Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 69
  1. #31
    Standing Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    11,400

    Default

    I think that Amazons talking about/mentioning their sexuality would be less offensive to the Chinese and moral conservatives than having their actions speak for them on screen. Talk is just talk--but seeing Lesbians do what Lesbians do is the kind of thing that makes certain audiences clutch their pearls. And if a movie is dubbed or subtitled in a foreign market like China, it's easy for the language to be obscured--whereas it's harder to blur out Lesbian actions on screen.

    But it is a difficult question. I think if it's unlkely for a movie to do well in China anyway--because of their prejudices toward people of colour and hatreds of freedoms--then WB should be brave and do the kind of movies that will be appreciated in the domestic market. WONDER WOMAN (2017) made half of its gross in the domestic market--which is very different from most comic book movies--so pleasing the domestic market should be the priority, rather than chasing after foreign markets that are never going to get on the freedom train.

  2. #32
    Extraordinary Member Celgress's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    5,245

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Kelly View Post
    Did Patty Jenkins say something about the movie? What was the quote?...
    Upon closer examination, looks like I misread the article it was a former writer of the comics who said that and then Jenkins was asked to comment but more or less (wisely) skirted around the idea. I do apologize for my mistake.
    "I'm sorry, but your story isn't adding up. I think your religion is a lie to keep my mouth shut."

  3. #33
    Mighty Member RealWonderman's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,956

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Celgress View Post
    I disagree it is because the method used was far more subtle than that used today and thus I argue more effective. I have nothing against political messages in fantasy I simply prefer them to be allegoric and not be hamfisted. Such messages should blend seamlessly with the plot. I fear after reading the interview the message here will be as subtle as a club to the head. Time will tell if my fears are realized.
    Well, the interview is from 2016, and it wasn't a club to the head, and it did blend seamlessly with the plot.
    It's not about 'deserve' it's about what you believe. And I believe in Love.

  4. #34
    Standing Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    11,400

    Default

    I find it strange that WONDER WOMAN 1984 is expected to tackle gay issues, yet they chose not to bring back Allan Heinberg for the screenplay.

  5. #35
    Astonishing Member marhawkman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    2,167

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Kelly View Post
    I find it strange that WONDER WOMAN 1984 is expected to tackle gay issues, yet they chose not to bring back Allan Heinberg for the screenplay.
    Expected for what reason? Also why do you think it would need to be him anyways?
    Quote Originally Posted by Celgress View Post
    I've never been a proponent of umbrella terms (such as "People of Color"), as they lump too many often distinct groups in together which can easily cause confusion, but to each their own.
    Yeah "people of color" is utterly worthless since it's pretty much "anyone whose skin isn't white". The definition of "white" depends on who you talk to since some groups(for example Castillians) don't think of themselves as white, but may get treated as white by others.

    It also trivializes the reasons why ethnic divisions exist. WW1 and WW2 were rooted in power struggles between Germans and French. Is that trivial just because both groups were white? Obviously not. Thing is, the French and Germans don't see each other as the same ethnic group. They don't care about how other people define "ethnic" groups.

    And that's just ONE example. OOH! Here's an example of a different type: certain African tribal groups(such as Berbers) have a wide range of skin pigmentations because skin color isn't part of their internal definition of who they are.

  6. #36
    Standing Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    11,400

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by marhawkman View Post
    Expected for what reason? Also why do you think it would need to be him anyways?
    That's the scuttlebutt I've picked up--could be wrong--but the talk is that the 1984 date was picked for its relevance to LGBTQ issues of the time. Allan Heinberg is the highly experienced film and TV writer, who wrote the screenplay for WONDER WOMAN. Granted there were others who doctored the script, but he was the one who got the credit. He also wrote for the Wonder Woman comics. And he's gay. As far as I know, Geoff Johns and Patty Jenkins are not gay, yet they opted not to bring Heinberg back despite the first movie being so successful. If WW84 is going to tackle gay issues, it just makes sense to have a writer from the gay community involved--and why not bring back the writer from the previous film? I mean, maybe he didn't want to come back--but I think he'd at least be offered the chance. Usually when a movie scores a big win, you try to get the same team back for the sequel.

  7. #37
    Ultimate Member Ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    11,971

    Default

    Its possible that Heinberg couldn't do the script due to scheduling or personal reasons, or perhaps his script was so doctored and changed it wasn't really his anymore (even though he got the credit) and everyone figured there was no point to bringing him back on. Who knows? Hollywood is a weird place.

    As for Diana being the queer representation people need.....I dunno. DC has finally "admitted" that Diana's bisexual, which is great. Should've been said a long time ago. But she's in a relationship with Steve that doesn't seem to be going anywhere, and to my knowledge no ex-girlfriends have shown up or are going to. So does Diana being bi actually mean anything? Isn't she, functionally, just straight? Sure, her sexuality is just one small part of who she is and there's far more interesting things about her to explore, but if her sexuality is just a footnote that never really actually factors into anything......isn't it sorta meaningless?

