DC Should Just Announce A Wonder Woman Movie Already

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

DC Should Just Announce A Wonder Woman Movie Already

It's the obvious way to give Marvel the finger. Isn't that justification enough guys?

Read Full Article

Well, if it got Marvel to get off their asses and commit to a Carol Danvers Captain Marvel movie just to not look behind the times, I'd be all for this.

And honestly, I do really like Diana. But the last thing I want them doing in Hollywood is this pissing contest the article suggests. I do want a Wonder Woman movie. I love the character and have since Lynda Carter spun in circles in the 70s. But I don't want them rushing it and messing it up just for the sake of grabbing headlines they may not be able to deliver on.

As cool as Diana is, I want them to have a plan in play to make her successful. I don't want Warner being the Hollywood manifestation of that one guy on every internet comment thread that just jumps in to yell "FIRST" with nothing interesting to say to back it up.

Fingers crossed that both Carol and Diana will get their time to shine sooner rather than later.

Great article, Ross. Between SJW and your earlier breakdown on Net Neutrality, I think you might be the best thing to happen to the Escapist since the Jimquisition.

Keep up the good work, champ!

I honestly do not agree with the push to give Wonder Woman her own movie. Yes, I understand the symbolic nature of a female lead in a superhero movie. It would make us all feel like good, responsible citizens to support it. But why Wonder Woman? The Silver Age accouterments that most people know her for (the truth lasso, the invisible jet) are goofy and outdated. And what else is there to her except, "I'm like Superman, but a woman"? What personality traits make her different from Superman? Everything that originally made her different has over time been discarded as sexist (because, well, most of it was). So what's left that I should be interested in? And no, the Greek myth angle is neither cool nor creative. I don't remember anybody fawning over how creative that Hercules movie with The Rock was.

Plus, her rogues' gallery isn't what you'd call exciting. Superhero movies stand or fall on the strength of their villain, which is why everyone likes Christopher Reeve's Superman II the best, and everybody's favorite Batman movies are the two that have The Joker in them. Is Ares the kind of villain who could steal scenes? (Because let's face it: that's who her first villain is going to be.) What motivates him besides "'Cause I'm Evil"?

The problem is that a Wonder Woman movie has to be good, and I don't see that they have much to work with. You'd need a serious re-invention of her character, which is possible, but it's certainly not a guaranteed home-run.

WickedLordJasper:

Plus, her rogues' gallery isn't what you'd call exciting. Superhero movies stand or fall on the strength of their villain, which is why everyone likes Christopher Reeve's Superman II the best, and everybody's favorite Batman movies are the two that have The Joker in them. Is Ares the kind of villain who could steal scenes? (Because let's face it: that's who her first villain is going to be.) What motivates him besides "'Cause I'm Evil"?

Surely you can think of ways that Ares would be awesome, right? Also, no one really considered Loki to be one of the most important essential Marvel villains, not really, until Tom Hiddleston turned Loki into the GOAT Marvel villain. Right actor + good writing = awesomeness. Which is to say, take the god of War, put him in the hands of someone awesome, and square off against Wonder Woman.

That said, I myself would rather that Wonder Woman be more interesting than her villains. One of the worst things about DC comic movies is that the villains are way more entertaining. Also, I take issue with your assessment of the original Superman. Christopher Reeve made that movie work, with assist from Gene Hackman, not the other way around. Er, IMHO I mean.

EDITED TO ADD:

The problem is that a Wonder Woman movie has to be good, and I don't see that they have much to work with.

If only there were professionals who could, like, think up stories which could then be converted into, I dunno, something like a play's script but for movies.

Anyway, apologies for the sarcasm, but I'm fairly certain if someone could turn a boring short story into one of the most touching, thought provoking, tearjerking slice of awesomeness ever made about starcrossed lovers (Brokeback Mountain is what I am thinking of), I feel confident it's within the realm of possibility that Wonder Woman's movie could be made good.

FWIW, I'm a fan of the character and her series/mythology etc. I think potential goodness is already baked in. For proof, check out the DC Animated Movie about Wonder Woman from 2009.

