(Spoilers) So like "Steve" and Diana in WW84.... are we gonna talk about it?

[brettc1]

No, it was clearly another man's body Steve was in.

Then the body is possessed, and possession is nine tenths of the law.

I wonder which tenth Diana enjoyed most?

[brettc1]

It doesn't, that's why fiction uses things like metaphors. Steve's body is like a coma patient, there are demons on Supernatural more willing to get permission on taking on someone's body (Ruby) than what the heroes did in '84. Fiction has been exploring morality since its founding, like Frankenstein and Dracula.

An excellent metaphor for this particular rapist argument.

Noble intentions that turned out as a lurching monstrosity, and which can only sustain itself by sucking the life and joy out of everything.

[Steel Inquisitor]

An excellent metaphor for this particular rapist argument.

Noble intentions that turned out as a lurching monstrosity, and which can only sustain itself by sucking the life and joy out of everything.

You can like a fictional story while acknowledging what the characters do in it are wrong. Most fiction will have some terrible thing in it, whether the creator intended to or not. The reason subjects like this are bought are because we, the audience, care and want the characters to be likeable and when a creator does something controversial with their decisions we're supposed to ignore the implications and go along for the ride as if it's roller coaster ride with no meaning underneath.

No comment on Dracula or Frankenstein? Why were they highlighted if they weren't going to examined to boost your argument? The argument being proposed in your responses is that they don't have metaphors and that examining them is wrong, assuming those works don't take stands on morality.

Another problem is that - there is no meat to your argument, there is no greater underlying argument being presented to prove what we're saying is wrong it's just that it's ruining the "fun" and nobody likes being reminded that entertainment has more to offer then turning your brain off. Which is funny since this is about Wonder Woman '84 who has a message about morality in bright flashing lights. And Wonder Woman herself being a political statement on society and female sensuality. Did you know that her creator originally made her lose her powers when men overpowered her because he was into bondage, and that he thought society should be a matriarchy? Those ideas didn't not end up impacting Wonder Woman and her stories. Does this ruin "the fun" of Wonder Woman, as well?

[Steel Inquisitor]

I haven't seen the movie I don't care about anyone else's opinion. I only want to know two facts:
1. Is it a possession or Steve's whole being replace the guy? Like the guy is written out of existence.
More importantly:
2. Who between Diana, Steve, and The Guy know what's happening, and who doesn't?

Because rape needs 1 person to be aware and doing it anyway, while the other unable to give consent, by any cause. I don't care if the cause is alcohol or magic.
If no one's aware, then it's not rape. They're all being screwed with by the higher power.

I don't want opinions or debate about movie realism or whatnot. What I care from the movie is my business. Just please answer it with the facts from the movie.

The movie is very up front that the man has no idea what they've done with his body, he shows up in the epilogue to speak to Diana. She doesn't say a word about this to him and he shows no signs he knows who she is. The movie is very implicit that he is not active at any point when he's being possessed. All we get is Steve, and Steve doesn't talk to him on the spiritual plane or anything. They don't show any concern for his body's safety, either and if Diana had her way he never would have returned to his original body. That's why I compared him to being in a coma. As person he just ceased and his body became an object for Steve to possess.

[Awonder]

... I only want to know two facts:
1. Is it a possession or Steve's whole being replace the guy? Like the guy is written out of existence.
More importantly:
2. Who between Diana, Steve, and The Guy know what's happening, and who doesn't?

To the best of my knowledge:

1- We learn that Steve's whole consciousness (/soul) woke up in a furnished apartment, and he has a new body. It's akin to Freaky Friday style mind-swap, except we only see Steve's experience of it. We know nothing of "Handsome Man's" life prior to Diana's wish, nor do we know where his consciousness (/soul) went (or even if he had one) during this time period. No other characters show any sign they know Handsome Man.

2- Diana and Steve know that Steve is not in Steve's original body. Handsome Man never shows any signs of knowing what's going on, during or afterwards.

[Restingvoice]

The movie is very up front that the man has no idea what they've done with his body, he shows up in the epilogue to speak to Diana. She doesn't say a word about this to him and he shows no signs he knows who she is. The movie is very implicit that he is not active at any point when he's being possessed. All we get is Steve, and Steve doesn't talk to him on the spiritual plane or anything. They don't show any concern for his body's safety, either and if Diana had her way he never would have returned to his original body. That's why I compared him to being in a coma. As person he just ceased and his body became an object for Steve to possess.

To the best of my knowledge:

1- We learn that Steve's whole consciousness (/soul) woke up in a furnished apartment, and he has a new body. It's akin to Freaky Friday style mind-swap, except we only see Steve's experience of it. We know nothing of "Handsome Man's" life prior to Diana's wish, nor do we know where his consciousness (/soul) went (or even if he had one) during this time period. No other characters show any sign they know Handsome Man.

2- Diana and Steve know that Steve is not in Steve's original body. Handsome Man never shows any signs of knowing what's going on, during or afterwards.

Oh yeah that's problematic, but just to make sure, do they know that another man existed before Steve took over, or that they only think it's a new body and home given by gods or whatever, and Diana only found out at the end... oh shit... that's another guy's body I slept with?

[brettc1]

No comment on Dracula or Frankenstein? Why were they highlighted if they weren't going to examined to boost your argument? The argument being proposed in your responses is that they don't have metaphors and that examining them is wrong, assuming those works don't take stands on morality.

Read my comment again. You’ll get there

[brettc1]

To the best of my knowledge:

1- We learn that Steve's whole consciousness (/soul) woke up in a furnished apartment, and he has a new body. It's akin to Freaky Friday style mind-swap, except we only see Steve's experience of it. We know nothing of "Handsome Man's" life prior to Diana's wish, nor do we know where his consciousness (/soul) went (or even if he had one) during this time period. No other characters show any sign they know Handsome Man.

