Which film did you like better - Aquaman or Wonder Woman

[Flash Gordon]

I don't really get your criticism of Wonder Woman's 3rd act. If it felt like it didn't fit because it was too CGI, it's because the rest of the film was so good that it didn't rely on that kind of spectacle. Aquaman's last scene was right in line with the rest of the movie, which was hallow action and bad dialogue and no stakes. Aquaman didn't have a fraction of the heart and character work that Wonder Woman did. I don't see any metric by which you can call it a superior film.

The 3rd act of WW was abysmal to watch and it contradicted the point of the film. It gave Diana a big bad CGI Man to slap around, when the message should have been "sometimes there isn't a big bad CGI Man to slap around, kids. sometimes things are more complicated". It tried to have it both ways, CGI Man who kinda sorta maybe isn't totally responsible.

The stakes weren't high because we don't know any characters beyond Diana, Steve, and some of the generic blokes that are with them. Steve's final moments were great and well acted but they alone should have been the climax. Diana is distracted by her confusion with the lack of "an Ares" and she's trying to save people, while Steve goes and does the big heroic act to stop the plane- that simple. WW1 was horrific, literal Hell on Earth. No need for Ares.

I mean honestly these kinds of films are always mostly hallow action with some good concepts and characters mixed in, and that's fine. Aquaman was just more effective.

I liked both flicks a lot, but it's no question for me that Aquaman is a better cinematic journey.

[dietrich]

Aquaman. WW was boring aside from the 1st act.

[SiegePerilous02]

Finally saw Aquaman last night. In terms of spectacle and action it definitely trumps Wonder Woman. In terms of everything else, WW is superior. Not that Aquaman is a bad film by any means, I had a lot of fun with it. It's kind of dumb, but it knows it's kind of dumb and has fun anyway. Arthur just isn't as layered a character as Diana and his chemistry with Mera isn't as strong as hers with Steve. I still really liked Arthur (and Mera) and that's down to Momoa and Wan, but it's fine that this movie is nothing more than the crowd pleaser it was. WW aimed to be something more, and it succeeded in several areas despite a weaker villain and 3rd act (and it's not like the villains in these things are usually that complex to begin with, Ares especially if we're going by the comics).

I still am looking forward to the inevitable Aquaman 2 and/or any other DCEU projects Wan is involved with.

The 3rd act of WW was abysmal to watch and it contradicted the point of the film. It gave Diana a big bad CGI Man to slap around, when the message should have been "sometimes there isn't a big bad CGI Man to slap around, kids. sometimes things are more complicated". It tried to have it both ways, CGI Man who kinda sorta maybe isn't totally responsible.

The point was a battle for Diana's soul as Ares sought to corrupt her after her world view had been shaken, and the need for a superhuman brawl in a superhero movie. CGI Ares doesn't really undermine anything, in his own words he doesn't make humanity do anything, he gives them inspiration and is trying to make things worse (which Diana needs to stop), but it's humanity's innate problem. Same role he always fills in the comics.

The stakes weren't high because we don't know any characters beyond Diana, Steve, and some of the generic blokes that are with them. Steve's final moments were great and well acted but they alone should have been the climax. Diana is distracted by her confusion with the lack of "an Ares" and she's trying to save people, while Steve goes and does the big heroic act to stop the plane- that simple. WW1 was horrific, literal Hell on Earth. No need for Ares.

But then there would be no need for Wonder Woman if Steve's act alone saves the day, which would defeat the purpose of the movie called "Wonder Woman"
I also think knowing only Diana, Steve and the Oddfellows is enough to be invested. The cast of characters in Aquaman are not any less generic and it worked there.

[Lightning Rider]

The 3rd act of WW was abysmal to watch and it contradicted the point of the film. It gave Diana a big bad CGI Man to slap around, when the message should have been "sometimes there isn't a big bad CGI Man to slap around, kids. sometimes things are more complicated". It tried to have it both ways, CGI Man who kinda sorta maybe isn't totally responsible.

The stakes weren't high because we don't know any characters beyond Diana, Steve, and some of the generic blokes that are with them. Steve's final moments were great and well acted but they alone should have been the climax. Diana is distracted by her confusion with the lack of "an Ares" and she's trying to save people, while Steve goes and does the big heroic act to stop the plane- that simple. WW1 was horrific, literal Hell on Earth. No need for Ares.

I mean honestly these kinds of films are always mostly hallow action with some good concepts and characters mixed in, and that's fine. Aquaman was just more effective.

I liked both flicks a lot, but it's no question for me that Aquaman is a better cinematic journey.