ZZoMBiE13:
Well, if it got Marvel to get off their asses and commit to a Carol Danvers Captain Marvel movie just to not look behind the times, I'd be all for this.

And honestly, I do really like Diana. But the last thing I want them doing in Hollywood is this pissing contest the article suggests. I do want a Wonder Woman movie. I love the character and have since Lynda Carter spun in circles in the 70s. But I don't want them rushing it and messing it up just for the sake of grabbing headlines they may not be able to deliver on.

As cool as Diana is, I want them to have a plan in play to make her successful. I don't want Warner being the Hollywood manifestation of that one guy on every internet comment thread that just jumps in to yell "FIRST" with nothing interesting to say to back it up.

Fingers crossed that both Carol and Diana will get their time to shine sooner rather than later.

You make good points. I am, of course, assuming they already have stuff in the works. Mainly, I think announcing Wonder Woman would make Female Superhero a legitimate thing people have to try and do. Hopefully it would spur Marvel to do their own, and other studios to try stuff too.

RossaLincoln:
Surely you can think of ways that Ares would be awesome, right? Also, no one really considered Loki to be one of the most important essential Marvel villains, not really, until Tom Hiddleston turned Loki into the GOAT Marvel villain. Right actor + good writing = awesomeness. Which is to say, take the god of War, put him in the hands of someone awesome, and square off against Wonder Woman.

It's true, you could do interesting things with him. And here's where my shameful, shameful secret comes out: I've only seen the Thor movie, not The Avengers. But I wasn't a big fan of the Loki in the original Thor: he was much more sullen and reserved than the hilarious trickster I grew up reading about. But apparently people saw something in him: maybe he became really fascinating in The Avengers. And there's lots of material with Ares I haven't read: maybe there's some way to deconstruct him into someone that feels unique.

RossaLincoln:
That said, I myself would rather that Wonder Woman be more interesting than her villains. One of the worst things about DC comic movies is that the villains are way more entertaining. Also, I take issue with your assessment of the original Superman. Christopher Reeve made that movie work, with assist from Gene Hackman, not the other way around. Er, IMHO I mean.

This is a good point: maybe I am pinning too much expectation on the rogues' gallery. I tend to go for the villain anyway, which I admit is a wholly personal preference on my part. If you let me film my own Superman movie, I would film the graphic novel "Lex Luthor: Man of Steel" without a second thought. That movie would be amazing. If Wonder Woman can actually carry her own movie, though, I'd need to hear about some hook that really changed my mind. Because so far, the only hook I've heard from anywhere on the internet is "Well, she's a woman".

EnglishBlues:

Keep up the good work, champ!

Daw, thanks!

RossaLincoln:
Also, no one really considered Loki to be one of the most important essential Marvel villains, not really, until Tom Hiddleston turned Loki into the GOAT Marvel villain.

That is so true. And not just about Loki really. I never cared for Thor's comics. I mean I liked the Avengers as much as the next comic nerd, but Thor and the Rainbow Road and Loki... none of it ever appealed to me at all. At least not in the 80s or 90s when I was doing most of my collecting.

When I heard Thor was getting the movie treatment, I wasn't excited in the least. But then it came out, I gave it a chance, and it was fantastic. It was grandiose and almost Shakespearean in it's delivery. They even made the bifrost cool with it's prismatic rock design. After Thor was when I knew I'd be a fan of Marvel's films for the long haul. Before that it was worrying that perhaps it was just RDJ making the magic happen. HULK was certainly fun, but it wasn't Iron Man fun. Then when Thor came along you could really see that they had something planned out in the best way.

I just wish Thor would wear his damn helmet once in a while. But that is a minor gripe.

Ugh, WW to me is just a boring character visually, storywise, and abilities all just seem meh to me.

It would take a miracle to make me go to a WW movie.

RossaLincoln:
It's the obvious way to give Marvel the finger. Isn't that justification enough guys?

The only justification a movie needs is a good script. Or Christopher Walken.