2- Diana and Steve know that Steve is not in Steve's original body. Handsome Man never shows any signs of knowing what's going on, during or afterwards.

Welll, that’s not entirely true. Is it just coincidence we see him the outfit that was Diana’s favourite for Steve?

Now, here’s a theory.

What if Steve NEVER came back.

What if it was handsome guy the whole time, and his memories were altered so he would just THINK he was Steve Trevor?

[brettc1]

The movie is very up front that the man has no idea what they've done with his body, he shows up in the epilogue to speak to Diana. She doesn't say a word about this to him and he shows no signs he knows who she is. The movie is very implicit that he is not active at any point when he's being possessed. All we get is Steve, and Steve doesn't talk to him on the spiritual plane or anything. They don't show any concern for his body's safety, either and if Diana had her way he never would have returned to his original body. That's why I compared him to being in a coma. As person he just ceased and his body became an object for Steve to possess.

Except that’s not what a coma is. What you’re describing is total brain death.

As regards his body’s safety, how safe do you think it would be if Diana had died fighting that convoy and 24 hours later nuclear missiles were raining from the sky?

Diana not wanting him returned is mere presumption. And illogical, given her character. The more reasonable conclusion is that she wanted a way to keep both men alive at the same time.

[fong03]

You apply it the same way people have looked at works of fiction as allegory or metaphors for centuries. Why are we acting like this kind of literary discourse and criticism is a new thing borne of our current political climate? Literary analysis has existed for way too long for us to be offended by the use of it here.

Ghosts have never been proven to exist. As far as we know from scientific data, they do not exist and therefore we don't really know what would actually happen if people really saw ghosts or if they were among us. However, we know that when a character sees a ghost in a work of fiction like Hamlet or The Lion King, we know it symbolises emotions like guilt, sadness, loss or even insanity. We do not have to have seen ghosts or have data on what ghosts do to people to understand what it means when used in that kind of context. Just because something in a work of fiction can't happen in real life, doesn't mean we cannot draw a close match and understand the meaning in the fiction.

The problem is you (at least from the posts of yours that I have read) are not actually engaging in that discourse. You made the statement that people are pretending consent doesn't exist. That isn't true. Pointing out that works of fiction have used allegory and metaphor doesn't provide a basis for the statement you made, which is what I responded to.

Putting aside the fact that I think you give the movie too much credit if you think there was any thought behind this choice beyond "We need to bring Steve back" and '80s body swap movies," you didn't address my question. What are the implications of your soul being permanently trapped within someone else's body? Who is the one whom is alive? What should Steve do? Are any of his actions acceptable? I never said that "you cannot draw a close match." I simply said that more thought needs to be put in before you do and I had not seen that done.

[Alpha]

Wrong, Germans enthusiastically enrolled like many others in different countries at the start of WWI. Among those who enrolled was an Austrian named Hitler. You forget that Germans in WWII weren't angels they had a superiority complex of themselves, they believed to be superior to the rest and that victory would have made them the most powerful nation on earth. They called it the Second Reich which was forerunner of the infamous Third.

This isn't somethint uniquely German. Hell, americans still believe they are some super evolved nation that has the the right to expand as much as possible both through war and globalism. And by this point in the movie we were clearly not in the beginning of the war. The most likely scenario is that the soldier who got hit by the block buster Wonder Woman was probably conscripted, considering the fact that if he was one of those that signed up at the beginning than he would've died already. And most people who volunteered for war did it right at the beginning.

This whole thing is only a small detail tho

[Alpha]

Yeah, I can't imagine sex without consent in the real world.

What are you talking about? Steve was in that body and he chose to have sex with Diana. He probably initiated.

[Alpha]

It doesn't, that's why fiction uses things like metaphors. Steve's body is like a coma patient, there are demons on Supernatural more willing to get permission on taking on someone's body (Ruby) than what the heroes did in '84. Fiction has been exploring morality since its founding, like Frankenstein and Dracula.

That's a very stupid metaphor. The point of a metaphor is that it maintains the emotion behind an event. When you have sex with an unconscious body the body doesn't have a soul in it making it kiss you, whisper to you, look at you and touch you. In every single way, this was Steve's body and he initiated the act.

And when you turn something someone else wrote and YOU turn THEIR story into a rape metaphor, you are clearly forcing meaning that wasn't there. You are the one doing it. In a sense, you are the rapist who turns this into a rape. Shame on you. Not all metaphors are automatically good. And this one is clearly a corrupt one considering how you are the one that twisted the situation.

[Agent Z]

"Adults...struggle desperately with fiction, demanding constantly that it conform to the rules of everyday life. Adults foolishly demand to know how Superman can possibly fly, or how Batman can possibly run a multibillion-dollar business empire during the day and fight crime at night, when the answer is obvious even to the smallest child: because it's not real.”

Grant Morrison ;-)

Morrison themselves are good example of not understanding the implications of what they are writing.

[Agent Z]

You (and others) ask a number of questions about "Handsome Man;" honest question here: do we know for sure he existed before Diana's wish?

The apartment of his which Steve did not recognize and which Diana did not ask for clearly say yes.

So, for me, given that we're dealing with a fictional situation that can't happen (afaik), and we really don't know all the facts (of the fiction), I'm not comfortable drawing any firm conclusions.

Avengers #200 was called out for having rape that wasn't acknowledged back in the 1980s, the same period in which this movie takes place in. Zeus's use of disguises and magic that don't exist in real life have been called out as rape including on this very board.