It is ridiculous to assert that we don't get to know WW's companions and not mention Aquaman's incredibly thin character development. We truly don't learn to distinguish any of those characters or feel the weight of their relationships at all. Wonder Women excelled at the character work, Aquaman frequently fumbled.

Ares gives her the final temptation and embodies her ambivalence about humanity. Without an external threat to bounce that off of her, it's almost impossible to capture her internal struggle on the matter. It's not contradictory at all. And at the least, her third act battle had thematic meaning and became a character moment for her. Meanwhile Arthur defeats Orm and is now okay with being king because..why? Who knows, the good guy won, yay! There might have been much more action going on, but it was far more hollow.

[Lightning Rider]

Finally saw Aquaman last night. In terms of spectacle and action it definitely trumps Wonder Woman. In terms of everything else, WW is superior. Not that Aquaman is a bad film by any means, I had a lot of fun with it. It's kind of dumb, but it knows it's kind of dumb and has fun anyway. Arthur just isn't as layered a character as Diana and his chemistry with Mera isn't as strong as hers with Steve. I still really liked Arthur (and Mera) and that's down to Momoa and Wan, but it's fine that this movie is nothing more than the crowd pleaser it was. WW aimed to be something more, and it succeeded in several areas despite a weaker villain and 3rd act (and it's not like the villains in these things are usually that complex to begin with, Ares especially if we're going by the comics).

I still am looking forward to the inevitable Aquaman 2 and/or any other DCEU projects Wan is involved with.



The point was a battle for Diana's soul as Ares sought to corrupt her after her world view had been shaken, and the need for a superhuman brawl in a superhero movie. CGI Ares doesn't really undermine anything, in his own words he doesn't make humanity do anything, he gives them inspiration and is trying to make things worse (which Diana needs to stop), but it's humanity's innate problem. Same role he always fills in the comics.



But then there would be no need for Wonder Woman if Steve's act alone saves the day, which would defeat the purpose of the movie called "Wonder Woman"
I also think knowing only Diana, Steve and the Oddfellows is enough to be invested. The cast of characters in Aquaman are not any less generic and it worked there.

Well put.

..

[Korath]

I'm still baffled that Diana and STeve romance, which amounts to "You're the first dick I saw" is seen as working better than Mera and Aquaman's. I really felt that the supporting characters were some of the weakest elements of WW.

Especially Charlie.

[Confuzzled]

I'm still baffled that Diana and STeve romance, which amounts to "You're the first dick I saw" is seen as working better than Mera and Aquaman's. I really felt that the supporting characters were some of the weakest elements of WW.

Especially Charlie.

No it didn't. They fell in love on the evening after the Battle of Veld. The scene in the climax where Steve has to explain to Diana that mankind can truly be awful and keep her from falling apart is also much more powerful than anything featuring Arthur/Mera. As is their goodbye at the end, with Diana not being able to hear him at first and then an (imagined for cathartic purposes?) memory where she thinks she can hear him.

These moments sets the romance apart from usual superhero movie romances. Don't get me wrong, I thought Arthur/Mera were sweet, but Diana/Steve is emotional on a whole other level.

I think WW's supporting cast also served their purposes well.

[Jim Kelly]

While James Wan tried to put as much as he could into AQUAMAN--because odds were against ever doing another one--he did leave enough for a second (and third) movie. Sure, by the end, Mera and Arthur aren't sparring as much and they get to kiss (and pretty awesomely, I thought), but there's still more to establish with their romance before they get married. Whereas, in WONDER WOMAN, it was certain that Diana was going to lose Steve, so the movie had to establish her love for him before the end.

Again, they are different movies. So they don't follow the same pattern because their stories are going in different directions.

[Confuzzled]

While James Wan tried to put as much as he could into AQUAMAN--because odds were against ever doing another one--he did leave enough for a second (and third) movie. Sure, by the end, Mera and Arthur aren't sparring as much and they get to kiss (and pretty awesomely, I thought), but there's still more to establish with their romance before they get married. Whereas, in WONDER WOMAN, it was certain that Diana was going to lose Steve, so the movie had to establish her love for him before the end.

Again, they are different movies. So they don't follow the same pattern because their stories are going in different directions.

I think more could've been established with Mera. Her infamous temper for instance could've been introduced, and her scene on the boat explaining to Arthur why the saviour of Atlantis had to be him could've been more layered.

Still though, Aquaman is a very good movie. Wonder Woman just happens to be excellent.

[SiegePerilous02]

I'm still baffled that Diana and STeve romance, which amounts to "You're the first dick I saw" is seen as working better than Mera and Aquaman's. I really felt that the supporting characters were some of the weakest elements of WW.