As much as I desperately want a Wonder Woman movie, I can't escape the suspicion that it might be best for all of us to wait until after the era of Christopher Nolan and Zach Snyder as the driving forces behind Warner Brothers DC movies has come to an end. Neither are particularly good with female leading characters, and Snyder in particular tends to run way way too far into fetish territory if not chained down and beaten about the head and shoulders by studio thugs. 9Granted Wonder Woman was originally created as bondage fetish fantasy material... but honestly I don't think that's what any of us want to see in this movie?) (Well OK probably a good number of us wouldn't mind seeing that... but not in the big public movie theater. We have the internet for that sort of thing these days.)

RossaLincoln:
Worse, however, is that the company currently taking a well-deserved victory lap over the success of Guardians - hell, the company currently being heralded as the new Pixar for chrissakes - considers a superhero movie with a female lead to be a little too challenging given the company's current schedule. So which studio is showing the severe lack of imagination now?

This is why I don't enjoy your articles. You take one quote, and blow the context to hell. He didn't say it was "too challenging", but rather that it was a challenge due to the current schedule. That is a different concept, different context. Bending someone else's words to make your point is the worst kind of journalism. I say this without malicious intent, rather as a plea to be objective, even if you have a point to get across, taking the easy way out that so many politically charged "journalists" is just cheap. Its hack writing at best. If you want to honestly be taken seriously, get this SJW thing off the floor instead of just gladhanding with everyone who already agrees with you, try to not misconceive or misconstrue quotes.
What I infer out of the whole Marvel explosion is that they didn't expect it to keep going like it has, and the herd has become a stampede. Sure they could make a movie with a woman lead, and they totally should. However it shouldn't be done just to pander to the female crowd, it should be done to be done right. A Carol Danvers/Ms. Marvel movie would be absolutely fabulous if done correctly, and I actually feel that with all the untitled movies they have lined up, one of them can be a Ms. Marvel movie. And now that GotG has proven that the IP name doesn't mean jack as long as the movie hits the right notes, there's a huge possibility that a female led movie like Ms. Marvel would be a success. Also with Lucy opening strong Marvel has a proof of concept that a strong female lead in a super-hero movie is very possible and should definitely be explored. And being owned by Disney, who just put out Frozen, I would expect that Marvel Studios is cooking up something and keeping it under wraps.
I don't judge them for not having done it, there is still time as far as I'm aware and that they haven't done it yet isn't a sign of anything except that they haven't done it yet. If you want to further a cause, why not go after the people who are actually holding down the gender in question instead of doing exactly what both sides of the political aisles do and pick apart people's words until you find something to latch onto and harp upon to make them seem like bad people.

sneakypenguin:
Ugh, Wonder Woman to me is just a boring character visually, storywise, and her abilities all just seem 'meh' to me.

It would take a miracle to make me go to a WW movie.

Quoted for truth. I for one would prefer Aquaman.

I'm going to put this out there; if DC's scared of doing a Wonder Woman movie, then they should try other female characters: Hawk Girl, Zatanna, Black Canary, the list goes on and it seems to be a much easier sell. Think about the Zatanna movie where there's a skeptical world that doesn't believe in magic but Zatanna proves them wrong. Seems like easy movie if you ask me.

They won't. They just won't. It's a miracle that WW is even in the Batman superman movie. Despite Lucy's success despite doing that whole 10% of the brain myth, and Frozen blowing up, it's not gunna happen.

Basically I have more faith that Marvel will make a Squirrel Girl movie than DC giving any female lead (If not WW, then who? I'd suggest Power Girl/huntress as a duo, r even standalone, but that'll be a cold day in hell.) a movie simply because of how their Movie makers tore into She-Hulk. I'd be impressed/surprised if WW did any justice to the comics in the movie, a decent script, and got any decent screen time. Especially since she's not even in the title.

