Will Wonder Woman FLY in "Batman v Superman"?

[Nyssane]

I personally don't care if she can fly or not. She has the battle skirt and she has her magic lasso. And she's appearing in the movie.

[Pinsir]

This is a pretty childish way of comparing coolness. Snyder's Superman can fly and punch mountains, but he's nowhere near the symbol and inspiration that movie Captain America is. Captain America is closer to All-Star Superman than Snyder's Superman. And he cant fly or punch mountains.

You are judging two movies against one. This kind of thinking reminds me of when Civilization V came out and people were judging it harshly because it didn't have features that IV had that it itself only got through expansions.

[Vanguard-01]

Since when did audiences care about power levels? They clearly don't, as Batman is the most popular superhero around, with audiences liking him way more than Superman, and Iron Man and Cap movies making much more money than the Thor and Hulk movies.

Audiences couldn't care less about power levels, if anything it makes the heroes less relatable (people say Superman's way too powerful all the time).

I heard no such complaints about MoS. People like big power displays and cool effects. A good personality is also essential. A character who has both of these qualities is a character with a good chance of selling.

Superman fans remain divided on the killing Zod issue in MoS and plenty of other topics about that movie. One thing that most of us agree upon, however, is that Henry Cavill did a great job bringing Superman to life. Most of the vitriol about MoS is in no way directed at him. People who rail against everything else about the movie will still take a breath and admit that he did a good job.

This Superman has power and personality. That's a combination that can go far. Wonder Woman can be the same way.

If Wonder Woman is to succeed she should be more that CGI and good looks, and actually have a personality. I doubt audiences would care either way about her flying, and neither do I.

See above. I'm agreeing with you that her personality will be important as well.

But if they can give her a great personality AND make her the powerhouse that she's supposed to be? Why the hell wouldn't they? Especially since it's already been done successfully once?

Besides, Gamora is going to be the first superpowered superheroine on screen since Supergirl, Marvel have already got DC beat in that regard.

????

I don't claim to be an expert on her, and no power on this Earth will get me to go see that joke of a movie, but isn't she just supposed to be kinda strong and fast?

Everything Marvel Studios makes is in the main universe, and they've already mentioned Dr. Strange in Cap 2.

I stand corrected on this front.

[Mr. Mastermind]

But if they can give her a great personality AND make her the powerhouse that she's supposed to be? Why the hell wouldn't they? Especially since it's already been done successfully once?

Because they want to put Wonder Woman in tense situations and don't want to have to bring in giant threats for her movie (which, given WB's history, will probably have a low budget)?

Almost all superheroes get powered down for the movies because it takes out most of the tension when said superheroes have to fight other characters than the main villains.

????

I don't claim to be an expert on her, and no power on this Earth will get me to go see that joke of a movie, but isn't she just supposed to be kinda strong and fast

Gamora is a powerhouse. Super strength, super speed, agility, durability, healing factor, and also doubles as a ninja and assassin.

She can't fly, but Gamora still fits the concept of a Superman level female superhero. I doubt most audiences would care about her not flying. There was also Mystique in DoFP who was just as important as any of the male characters in the film, drove the actual plot, had plenty of cool action scenes, and was played by an actress that women actually liked.

I really don't see how Wonder Woman in BvS is going to be any big new step for the genre. If she gets her own film that doesn't suck, then that'd be new and awesome. But her being able to fly is not the best thing WW has to offer. The character's ideals and story are her strengths, not her power levels.

Also, what's wrong with the Guardians of the Galaxy movie being kinda funny?

[Vanguard-01]

Because they want to put Wonder Woman in tense situations and don't want to have to bring in giant threats for her movie (which, given WB's history, will probably have a low budget)?

Almost all superheroes get powered down for the movies because it takes out most of the tension when said superheroes have to fight other characters than the main villains.

"Powered down" for Diana doesn't have to mean "just slightly stronger than Batman and no flying." We didn't see Superman benchpressing the planet in MoS, but his strength was still awesome to behold.