    If DC is going to have queer representation (which is should) shouldn't that hero be actively involved in a queer relationship or otherwise express that representation? I feel like Batwoman makes more sense for this role than Diana. If you didn't read Rucka's run in 2016 you'd be hard pressed to recognize that Diana is anything other than straight, I think (though I did skip Jurgens and only just got back into the title, so maybe this has played more than Im aware of?).

    I just feel like the LGBQ community deserves better than a representative who's connection to the community is essentially invisible and a non-factor in her life and narrative.
    Higher, Faster, Further....More.

    Truth, Justice, and a Better Tomorrow!

    Bridge Four!

  8. #38
    Extraordinary Member Celgress's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    5,245

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ascended View Post
    ....I just feel like the LGBQ community deserves better than a representative who's connection to the community is essentially invisible and a non-factor in her life and narrative.
    I couldn't possibly agree with you more. Batwoman is a far better representative superheroine for this demographic than Wonder Wonder, IMO.
    "I'm sorry, but your story isn't adding up. I think your religion is a lie to keep my mouth shut."

  9. #39
    Astonishing Member kjn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    2,637

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ascended View Post
    Its possible that Heinberg couldn't do the script due to scheduling or personal reasons, or perhaps his script was so doctored and changed it wasn't really his anymore (even though he got the credit) and everyone figured there was no point to bringing him back on. Who knows? Hollywood is a weird place.
    Agreed. There might be all sorts of legitimate reasons why Heinberg isn't involved with WW84.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ascended View Post
    As for Diana being the queer representation people need.....I dunno. DC has finally "admitted" that Diana's bisexual, which is great. Should've been said a long time ago. But she's in a relationship with Steve that doesn't seem to be going anywhere, and to my knowledge no ex-girlfriends have shown up or are going to. So does Diana being bi actually mean anything? Isn't she, functionally, just straight? Sure, her sexuality is just one small part of who she is and there's far more interesting things about her to explore, but if her sexuality is just a footnote that never really actually factors into anything......isn't it sorta meaningless?

    If DC is going to have queer representation (which is should) shouldn't that hero be actively involved in a queer relationship or otherwise express that representation? I feel like Batwoman makes more sense for this role than Diana. If you didn't read Rucka's run in 2016 you'd be hard pressed to recognize that Diana is anything other than straight, I think (though I did skip Jurgens and only just got back into the title, so maybe this has played more than Im aware of?).

    I just feel like the LGBQ community deserves better than a representative who's connection to the community is essentially invisible and a non-factor in her life and narrative.
    Very much agreed with this. At the same time, I understand that Wonder Woman has been a queer icon for a long while, even without being canonically queer. And lets face it, the only superheroes with a stronger level of recognition than Wonder Woman are Batman, Superman, and Spiderman. Batwoman is at least two levels below Wonder Woman here.

    And I think that Wonder Woman could still evolve as a queer icon, even within the constraints of being hitched to Steve Trevor. Making Atlantiades a regular in her cast is one, getting her back to her kink- and sex-positive roots is another, establishing Kasia as her (former) girlfriend and treating that relationship seriously once we get the Amazons back, showing the Amazons in wlw relations, Diana being strongly supporting on loving relations in all forms are all steps that can be taken.
    «Speaking generally, it is because of the desire of the tragic poets for the marvellous that so varied and inconsistent an account of Medea has been given out» (Diodorus Siculus, The Library of History [4.56.1])

  10. #40
    Ultimate Member Ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    11,971

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kjn View Post
    And I think that Wonder Woman could still evolve as a queer icon, even within the constraints of being hitched to Steve Trevor. Making Atlantiades a regular in her cast is one, getting her back to her kink- and sex-positive roots is another, establishing Kasia as her (former) girlfriend and treating that relationship seriously once we get the Amazons back, showing the Amazons in wlw relations, Diana being strongly supporting on loving relations in all forms are all steps that can be taken.
    You've got a good point, and I think those are all things that should be done. And its true that the LGBQ community has "claimed" Diana long before Rucka finally twisted DC's arm into admitting what all of us knew the whole time. But even if DC went that far and did the things you mention, as long as Steve's Diana's main love interest....isn't it going to feel a little lip service-y?

    Batwoman is definitely "ranks" below Diana, but at least her sexuality is openly there; with Diana it's hidden behind the fact that she happens to be dating and in love with a male.
    Higher, Faster, Further....More.

    Truth, Justice, and a Better Tomorrow!

    Bridge Four!

  11. #41
    Extraordinary Member Celgress's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    5,245

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ascended View Post
    You've got a good point, and I think those are all things that should be done. And its true that the LGBQ community has "claimed" Diana long before Rucka finally twisted DC's arm into admitting what all of us knew the whole time. But even if DC went that far and did the things you mention, as long as Steve's Diana's main love interest....isn't it going to feel a little lip service-y?...
    No doubt I'll anger many people with this comment, but here it comes. I think Steve is such of a non-entity these days that if he were jettisoned in favor of a girlfriend, or heck even Superman or Batman, only the hardest of hardcore comic purists would care. if Steve is the only thing holding DC back from making Diana gay I honestly don't see much of a problem.
    "I'm sorry, but your story isn't adding up. I think your religion is a lie to keep my mouth shut."