I just love when online armchair critics tell studios to "take a risk" fully unaware of how douchey it is to tell someone to do that when you have no stake in it yourself.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, Wonder Women's biggest problem in getting a movie is feminism. She's one of if not the feminist icon, so any movie she gets is going to be picked apart, scrutinized, and put under the microscope for hidden sexism. Too butch and man hating. Too Manic Pixie Dream Girl. Needing Steve Trevor to save her. Needing to save Steve Trevor. The outfit. Large parts of her standard origin. There's just too much that could be misconstrued out of context by people with chips on their shoulders, and until such time a Wonder Woman movie could just be enjoyed, not endlessly picked apart to determine how much it accidentally supports rape culture, any film maker would probably prefer to break dance in a minefield.

Guardians didn't have that problem because few know who these characters are, and fewer hold a firm attachment. I mean, I like the movie, but I was put off somewhat that Gamora, a character who in the comics could trade blows with Thanos and once decimated a UN military unit (complete with tanks) unarmed in less than 10 minutes, got reduced to someone that could be outdone by a normal human and needed his rescue. No preconceptions, no problems. On the other hand, while I wouldn't call Man of Steel a great film, so much flack came out of it not for the film, but that it didn't meet their preconceptions of Superman, and Wonder Woman would invite far worse.

Factor in that DC is having trouble getting these films right except for Batman, perhaps they should learn from Marvel and pick a lessor known to the masses character to start. Batwoman would get their female and homosexual characters out in one go. While I'd pity the actress, I always felt Zatana could do more interesting things than back up the league. I've got a soft spot for Stargirl from the 2000s JSA run. Same era, maybe tell the Hawk characters' story from Kendra Saunders' point of view (Carter being a bit stalkerish). If you don't mind monkeying a bit with Oriigins, World's Finest has a good incarnation of Power Girl right now (and it started in a costume without a boob window.) Or if you don't mind going dark, a take on Secret Six.

Just some ideas.

I admit, I would be shocked and amazed (no, not one or the other, truly both) if DC did this. At least, if there's any cross-pollination between the comics and the movies. I honestly don't know, I don't go to movies much.

This is one of the few things I would honestly drop everything and reverse that policy for. Wonder Woman is an awesome character.

Redd the Sock:
I've said it before and I'll say it again, Wonder Women's biggest problem in getting a movie is feminism. She's one of if not the feminist icon, so any movie she gets is going to be picked apart, scrutinized, and put under the microscope for hidden sexism. Too butch and man hating. Too Manic Pixie Dream Girl. Needing Steve Trevor to save her. Needing to save Steve Trevor. The outfit. Large parts of her standard origin. There's just too much that could be misconstrued out of context by people with chips on their shoulders, and until such time a Wonder Woman movie could just be enjoyed, not endlessly picked apart to determine how much it accidentally supports rape culture, any film maker would probably prefer to break dance in a minefield.

I admit, I've been only a very, very occasional movie-goer in the past decade or so, but...did feminists get a whole bunch of cultural power when I wasn't looking? I had assumed we were still being safely ignored, but we're suddenly able to dictate plots to filmmakers and ruin the experiences of moviegoers everywhere? I was under the impression that the problem was currently too much overt sexism, rather than just hidden cultural patriarchal assumptions.

A Zatanna movie done in a "Now You See Me" movie style would intrigue me. Wonder Woman could definitely be done well depending on which variant of her power the studio would employ (invisible jet Wonder Woman might put her in cahoots with Lexcorp or Wayne Enterprises in some form, while free flight Wonder Woman would be an awesome counter to Man Of Steel) I think occasional flashbacks to her Amazonian origins are a must. Maybe you could bring her in as a pseudo-villain at first (give her that Flashpoint Paradox ruthlessness that made me fall in love with her all over again)

"making DC Superheroes look like they're standing in the rain blasting Peter Gabriel's "In Your Eyes". "

Are you sure that's really the Peter Gabriel song you mean? The big, uplifting number he usually ends the main part of gigs with, often having Africans in brightly coloured clothes come on stage to chant throughout?