Diana has few superstrength feats as it is. There isn't a particularly high standard for her strength feats. I don't need to see her lifting an aircraft carrier to be happy, but I'd like to see her at least tossing a tank or something along those lines. And I really don't see how letting her fly hurts any tension moments or stuff like that.

Gamora is a powerhouse. Super strength, super speed, agility, durability, healing factor, and also doubles as a ninja and assassin.

She can't fly, but Gamora still fits the concept of a Superman level female superhero. I doubt most audiences would care about her not flying. There was also Mystique in DoFP who was just as important as any of the male characters in the film, drove the actual plot, had plenty of cool action scenes, and was played by an actress that women actually liked.

I really don't see how Wonder Woman in BvS is going to be any big new step for the genre. If she gets her own film that doesn't suck, then that'd be new and awesome. But her being able to fly is not the best thing WW has to offer. The character's ideals and story are her strengths, not her power levels.

Also, what's wrong with the Guardians of the Galaxy movie being kinda funny?

Do we know Gamora will be showing all that power in the movie? In the previews, I haven't seen her do anything except stand around looking hot and brandishing a blade. Has Marvel confirmed she'll be a tank buster, or whatever?

Wonder Woman STARTED the female superhero genre. Nearly 75 years, and still no other female superhero can touch her. If ANYONE should redefine the genre, it's her.

And once again, have I somehow misled you into believing that I only care about her being able to fly or other stuff? I could've sworn I just said that I'd like to see her display BOTH an awesome personality and great power. Will I still like the movies if she's just "Batman with a spear?" Eh. I'll be disappointed, to say the least. But if, as you say, her story is still well-handled, yes. I can move on with my life despite the fact that WB passed on a golden opportunity to show the world how awesome Wonder Woman is supposed to be.

What's wrong with Guardians?

1.) Gamora is the only character I can even PRETEND to care about. And that's pretty much just because she's hot.

2.) Gun. Toting. Talking. Racoon. 'Nuff said.

[Pinsir]

This "First come, first preserved" thinking makes no sense. According to this line of thinking people would reject Ultron for being the Terminator.

[Mr. Mastermind]

"Powered down" for Diana doesn't have to mean "just slightly stronger than Batman and no flying." We didn't see Superman benchpressing the planet in MoS, but his strength was still awesome to behold.

Diana has few superstrength feats as it is. There isn't a particularly high standard for her strength feats. I don't need to see her lifting an aircraft carrier to be happy, but I'd like to see her at least tossing a tank or something along those lines. And I really don't see how letting her fly hurts any tension moments or stuff like that.

I honestly don't care about Wonder Woman's strength at all, just her character, so whatever. There are some filmmakers who would find it easier to make a film with a Superman level main character, so I won't fault them if they went that way.

Do we know Gamora will be showing all that power in the movie? In the previews, I haven't seen her do anything except stand around looking hot and brandishing a blade. Has Marvel confirmed she'll be a tank buster, or whatever?

Well, I've been staying away from the trailers in fear of spoilers, so I can't judge.

Wonder Woman STARTED the female superhero genre. Nearly 75 years, and still no other female superhero can touch her. If ANYONE should redefine the genre, it's her.

And once again, have I somehow misled you into believing that I only care about her being able to fly or other stuff? I could've sworn I just said that I'd like to see her display BOTH an awesome personality and great power. Will I still like the movies if she's just "Batman with a spear?" Eh. I'll be disappointed, to say the least. But if, as you say, her story is still well-handled, yes. I can move on with my life despite the fact that WB passed on a golden opportunity to show the world how awesome Wonder Woman is supposed to be.

The world will still think of Wonder Woman is awesome is she is actually likable and does cool stuff without the added help of superpowers.

And I think you underestimate other female superheroes. I know plenty of people (actually, a majority of my friends) that like Mystique and Black Widow yet couldn't care less about Wonder Woman. Gal Gadot being a no name actor doesn't help, especially when compared to the likes of ScarJo and JLaw (sorry, I couldn't resist).

What's wrong with Guardians?

1.) Gamora is the only character I can even PRETEND to care about. And that's pretty much just because she's hot.

2.) Gun. Toting. Talking. Racoon. 'Nuff said.

I don't get it, why don't you want to see a movie with a gun toting talking racoon voiced by an Academy Award Nominee? When was the last time you can say that about a movie? Plus it's got Chris Pratt and Karen Gillan in it, and that just makes it even cooler.

[dshipp17]

Wasn't she flying in the last issue? They're starting to lay all of the groundwork to have her flying in the move; it depends on how little or how extensively they plan on using Wonder Woman in the move. She might just get a small role; at that, it might be a small role in a group setting with members of the Justice League.

[Pinsir]

Wonder Woman STARTED the female superhero genre. Nearly 75 years, and still no other female superhero can touch her. If ANYONE should redefine the genre, it's her.

As a historian I'm always skeptical of "This was the first!" claims. I know for sure WW wasn't the first female hero and I'm pretty sure Superman wasn't either. She certainly is the most popular one, back when she was created and at various times in her past. Though currently Ms. Marvel, Harley Quinn, Batgirl, and probably some others sell more...Still she is the most recognizable.

What makes WW most important is her ideology. If you want to make her different from other female heroes or even male ones (herp WW is Superman with boobs!). The most powerful WW runs have always been about ideology like Marston's and Azz's. Make her about fighting with love, about reforming foes (not whatever Johns is doing with her), about ethics.

[Vanguard-01]

I honestly don't care about Wonder Woman's strength at all, just her character, so whatever. There are some filmmakers who would find it easier to make a film with a Superman level main character, so I won't fault them if they went that way.

Fair enough.

The world will still think of Wonder Woman is awesome is she is actually likable and does cool stuff without the added help of superpowers.

I've agreed with you twice on this issue.

And I think you underestimate other female superheroes. I know plenty of people (actually, a majority of my friends) that like Mystique and Black Widow yet couldn't care less about Wonder Woman. Gal Gadot being a no name actor doesn't help, especially when compared to the likes of ScarJo and JLaw (sorry, I couldn't resist).

I'm not so much talking about popularity. I'm talking about iconic status and recognition. Anyone born in Western society pretty much comes out of the womb able to identify Wonder Woman at a glance.

Mystique and Black Widow are still only recognizable by hardcore comics fans and people who saw the movie, but even the movies haven't elevated their recognition factor very much.

Gal being a no-name? Yeah, I won't lie. That could hurt her chances here. As you say, she's going to be compared to two very popular actresses who are both very hot items in Hollywood right now. This is why I think it's important for her to be the total package: powerful AND interesting. Yeah, you're right on one thing: if they have to choose between making her interesting and making her powerful, then they should absolutely favor making her interesting. But if they can do BOTH, then I think she's got a real shot at changing the whole female superhero landscape.

I don't get it, why don't you want to see a movie with a gun toting talking racoon voiced by an Academy Award Nominee? When was the last time you can say that about a movie? Plus it's got Chris Pratt and Karen Gillan in it, and that just makes it even cooler.

I literally care nothing for talking raccoons with guns and an attitude problem. Or ripoffs from Tolkien's Ents for that matter. Who is voicing them, who is playing them doesn't matter. If I don't care about the characters, I'm not going to care about the movie.

[Dr. Hurt]

Movie Cap was also Captain America for the vast majority of his two movies. Superman only became Superman in like the last twenty minutes of his movie. He's still learning how to BE Superman, so this isn't remotely fair comparison.

And we're talking about POWER here. Not personality.

You were talking about coolness, dont shift the goalpost. Coolness isnt exclusive to power levels.

As for Superman, funny how a scrawny little kid from Bronx that had never seen action once managed to be a bigger inspiration than a godlike Superman.



No, the godlike Superman needs to get lectured by two dads and a priest to learn how to be a good guy. He needs to make out with a woman he just met over the rubble of Metropolis and then kill the bad guy to learn that killing is bad... MKAY?

The whole point of Superman is that his american pie - kansas upbringing is responsible for him being the man he is. He doesnt need to learn that killing is bad AT THIRTY FREAKING THREE (like Jesus, get it? Goyer is so clever, omg best writer ever!) YEARS OF AGE.

Nonsense. They stomped the city flat. I promise you, more than 5000 people died in that battle.

And once again? ZOD did all the building destroying. Superman directly damaged ONY buildings that were already empty and NEVER totally ruined any of those. Watch the movie again. Every building that was damaged was damage by Zod punching or throwing Superman through it. And every building we saw them fly through was EMPTY. The city was evacuating.

Gael is going to come and clean this thread if we go too off topic. I'll just say that the world didnt look so bleak in Godzilla and his win felt like a triumph.

You are judging two movies against one. This kind of thinking reminds me of when Civilization V came out and people were judging it harshly because it didn't have features that IV had that it itself only got through expansions.

I was just saying that Captain America won me over from the first scene that Steve appeared in the first film (and i had only read Brubaker's run so i didnt even care much about the character) while MoS Superman didnt. He could take all the Avengers in a second and yet i dont care much about him. So to bring this all back to WW, i think the most important thing is to make her cool in many ways, not just powers. She needs to be inspirational, to have some spunk, to be fearless, and if she has that, i think her power levels will be secondary. To the main audience that is, this place is gonna go up in flames, as will every feministic blog out there.

[Vonter Voman]

I would like if she didn't fly and only jumped like Faora. But I'm also fine if she flies as long as she doesn't go around floating everytime.

[Vanguard-01]

No, the godlike Superman needs to get lectured by two dads and a priest to learn how to be a good guy. He needs to make out with a woman he just met over the rubble of Metropolis and then kill the bad guy to learn that killing is bad... MKAY?

His lectures from Jor-El didn't teach him how to be a good guy. Jor-El taught him his history and the meaning of the "S." He told Clark he'd be an inspiration. That's it. Clark already knew what to do. The priest? The priest just gave him the advice that sometimes he needs to take a leap of faith. Hardly "Good Guy 101."

No. Good God, how many times are you going to have to hear this? Superman did NOT have to kill someone to learn that killing is bad. That is NOT the point. He was raised by two moral parents who taught him right from wrong. He knew killing anyone was bad. He knew killing ZOD was bad. Which is why he BEGGED Zod to give up and not force him to do what he did, and why he agonized over the death after it happened.

Superman killing Zod was not, I repeat, NOT intended to show him that killing people is bad. Have you ever killed anyone? Neither have I. But the people out there who HAVE had to kill someone have a more poignant understanding of just how horrible it feels to take a human life. It doesn't TEACH you that killing is bad. It let's you experience the depth of WHY it is so awful.

And he did NOT make out with Lois over the rubble of Metropolis. He made out with her after he just saved her (and, he believed, the entire city) from death. They kissed because they thought the fight was over. The minute Zod was revealed to be alive, Clark left her to go fight him. They didn't make out after he killed Zod either. That scene ended with him on his knees, clinging to Lois for comfort because of the horror at what he had just done.

I'm increasingly certain that Superman's killing of Zod will motivate him to never want to kill again. It's called "character development."

Gael is going to come and clean this thread if we go too off topic. I'll just say that the world didnt look so bleak in Godzilla and his win felt like a triumph.

Seven billion people were not incinerated or crushed to death by one petty genocidal maniac whose only reason for trying to kill them at that point was petty spite at the end of MoS. Feels like a triumph to me.

So to bring this all back to WW, i think the most important thing is to make her cool in many ways, not just powers. She needs to be inspirational, to have some spunk, to be fearless, and if she has that, i think her power levels will be secondary. To the main audience that is, this place is gonna go up in flames, as will every feministic blog out there.

As I have been saying to Mr. Mastermind: what you're saying is true. But WHY in the world can't we hope that they make her interesting, awesome, AND powerful? Yeah, if you have to sacrifice one of those things, then sure, sacrifice power. But I don't see why we need to keep driving forward this notion that we practically WANT to see Diana reduced to just a chick with a sword.

[Dr. Hurt]

His lectures from Jor-El didn't teach him how to be a good guy. Jor-El taught him his history and the meaning of the "S." He told Clark he'd be an inspiration. That's it. Clark already knew what to do. The priest? The priest just gave him the advice that sometimes he needs to take a leap of faith. Hardly "Good Guy 101."

No. Good God, how many times are you going to have to hear this? Superman did NOT have to kill someone to learn that killing is bad. That is NOT the point. He was raised by two moral parents who taught him right from wrong. He knew killing anyone was bad. He knew killing ZOD was bad. Which is why he BEGGED Zod to give up and not force him to do what he did, and why he agonized over the death after it happened.

Superman killing Zod was not, I repeat, NOT intended to show him that killing people is bad. Have you ever killed anyone? Neither have I. But the people out there who HAVE had to kill someone have a more poignant understanding of just how horrible it feels to take a human life. It doesn't TEACH you that killing is bad. It let's you experience the depth of WHY it is so awful.

And he did NOT make out with Lois over the rubble of Metropolis. He made out with her after he just saved her (and, he believed, the entire city) from death. They kissed because they thought the fight was over. The minute Zod was revealed to be alive, Clark left her to go fight him. They didn't make out after he killed Zod either. That scene ended with him on his knees, clinging to Lois for comfort because of the horror at what he had just done.

I'm increasingly certain that Superman's killing of Zod will motivate him to never want to kill again. It's called "character development."

You make some good points. But Goyer and Snyder....

Nolan himself, the guy who didnt know why the utility belt or the cape were important to batman, and needed Goyer to convince him to use them (so in other words doesnt know crap about superheroes), knew that this was the wrong move.

Goyer frames the decision to have Superman kill as a modernizing tactic. “If you don’t reinvent these characters…then they become stagnant, and they cease being relevant…hopefully, we’ve redefined Superman.” Snyder, however, goes a little bit deeper in his exploration of Superman’s decision. The director of such films as Sucker Punch and Legend of the Guardians: The Owls of Ga’Hoole explains that he wanted to specifically explore Superman’s Zod-killing in the context of his development as a superhero. “If it’s truly an origin story, his aversion to killing is unexplained,” says Snyder, continuing:

I felt like, if we could find a way of making it impossible for him — Kobayashi Maru, totally no way out — I felt like that could also make you go, “This is the why of him never killing again.” He’s basically obliterated his entire people and his culture, and he is responsible for it, and he’s just, like, “How could I ever kill again?”

http://insidemovies.ew.com/2013/06/1...-steel-ending/

Seven billion people were not incinerated or crushed to death by one petty genocidal maniac whose only reason for trying to kill them at that point was petty spite at the end of MoS. Feels like a triumph to me.

The movie was so bleak and depressing that i didnt feel it. With the Avengers or Godzilla i got that uplifting, triumphant feeling.

As I have been saying to Mr. Mastermind: what you're saying is true. But WHY in the world can't we hope that they make her interesting, awesome, AND powerful? Yeah, if you have to sacrifice one of those things, then sure, sacrifice power. But I don't see why we need to keep driving forward this notion that we practically WANT to see Diana reduced to just a chick with a sword.

No, that is a good point and i agree. I was just argueing that powers alone arent enough to make her cool.

[Pinsir]

I don't think WW is suppose to be cool. You are trying to boil WW into a Marvel-esque generic hero and I would prefer my lord Snyder to take it in a different direction. I get that expectations are higher for WW as opposed to Superman and Batman who have had multiple appearances already. However, WW fans are going to have to come to grip that their long awaited baby may not be the one they hoped for. If they appreciate it none the less or go insane is up to them.

Also it is irritating that most of your post is about MoS/Cap then you say that "Well we better not go any further here, you know Gael." It sounds like you are trying to get away with views you know will be challenged, especially after you mentioned several blatant inaccuracies.