to be familiar. WW84 however is very much different in its themes and isn't as well plotted. But it's not the only factor, and sadly there is a misogynistic hate machine out there ready to spring into action.

But there is a great video essay by Rosie (Fandom Musings) about why Captain Marvel got a lot more pushback than the first Wonder Woman movie, and several of the same dynamics would be at play if Wonder Woman 1984 had followed on the success of Captain Marvel.

I was bothered by the body steal and the lack of concern about the guy being evicted. That seemed weird. Diana’s motivation to get her powers back should have been secondary to just returning the guy to his life, I thought. Plus this man must have been the worlds biggest isolationist for NOBODY to notice he was missing or trying to get in touch with him. No friends, work colleagues, or family at all.

But sexual assault? I don’t know. Mind swapping is a bit different to being roofied.

Pretty much agree. The underlying thing here is the body possession. The trouble isn't that Diana makes love with Steve in another man's body, it is that Steve is in another man's body, and it's largely just glossed over. I can sort of let it slide, given how concentrated the plot of the movie is—I think it takes place over two days, tops, once it gets going, but it's still an unaddressed concern.

A word on the allegations of racism. Here I think it's helpful to consider that racism can be many things. We might think in terms of sundown towns at one level, but harmful stereotypes play a huge part too. Even on their face innocent stereotypes can feed into harmful stereotypes and prejudices. What WW84 does is takes a bunch of stereotypes that might look innocent, but due to their prevalence and the role they play really are harmful, and uses them without questioning or addressing them. Were burqas commonly worn by women in Egypt in the 1980s? I'm sure some women wore them, but were they widespread? I really doubt it.

This is in contrast to WW2017, because that took the on their face stereotypical characters of Sameer and Chief and gave them depth, nuance, and authenticity.

[I'm a Fish]

Apparently Kristen Wiig got nominated for a Razzie for worst supporting actress...

I think that is rather uncalled for, her acting was good. Not to mention, in a lot of reviews I read for the movie, almost all of them cited her acting as a highlight of the film. If they had a complaint, it was about her character not her acting.


Also WW84 got a Razzie nomination for Worst Sequel (but I think it was the only sequel of 2020) I'm not too upset about that one, it's whatever.


Edit: Honestly I don't care about the Oscars or the Razzies, a relatively small group of people (or how ever many people vote in the Razzies) are supposed to decide what the world likes or what you like? Meh. I just hope it doesn't effect Wonder Woman 3 or how much Cheetah is involved in it (if she is at all).
I doubt it will because the Razzies are regarded as a joke and I don't think Patty cares, Snyder didn't care when his movie got 4 Razzies , but yeah sometimes little things you know.

[Psy-lock]

Apparently Kristen Wiig got nominated for a Razzie for worst supporting actress...

I think that is rather uncalled for, her acting was good. Not to mention, in a lot of reviews I read for the movie, almost all of them cited her acting as a highlight of the film. If they had a complaint, it was about her character not her acting.


Also WW84 got a Razzie nomination for Worst Sequel (but I think it was the only sequel of 2020) I'm not too upset about that one, it's whatever.


Edit: Honestly I don't care about the Oscars or the Razzies, a relatively small group of people (or how ever many people vote in the Razzies) are supposed to decide what the world likes or what you like? Meh. I just hope it doesn't effect Wonder Woman 3 or how much Cheetah is involved in it (if she is at all).
I doubt it will because the Razzies are regarded as a joke and I don't think Patty cares, Snyder didn't care when his movie got 4 Razzies , but yeah sometimes little things you know.

Maybe those people wanted to complete the evil trinity

It's a testament to how poorly DCEU handles its villains (and movies in general) if the actors portraying such iconic characters like Cheetah, Joker and Lex Luthor get razzies.

[I'm a Fish]

Maybe those people wanted to complete the evil trinity

It's a testament to how poorly DCEU handles its villains (and movies in general) if the actors portraying such iconic characters like Cheetah, Joker and Lex Luthor get razzies.

The way the Razzies work, it's hard to know if it wasn't just a wave of toxic Marvel fanboys flooding the voting. Especially since the Marvel vs DC thing was at its height then. The movies might have been bad, but I'm sure there were way worse movies that year.

[kjn]

The way the Razzies work, it's hard to know if it wasn't just a wave of toxic Marvel fanboys flooding the voting. Especially since the Marvel vs DC thing was at its height then. The movies might have been bad, but I'm sure there were way worse movies that year.

Is it possible? Yes. But I judge it unlikely. Getting a large number of people to toss down $40 will take a public campaign, and is nearly impossible to hide—see also the Sad Puppies and the Hugos.

A much simpler explanation is that both BvS and Suicide Squad were big-budget movies that crashed and burned and became targets for public ridicule. Which is exactly the normal target for the razzies.

[SiegePerilous02]

Maybe those people wanted to complete the evil trinity

It's a testament to how poorly DCEU handles its villains (and movies in general) if the actors portraying such iconic characters like Cheetah, Joker and Lex Luthor get razzies.

Yeah, though if we're grading on a curve, I think Wiig's Cheetah is much better than the other two. I at least liked her if not everything they did with the character. Lex and Joker are just awful as the whole packages, acting performance and writing.

[kjn]

I think a much simpler explanation for Wonder Woman and the razzies would be that this was for 2020. How many movies were released last year? I'm mostly surprised that Birds of Prey didn't turn up on the list. Not because I thought the movie bad (on the contrary!), but because it received lots of hate and there were very few movies actually released.

Come to think of it, here is another piece of evidence that there are no hate campaigns in the Razzies: the 2016 Ghostbusters wasn't nominated.

[kjn]

Oh, another thing about the movie, and where it failed where Wonder Woman 2017 succeeded.

Both are period pieces, and did a really good job on the fashion, styles, and aesthetics. But Wonder Woman 2017 really managed to catch the zeitgeist of the the First World War, perhaps more the early war than the late war, but it was still clearly set using the mentality of that time.

But Wonder Woman 1984 pretty much failed at that. Yes, we get the self-improvement guy, but those appeared at that time and never really went away. We get a little hint of the nuclear arms race with the wish from the US president, but nothing else to tie into the late Cold War. And nothing about the AIDS epidemic, which arguably really hadn't reached the public consciousness in 1984, but still is very much part of that era.

[PopQuezy]

I was at my local Target today, and they've already started placing promotional material in the Electronics section for the WW84 physical media. There were posters and an empty cardboard cutout where I assume the physical media will be on display. It was pretty exciting to see and I can't wait to get my Bluray.

[I'm a Fish]

I was at my local Target today, and they've already started placing promotional material in the Electronics section for the WW84 physical media. There were posters and an empty cardboard cutout where I assume the physical media will be on display. It was pretty exciting to see and I can't wait to get my Bluray.

I hope they have a directors commentary. I love those.

[I'm a Fish]

I think a much simpler explanation for Wonder Woman and the razzies would be that this was for 2020. How many movies were released last year? I'm mostly surprised that Birds of Prey didn't turn up on the list. Not because I thought the movie bad (on the contrary!), but because it received lots of hate and there were very few movies actually released.

Come to think of it, here is another piece of evidence that there are no hate campaigns in the Razzies: the 2016 Ghostbusters wasn't nominated.

I have no doubt that's a huge part of it. Plus it came at the end of the year and BoP came at the beginning, and with the pandemic, no one really remembers it anymore.

[BiteTheBullet]

I have no doubt that's a huge part of it. Plus it came at the end of the year and BoP came at the beginning, and with the pandemic, no one really remembers it anymore.

Maybe the other reason why Wonder Woman 1984 has received razzies is because it was a clusterf**k of a movie. Loved the 1st movie with the caveat that the third act was weak, but WW84 was just plain bad. 200 million plus for laughable effects? Tobey Maguires Spiderman was a long time ago but his web slinging was far superior to what they did with the lasso slinging in this movie.

There is just so much about the movie that was just disappointing. I really hope that all Patty Jenkins does is direct the 3rd movie, because that very much felt like a 1st draft script. I really hope they reign her in on the 3rd installment.

On the bright side, the 3rd movie has to be better than the current one.

[Mysterious]

Maybe the other reason why Wonder Woman 1984 has received razzies is because it was a clusterf**k of a movie. Loved the 1st movie with the caveat that the third act was weak, but WW84 was just plain bad. 200 million plus for laughable effects? Tobey Maguires Spiderman was a long time ago but his web slinging was far superior to what they did with the lasso slinging in this movie.

There is just so much about the movie that was just disappointing. I really hope that all Patty Jenkins does is direct the 3rd movie, because that very much felt like a 1st draft script. I really hope they reign her in on the 3rd installment.

On the bright side, the 3rd movie has to be better than the current one.

This movie was really messy boring and didn't have any world ending threats it didn't feel like anybody's life was really in danger or nothing. And for her to be so powerful I can't believe they didn't have her do much. those little circus kicks she did the White House fight while grabbing the gun was more of a pose it was really silly. And let's not talk about feats because the strongest thing she did was flip a cargo truck in the air and she struggled with that. Did anybody notice she's still moving the same size militia vehicles from the first movie? Her strength has not increased like Patty said it would she was not at the height of her powers

[I'm a Fish]

Maybe the other reason why Wonder Woman 1984 has received razzies is because it was a clusterf**k of a movie. Loved the 1st movie with the caveat that the third act was weak, but WW84 was just plain bad. 200 million plus for laughable effects? Tobey Maguires Spiderman was a long time ago but his web slinging was far superior to what they did with the lasso slinging in this movie.

There is just so much about the movie that was just disappointing. I really hope that all Patty Jenkins does is direct the 3rd movie, because that very much felt like a 1st draft script. I really hope they reign her in on the 3rd installment.

On the bright side, the 3rd movie has to be better than the current one.

The venom goo in the 3rd movie also looked better than the venom goo in the Venom movie.
That's just a side note, I don't mean anything by it.

Eh, 2nd movie was bad. I still liked it, er, parts of it. I'm mostly just bothered that they nominated Wiig for a Razzie, not the nomination of WW84.

But reign Patty in? The studio wanted the No Man's Land scene cut, she convinced them otherwise. She convinced the Studio to ditch the Snyder Wonder Woman that would have had her behead people. The studio also made her drag out the 3rd act last second in the first movie, which was the biggest complaint from people.

Why are people suddenly saying studio interference is a good thing? It's never been a good thing. Remember what studio interference did to Spider-Man 3? WW84 might have been the exception, or it might have been way worse, we'll never know. They would have probably wanted her to kill Max Lord like she does in the comics. I'm not ignoring the flaws in the second movie, but the first movie was Patty's vision too.

I'm not writing any of this in an accusing tone, I'm just genuinely confused why people flip-flop so often.