I'd have though "No Self-Control", or even "Red Rain" would have been more fitting Gabriel songs...

a rogues gallery of villains who could easily put to shame anything Marvel has yet put on film (with the exception of Loki of course)

Hmm, not so sure about that, actually. I can only think of a few Wonder Woman villains and I don't think any of them really count as iconic. I'd say Cheetah or Giganta (she is a more WW centric villain not just a general DC Villain, right? I'm never quite sure on that) are just as obscure as Ronan from Guardians or Malakith from Dark World. And the less said about Egg Fu the better.

You could do Greek gods I suppose, people are fairly familiar with them...largely because we've been plundering Greek myths for stories for decades now. Hell we had two Hercules movies this year alone. Any use of Ares or Hades is going to seem a bit done before, not to mention the use of a mythological god as a villain is going to draw inevitable comparisons to Loki (even the article did precisely that).

Its not the villains that make a movie (usually, anyway) but I don't think you can rely on them to really stand out and make people talk

Doing it just to appease people will release a poor film.

Doing it because someone is passionate about telling the story= a much better film

It would be good for a female hero movie to come out, and it is slowly getting there. As others have said, this is something that shouldn't be rushed, and will have to come naturally, not come out as a way to just appease a certain portion of people, because that never works out well.

As far as Marvel, they may not have any female super hero movies planned that we know of, but they do have the Agent Carter mini series that will be coming out. It may be a short series, but it has a female lead, and it's a step forward for getting there. If it does well enough, it might entice Marvel and other companies to make more female lead shows. I think the best thing people can do is to watch that show and support it. Even if it isn't the best thing, it should be supported to show people want something like it.

I feel this is relevent-

http://www.dorkly.com/post/62412/the-trouble-with-wonder-woman

Honestly if they wanted to make a good Wonder Woman movie, they should probably goes with the 2009 animated movie root (she's an Amazon princess and Ares was the villain).

that racoon joke I do kind of agree with in spirit at least

HOWEVER the glaring differences is the talking Racoon is not the main character, the main character of Guardians is your average plucky white guy

I guess that joke could be used as a jab at BOTH Marvel and DC

RossaLincoln:
DC Should Just Announce A Wonder Woman Movie Already

It's the obvious way to give Marvel the finger. Isn't that justification enough guys?

Read Full Article

Gahhhhh..... I disagree with you sir... I have reasons but who cares... I don't think that the Wonder Woman movie should be made just because DC could stick it to marvel or because the movie could do well cause as you've condcendingly proclaimed into the vast echo-chamber "women watch movies guys gawh!" It's just that it's so tiring. What if it turns out like the legend of chun-li or catwoman, or Electra, etc... It would be lucky to be as good as Xena and for the record the costume is not that bad. It would be nice if they had a good Vision for it, but they clearly don't and I would hate to see them half assedly pump out another garbage reactionary cash in that ends up being a leggier green lantern...

But again who cares... I'm pretty sure I'm not a men's rights activist but arguing against a wonder woman movie sure feels awkward in this case...

mjharper:
"making DC Superheroes look like they're standing in the rain blasting Peter Gabriel's "In Your Eyes". "

Are you sure that's really the Peter Gabriel song you mean? The big, uplifting number he usually ends the main part of gigs with, often having Africans in brightly coloured clothes come on stage to chant throughout?

I'd have though "No Self-Control", or even "Red Rain" would have been more fitting Gabriel songs...

You haven't seen Say Anything, have you?

*sigh*

First off, on the most basic and elemental point, I agree. There should be a Wonder Woman movie, sooner rather than later. I think Gal Gadot is a good enough actress and a strong enough presence that she could definitely pull off being the lead of a movie, and DC is in a good position to make that movie happen. At the very least, it would put something on their release schedule that fans could look forward to with interest and curiosity, rather than the mild dread and possible eagerness to pull things down that BvS:DoJ seems to have engendered in that same base.

So, look at that! I want to agree!

...And then the editorial had to throw in "Xena meets bondage costume" (what?!), "stripperific", "mansplaining unimaginative losers", "unimaginative and dickish", and calling a perfectly reasonable explanation "full of shit" because it was only viewed through a narrow lens that was pre-ordained to come to the conclusion that supported the hypothesis.

And, yes, I read the footnoted editorial... And I'm beginning to wish the Escapist as a whole would get out of the habit of using editorials to "support" other editorials.

I would like to see a Black Widow movie, too, and I'm hoping that if the (rumored!) budget concerns are an issue, they can be overcome; I would hardly be surprised if Scarlett Johansson was perfectly capable of negotiating a hefty salary at this point, with or without a headliner title.

But the amount of care Marvel has put into crafting a universe that works has earned them the right to be taken with a shred of credulity if they say that their arc doesn't fit in a female-led movie right now. Ten movies in a row that were all above average, all of which seemed to be building and expanding their collective universe: that hasn't been done before. And it suggests to me that maybe we shouldn't congratulate ourselves for our willingness to lean over the engineer's shoulder, poke them in their tool-using arm, and yell "YOU SHOULD PUT A GEAR RIGHT HERE! GEARS ARE GREAT!"

...And I'm beginning to think no one who writes for the Escapist actually understands what "mansplaining" means. "Mansplaining" isn't when a man explains something, or even explains something to a woman, or even explains it to a woman condescendingly. It's when a man presumes to explain something to a woman that she already knows.

That's not behavior that's unique or necessarily common to men, and the term is ridiculously sexist to boot. It is asshole behavior which I have seen both sexes participate in, and the term should die.

A little more to say, but I think that's it for steam venting; I'll be back in a bit (I'm sure everyone will wait with bated breath (said jokingly.))

See, the problem is this: I don't really trust DC to make a movie right now, and if a Wonder Woman movies releases and then is terrible (And doesn't inexplicably make crazy amounts of money like anything Michael Bay), there's a real risk of ending up with a mountain of headlines about how it was totally the right call to not ever make female-led superhero movies in the first place.

The chance of failure should never be a reason not to do something, but as somebody purely spectating, it's not hard to see how a DC Wonder Woman movie could have generally negative results.

On an unrelated note: I'd prefer to see a Birds of Prey movie because Oracle is the best superhero ever.

ZZoMBiE13:
Well, if it got Marvel to get off their asses and commit to a Carol Danvers Captain Marvel movie just to not look behind the times, I'd be all for this.

Could be one of the mystery movies coming out by 2018, though it's more likely she'll be Ms. Marvel then Captain Marvel if this is the case (Which as much as I'd prefer, I see more sense in the Captain Marvel route).

Also, DC are clearly not smart enough to do a Wonder Woman movie. I mean, they're stuffing the entire JLA (New Batman, Aquaman, Wonder Woman, Cyborg all confirmed to debut in Batman v Superman) into one movie in hopes that'll be adequate introduction before they do the JLA super star tag team. And whilst true, a lack of a solo female hero Marvel movie is disconcerting, it's more disconcerting that DC doesn't trust Aquaman, Cyborg and Wonder Woman to hold their own, especially given the popularity of the characters and the demand for movies based on them (Okay maybe not so much Cyborg, but Wonder Woman and Aquaman definitely).

Shiftygiant:

ZZoMBiE13:
Well, if it got Marvel to get off their asses and commit to a Carol Danvers Captain Marvel movie just to not look behind the times, I'd be all for this.

Could be one of the mystery movies coming out by 2018, though it's more likely she'll be Ms. Marvel then Captain Marvel if this is the case (Which as much as I'd prefer, I see more sense in the Captain Marvel route).

Also, DC are clearly not smart enough to do a Wonder Woman movie. I mean, they're stuffing the entire JLA (New Batman, Aquaman, Wonder Woman, Cyborg all confirmed to debut in Batman v Superman) into one movie in hopes that'll be adequate introduction before they do the JLA super star tag team. And whilst true, a lack of a solo female hero Marvel movie is disconcerting, it's more disconcerting that DC doesn't trust Aquaman, Cyborg and Wonder Woman to hold their own, especially given the popularity of the characters and the demand for movies based on them (Okay maybe not so much Cyborg, but Wonder Woman and Aquaman definitely).

I give Marvel a bit of slack for one simple reason. All their best female characters are already licensed out to Fox.

Storm, Rogue, Sue Storm, Mystique, Jean Grey, they all fall under the license agreements brokered long before Marvel had their own studio. Long before they were part of Disney. Sure, they still have many strong characters who would work, the aforementioned Ms/Captain Marvel for instance. But you need to set up the universe before you can bring in Ms. Marvel unless you completely retool her origin.

Now that Agents of SHIELD and Guardians of the Galaxy has made mention of the Kree, there's room to start introducing S.W.O.R.D. and the Kree and maybe Mar-Vell, all of which are basically necessary if you're going to do a movie about Carol Danvers. She could easily fit in around the time of Avengers 3, but that is still a ways off.

Of course there are others they can still use, but the strongest options are either tied up in long term rights deals or need some more setup. I know that's a copout to a degree, but I can at least see why it's happened as it has.

Wonder Woman on the other hand, that is just shameful. No one but Warner owns the rights to any of DC's characters because Warner has owned DC for so long. Not having a Wonder Woman movie by now is sad on a whole new level. We've had multiple Batman and Superman films over the last 25 years, but poor Diana remains ignored outside of an (excellent) animated feature.

So the other thing is... Up until, well, now, DC/WB and Marvel/Disney have been playing very different games within the bigger pond called "superhero movies."

From the moment Nick Fury broke in to talk to Tony Stark about the "Avengers Initiative", Marvel has been clearly engaging in building a continuity. That several of Marvel's "big names" have been split up among other studios only heightens the suggestion that they aren't just building individual movies, but puzzle pieces to fit together. That the films have been of such remarkably high quality has only helped build momentum; with each worthwhile new movie audiences see, they feel like they're seeing more of the completed puzzle.

DC has largely made individual franchises and sequels to those franchises. In a sense, they have a longer history as a "big player" in the public mind: Christopher Reeves' Superman is the first superhero movie a significant portion of the ticket-buying audience remembers, the Tim Burton Batman for others. But aside from one throw-away line about the circus being "halfway to Metropolis by now" in Batman Forever, there was little suggestion that these characters would, could, or should exist in the same united cinematic universe. Some of the movies have been triumphant, others less so; Batman and Robin arguably put the whole genre into hibernation for a time. But their history is one of characters who go movie to movie with the same character.

That history puts DC/WB in a better place to launch a franchise based on a single iconic character. To take a shot on the bankability of a female superheroine lead, and even to fob off a mis-step as the mistake of a particular director, writer, actor or script that just couldn't bring an otherwise worthwhile concept together. Too bad, try again next time, see you at the reboot.

...Except now WB is apparently taking a swing at the world-building thing. I'm not of the camp that hated either Man of Steel or Dark Knight Rises, but both (while successful) had somewhat mixed reactions within the fan community, and neither showed any signs of being built with a future continuity in mind. BvS is trying to jumpstart the momentum that Marvel has now enjoyed for ten movies, and while I'd love for them to succeed, early reception of what we've been shown so far has been every bit as mixed.

If BvS under-performs, I think any serious chance of a Wonder Woman movie goes with it for the near future. Giving up on single-hero movies and failing to establish a multi-hero continuity, WB will probably fall back, form a new plan, and lick its wounds, not take chances on an audience for a female-led movie with a scent of mediocrity from an earlier film dogging its heels.

In short, there are reasons for not announcing a WW movie before BvS comes out that might be something other than misogynists who lack imagination, as difficult as that idea might be to fit into a narrative.

I apologize if this sounds harsh; by and large, I've found "SJW" to be a worthwhile read. But I think a good point is stronger for not trying to cast those who are on the opposite side- or even just not as interested in fighting the same fight- as backward troglodytes who must be harboring the worst of intentions for their actions. When I read loaded language that tries to disparage anyone who disagrees before they have the nerve to disagree, my sympathy wanes. And I am not an audience who should be unsympathetic to such causes.

RossaLincoln:

mjharper:
"making DC Superheroes look like they're standing in the rain blasting Peter Gabriel's "In Your Eyes". "

Are you sure that's really the Peter Gabriel song you mean? The big, uplifting number he usually ends the main part of gigs with, often having Africans in brightly coloured clothes come on stage to chant throughout?

I'd have though "No Self-Control", or even "Red Rain" would have been more fitting Gabriel songs...

You haven't seen Say Anything, have you?

Nope. It's a rom-com isn't it? I know the song is used in it, but I don't understand how that fits with Sad Batman...

ZZoMBiE13:

Shiftygiant:

ZZoMBiE13:
Well, if it got Marvel to get off their asses and commit to a Carol Danvers Captain Marvel movie just to not look behind the times, I'd be all for this.

Could be one of the mystery movies coming out by 2018, though it's more likely she'll be Ms. Marvel then Captain Marvel if this is the case (Which as much as I'd prefer, I see more sense in the Captain Marvel route).

Also, DC are clearly not smart enough to do a Wonder Woman movie. I mean, they're stuffing the entire JLA (New Batman, Aquaman, Wonder Woman, Cyborg all confirmed to debut in Batman v Superman) into one movie in hopes that'll be adequate introduction before they do the JLA super star tag team. And whilst true, a lack of a solo female hero Marvel movie is disconcerting, it's more disconcerting that DC doesn't trust Aquaman, Cyborg and Wonder Woman to hold their own, especially given the popularity of the characters and the demand for movies based on them (Okay maybe not so much Cyborg, but Wonder Woman and Aquaman definitely).

I give Marvel a bit of slack for one simple reason. All their best female characters are already licensed out to Fox.

Storm, Rogue, Sue Storm, Mystique, Jean Grey, they all fall under the license agreements brokered long before Marvel had their own studio. Long before they were part of Disney. Sure, they still have many strong characters who would work, the aforementioned Ms/Captain Marvel for instance. But you need to set up the universe before you can bring in Ms. Marvel unless you completely retool her origin.

Now that Agents of SHIELD and Guardians of the Galaxy has made mention of the Kree, there's room to start introducing S.W.O.R.D. and the Kree and maybe Mar-Vell, all of which are basically necessary if you're going to do a movie about Carol Danvers. She could easily fit in around the time of Avengers 3, but that is still a ways off.

Of course there are others they can still use, but the strongest options are either tied up in long term rights deals or need some more setup. I know that's a copout to a degree, but I can at least see why it's happened as it has.

Kree are major players in Guardian's of The Galaxy (Ronan is a Kree ). So there is hope that she'll be in soon. My gripe though is that, even with all the female heroes in the Marvel universe, Ms. Marvel included, Marvel have yet to have one have a solo movie. That said, past Ant-Man we don't really have a clear picture of the future, so it's likely that a female hero will be sooner than later.

Shiftygiant:

Kree are major players in Guardian's of The Galaxy (Ronan is a Kree ). So there is hope that she'll be in soon. My gripe though is that, even with all the female heroes in the Marvel universe, Ms. Marvel included, Marvel have yet to have one have a solo movie. That said, past Ant-Man we don't really have a clear picture of the future, so it's likely that a female hero will be sooner than later.

I kept expecting them to introduce Rescue in the Iron Man movies. Especially in Iron Man 3 which had literally dozens of Tony's suits. It seemed like such a logical extrapolation. I mean it was right there! And whether you like her or not, Gwyneth Paltrow is a capable actress who could easily handle the superhero version of Pepper's character.

I mean I know Rescue is just another one of those female superheros derivative of an existing male hero(at least they didn't call her "Iron-Girl). Even within the context of the films ending it would have made sense. Pepper is in trouble? Instead of trying to rescue her, activate a suit that will turn her into Rescue. Every little girl in the audience would have gone out and bought the action figure THAT VERY DAY. It's not like they have any others to choose from, Black Widow notwithstanding.

 Pages 1 2 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here