Especially Charlie.

She doesn't fall in love with him right away. And since this is a movie where Greek gods are real, their love story is hardly the most unrealistic thing going on.
Gadot and Pine also straight up just have better chemistry than Mamoa and Heard, which is why people in turn are saying that their love story is better. That's not to say the latter pair lack chemistry, because I think they had it, it just wasn't as strong. It was coasting along more on them both being hot than WW/Steve did.

The supporting characters in WW were also stronger than AM, IMO. Again, it's not that Aquaman used its supporting cast poorly, it's just that they are not as strong in comparison. I had a better feel for Hippolyta, Antiope, Etta, Chief, Charlie and Sameer than I did for...pretty much just Vulko.

[Flash Gordon]

The point was a battle for Diana's soul as Ares sought to corrupt her after her world view had been shaken, and the need for a superhuman brawl in a superhero movie. CGI Ares doesn't really undermine anything, in his own words he doesn't make humanity do anything, he gives them inspiration and is trying to make things worse (which Diana needs to stop), but it's humanity's innate problem. Same role he always fills in the comics.

It didnt work for me. There's no need to have a "battle for Diana's soul" when horrific trench warfare is happening all around her and the world is at war with each other.

But then there would be no need for Wonder Woman if Steve's act alone saves the day, which would defeat the purpose of the movie called "Wonder Woman"
I also think knowing only Diana, Steve and the Oddfellows is enough to be invested. The cast of characters in Aquaman are not any less generic and it worked there.

There's a lot left for Wonder Woman to do beyond wax metaphorically. Steve stopping that plane doesn't end the war, its just one small act of valor and it shows Diana that while men are cruel...men are also selfless.

[SiegePerilous02]

It didnt work for me. There's no need to have a "battle for Diana's soul" when horrific trench warfare is happening all around her and the world is at war with each other.

Of course there is a need for it. She's the main character, not the people participating in the trench warfare in the backdrop (nobody cares about them as movie characters beyond what the situation offers thematically). And WW origin story requires Ares to a play a role as he always has, or else there is no point in adapting Wonder Woman. It's a superhero movie and he's one of her primary villains. He is also the only reason we build war stories around Diana in the first place.

There's a lot left for Wonder Woman to do beyond wax metaphorically. Steve stopping that plane doesn't end the war, its just one small act of valor and it shows Diana that while men are cruel...men are also selfless.

So I have to ask what the issue is here? The film uses Steve's act exactly as you describe, and clearly humanity's capacity for war is not magically solved, since we got WW2 and a whole slew of other stuff afterward. There's not a lot for Wonder Woman to do if she's not defeating the superhuman threat Ares poses and holding onto her ideals, because she cannot magically solve the war. It'd be insulting if she (or any superhero) could. Ares is the necessary threat she needs to save the world from, preventing him from actively making things worse, before going back to fighting the smaller/endless battles of humanity vs. itself. Which she continues to do in the present day.

[Wandering_Wand]

Wonder Woman had a better and cleaner (more coherent) story, but a questionable (not bad, not great) third act.
Aquaman had better action and visuals with an absolute killer third act that is by far one of the top endings to a CBM.

From a purely quality perspective, the edge goes to Wonder Woman.
From an overall "fun" and enjoyment perspective, the edge goes to Aquaman.

Which one did I like more? Aquaman. It was an action/adventure underwater epic, whereas Wonder Woman was a definitely more somber (but beautifully done) origin tale.

Both are really close though overall for me. They're both great movies.

[stargazer01]

For me Aquaman.

I've seen it more times than WW. It is more fun and entertaining to watch and it also moves me more than WW. And I don't understand why some people think Aquaman is a mindless action film, because I think it has a lot of heart, especially with Arthur's parents story and Arthur's character development, and when he finds Atlan's trident and become a hero and King. He has to listen and communicate with that monster in order to make it understand why he needs the trident. It was so beautifully done and so epic, I cried.

Both are very good superhero movies, but Aquaman has more eye candy and spectacle and better and bigger world building. The third act is pure magic and perfection, IMO. I also like the characters a bit more than WW.

[stargazer01]

I'm still baffled that Diana and STeve romance, which amounts to "You're the first dick I saw" is seen as working better than Mera and Aquaman's. I really felt that the supporting characters were some of the weakest elements of WW.

Especially Charlie.

I rewatched WW recently and I didn't fully buy why she fell for Steve. It felt too sudden. So yeah, it felt like she was more curious about being with a man than real love. With Mera and Arthur the romance felt more natural and I loved their banter and arguments until both realized they really cared for each other. I liked that Mera kissed him first.