  12. #42
    Astonishing Member kjn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    2,637

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ascended View Post
    You've got a good point, and I think those are all things that should be done. And its true that the LGBQ community has "claimed" Diana long before Rucka finally twisted DC's arm into admitting what all of us knew the whole time. But even if DC went that far and did the things you mention, as long as Steve's Diana's main love interest....isn't it going to feel a little lip service-y?
    If Diana didn't have the history of being a queer icon already, then yes, it would be lip service. But I believe the queer community is looking at different types and varieties of representation, and they have a tradition of choosing their own icons.

    Also, DC could choose to go for out-of-continuity stories. Now, they missed the chance to do an Earth One with a gay Steve Trevor and Diana and Etta Candy as a couple, with lots of kink subtext. Think something like Stjepan Šejić's Sunstone, but with superheroics and no nudity.
    «Speaking generally, it is because of the desire of the tragic poets for the marvellous that so varied and inconsistent an account of Medea has been given out» (Diodorus Siculus, The Library of History [4.56.1])

  13. #43
    Ultimate Member Ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    11,971

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Celgress View Post
    No doubt I'll anger many people with this comment, but here it comes. I think Steve is such of a non-entity these days that if he were jettisoned in favor of a girlfriend, or heck even Superman or Batman, only the hardest of hardcore comic purists would care. if Steve is the only thing holding DC back from making Diana gay I honestly don't see much of a problem.
    I....sort of.....agree. Steve hasn't exactly been a limitless source of entertainment and badassery. But he's definitely had some good moments too. And let's not forget that he was absent for most of post-Crisis, so that's twenty-ish years of development that the other love interests like Lois and Iris (who was around even if Barry wasn't) got to benefit from. Steve's got a lot of catching up to do, but I don't think he's a lost cause yet.

    .....would people accept the idea of Diana being in some kind of poly relationship with Steve and another woman? It'd get Diana into a non-traditional sexuality/relationship dynamic without losing the historic precedent with Steve, and it'd mirror Marston which would be a nice meta nod to her creator. I'd think that, as long as it wasn't written like some kind of idiotic high school male F-M-F fantasy it might work okay?

    Quote Originally Posted by kjn View Post
    If Diana didn't have the history of being a queer icon already, then yes, it would be lip service. But I believe the queer community is looking at different types and varieties of representation, and they have a tradition of choosing their own icons.

    Also, DC could choose to go for out-of-continuity stories. Now, they missed the chance to do an Earth One with a gay Steve Trevor and Diana and Etta Candy as a couple, with lots of kink subtext. Think something like Stjepan Šejić's Sunstone, but with superheroics and no nudity.
    And the community should absolutely pick their own icons. Who am I to tell them who gets to represent them? And who could argue with wanting to "claim" Diana? But I would think a character whose sexuality is an active aspect of their stories would be a better fit, wouldn't it? I just dont like the idea of Diana being a LGBQ rep when her being bi is a barely acknowledged footnote, yknow? But if the community wants it, cool, I wouldn't argue with them.

    We're past the point where some out of continuity stuff should've shown Diana to have a different, non-traditional sexuality. Gay, bi, something else, whatever, her being something other than straight should've gotten some play in Elseworlds (at least) ages ago.
    Higher, Faster, Further....More.

    Truth, Justice, and a Better Tomorrow!

    Bridge Four!

  14. #44
    Standing Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    11,400

    Default

    Wonder Woman has been more like a Judy Garland or a Bette Midler--someone who isn't necessarily gay herself, but someone with whom gay people identify. Gay men identify with Diana herself, so if she loves Steve Trevor that's okay. They aren't putting themselves in Steve's military boots, they're putting themselves in Diana's high-heeled red boots.

    I guess there are really two distinct queer fandoms for Wonder Woman. One being gay men, for whom Wonder Woman is their diva. And the other being lesbians, for whom the ideal of strong women living together in a loving society is a powerful fantasy.

  15. #45
    Astonishing Member Korath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Toulouse, France
    Posts
    2,660

    Default

    I kind of have a hard time seeing Diana as Queer when she's hopelessly in love with the first man she ever saw. She has lives for decades/centuries with the Amazons, but true love doesn't happen until she met her first pair of cojones. That's hardly a queer symbol for me.

    She's a symbol of bravery and an inspiration for all girls to be heroic and stand up against oppression and the like. But with what has been hinted as WW84 plot, well... it's not exactly the most progressive figure ever, far from it. And even Marston built some seriously troubling undertones in his creation. She does come from a sexist and isolationist culture. And that the Amazons have historical reasons to have become just that, it doesn't erase the inherent rot inside their culture.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •