DC Comics Cinematic Universe (2013 - present)

1167168170172173220

Comments

  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 4,343
    When it comes to my preferred versions of DC, I pretty much love the Bruce Timm shows. I revisited that entire run from 1992 thru 2006 and was astounded over how well they held up. It all felt like a near perfect summary of DC heroes, as much as that's possible for an animated television series.

    Never saw that, I'm sorry, but on the other hand I loved the Batman Animated Series.
  • When it comes to my preferred versions of DC, I pretty much love the Bruce Timm shows. I revisited that entire run from 1992 thru 2006 and was astounded over how well they held up. It all felt like a near perfect summary of DC heroes, as much as that's possible for an animated television series.

    Same here! I worship at the throne of Bruce Timm and Paul Dini. The DCAU is my all time favorite set of comic book adaptations from any medium, but I’ve mentioned that thousands of time already :))
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    edited December 2020 Posts: 8,183
    matt_u wrote: »
    Seriously? Lord was redeemable. Zod not. He would've killed 7.8 billion people one by one because he had noting left, nothing to lose. And Clark still suffered a lot from that.

    True, but it's not like the script willed itself to put Clark in a corner where he was pressured into killing as a last resort. That's all on the writers. And as it was told, it felt kind of unearned.
    1978 was a long time ago.
    Zack Snyder's Superman died for humanity even tho half of the world hated him and the other half questioned him. Donner's Superman gave up his powers in order to stay with Lois, even tho everybody loved him. Come on.

    I have my issues with the Reeve films, but they at least got to tone and jovial attitude right. I simply have no interest in a version of Superman that mopes about the burdens of being a savior and listening to his parents express Ayn Rand sentiments. As bad as that CGI lip was, at least Joss Whedon presented Superman as someone that was enthralled in his role as a superhero. The closest we got that with Snyder Supes was when he flew for the first time, and I feel like we were robbed of more moments like that.

  • I think what Snyder was trying to do was build to the more jovial, and optimistic qualities of Superman. As much as I love the Snyder films, the tone does feel a bit off putting to me. I think he should’ve taken more influence from Dan Jurgens run on Superman. He’s already taken quite a bit of influence, but Jurgens also inserted that hopeful, and optimistic qualities into his stories, whereas I feel Snyder missed the mark quite a bit. Still it’s hard for me to judge seeing as how we haven’t been able to see where Snyder would’ve continued taking the character, that’s part of the reason why I’m accepting of his versions to an extent.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    edited December 2020 Posts: 4,343
    matt_u wrote: »
    Seriously? Lord was redeemable. Zod not. He would've killed 7.8 billion people one by one because he had noting left, nothing to lose. And Clark still suffered a lot from that.

    True, but it's not like the script willed itself to put Clark in a corner where he was pressured into killing as a last resort. That's all on the writers. And as it was told, it felt kind of unearned.

    Man, Supes waited til the last second while Zod was trying to evaporate a family stuck in a corner...
    1978 was a long time ago.
    Zack Snyder's Superman died for humanity even tho half of the world hated him and the other half questioned him. Donner's Superman gave up his powers in order to stay with Lois, even tho everybody loved him. Come on.

    I have my issues with the Reeve films, but they at least got to tone and jovial attitude right. I simply have no interest in a version of Superman that mopes about the burdens of being a savior and listening to his parents express Ayn Rand sentiments. As bad as that CGI lip was, at least Joss Whedon presented Superman as someone that was enthralled in his role as a superhero. The closest we got that with Snyder Supes was when he flew for the first time, and I feel like we were robbed of more moments like that.

    Zack showed a realistic version of Superman, also because there’s a very realistic portrayal of how the public opinion would react in such a scenario. Without mentioning that BvS was just the second chapter within a larger 5 film story arc. Superman in JL2 would’ve been much more lighter.
  • Posts: 2,917
    When it comes to my preferred versions of DC, I pretty much love the Bruce Timm shows. I revisited that entire run from 1992 thru 2006 and was astounded over how well they held up. It all felt like a near perfect summary of DC heroes, as much as that's possible for an animated television series.

    I think the consensus is that the DCAU did the best job of cherry-picking the most worthwhile aspects of DC comics and translating them into moving pictures. The Timm shows were able to honor the comics without having to slavishly follow them. That distance is what's missing in the current DC animated films--they're tied too closely to what the comics are doing and have been obligated to adapt material that either doesn't translate well into animation or doesn't deserve to be adapted in the first place. There have also been some faithful adaptations that were dutiful but unexciting.

    Additionally, since the animated films are being steadily cranked out, the powers-that-be have not allocated budgets that allow the look of the comics to be truly emulated. Timm's style worked beautifully because it was designed with limited TV budgets in mind. The current films either go for an anime-influenced style that's far from the comics or with a half-assed comic-book look that doesn't do justice to the original illustrations (as in the film of The Killing Joke).
  • Revelator wrote: »
    When it comes to my preferred versions of DC, I pretty much love the Bruce Timm shows. I revisited that entire run from 1992 thru 2006 and was astounded over how well they held up. It all felt like a near perfect summary of DC heroes, as much as that's possible for an animated television series.

    I think the consensus is that the DCAU did the best job of cherry-picking the most worthwhile aspects of DC comics and translating them into moving pictures. The Timm shows were able to honor the comics without having to slavishly follow them. That distance is what's missing in the current DC animated films--they're tied too closely to what the comics are doing and have been obligated to adapt material that either doesn't translate well into animation or doesn't deserve to be adapted in the first place. There have also been some faithful adaptations that were dutiful but unexciting.

    Additionally, since the animated films are being steadily cranked out, the powers-that-be have not allocated budgets that allow the look of the comics to be truly emulated. Timm's style worked beautifully because it was designed with limited TV budgets in mind. The current films either go for an anime-influenced style that's far from the comics or with a half-assed comic-book look that doesn't do justice to the original illustrations (as in the film of The Killing Joke).

    +1 on everything you just said, although I’d also add the lack of Paul Dini as another reason why I feel the new DC Animated Movies just don’t hit the mark.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,183
    matt_u wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    Seriously? Lord was redeemable. Zod not. He would've killed 7.8 billion people one by one because he had noting left, nothing to lose. And Clark still suffered a lot from that.

    True, but it's not like the script willed itself to put Clark in a corner where he was pressured into killing as a last resort. That's all on the writers. And as it was told, it felt kind of unearned.

    Man, Supes waited til the last second while Zod was trying to evaporate a family stuck in a corner...
    1978 was a long time ago.
    Zack Snyder's Superman died for humanity even tho half of the world hated him and the other half questioned him. Donner's Superman gave up his powers in order to stay with Lois, even tho everybody loved him. Come on.

    I have my issues with the Reeve films, but they at least got to tone and jovial attitude right. I simply have no interest in a version of Superman that mopes about the burdens of being a savior and listening to his parents express Ayn Rand sentiments. As bad as that CGI lip was, at least Joss Whedon presented Superman as someone that was enthralled in his role as a superhero. The closest we got that with Snyder Supes was when he flew for the first time, and I feel like we were robbed of more moments like that.

    Zack showed a realistic version of Superman, also because there’s a very realistic portrayal of how the public opinion would react in such a scenario. Without mentioning that BvS was just the second chapter within a larger 5 film story arc. Superman in JL2 would’ve been much more lighter.

    That’s the thing: I’m simply not interested in a “realistic” version of Superman. I’m even less interested in Snyder’s vision taking FIVE films to get to a more traditional depiction of Superman. It’s a shame because I think Cavill was well cast in the role but has been largely wasted.
  • edited December 2020 Posts: 6,844
    I watched WW84. I liked it. I'll probably never see it again. Pretty much how I felt about the first film, as I hadn't seen that since theaters.


    DCEU ranking:


    BIRDS OF PREY (AND THE FANTABULOUS EMANCIPATION OF ONE HARLEY QUINN)
    WONDER WOMAN 1984
    WONDER WOMAN
    SHAZAM!
    AQUAMAN
    JUSTICE LEAGUE
    BATMAN V SUPERMAN
    MAN OF STEEL
    SUICIDE SQUAD

    Birds of Prey at #1! I clearly did not get as much out of that film as you did, @MakeshiftPython! Which surprised me because Margot Robbie is a solid live-action Harley Quinn, and as demonstrated by Batman: The Animated Series the character is deeply fascinating and fully capable of carrying a story on her own apart from the likes of the Joker or Poison Ivy (case in point: the simply delightful "Harley's Holiday"). What did you enjoy about Birds of Prey that you would rank it over all the rest of the DCEU?

    I just thought it was the most fun of the films, mainly because of Robbie’s performance.

    Truthfully, I only merely like half of the films. From Aquabro it’s downhill for me.

    Fair enough. The DCEU has been very uneven, that's for sure. Suicide Squad, Justice League, Aquaman, and Birds of Prey have all been colorful messes in my opinion—some with fewer redeeming points than others—and unfortunately I haven't heard good things at all about WW84 either. It's debuted with a shocking 5.6 on IMDB.

    For my own part, I think Man of Steel, Batman Vs. Superman, and Wonder Woman have been the strongest entries, though I do still have to see Shazam!
    When it comes to my preferred versions of DC, I pretty much love the Bruce Timm shows. I revisited that entire run from 1992 thru 2006 and was astounded over how well they held up. It all felt like a near perfect summary of DC heroes, as much as that's possible for an animated television series.

    There we can agree!
  • Agent007391Agent007391 Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start
    Posts: 7,854
    Revelator wrote: »
    When it comes to my preferred versions of DC, I pretty much love the Bruce Timm shows. I revisited that entire run from 1992 thru 2006 and was astounded over how well they held up. It all felt like a near perfect summary of DC heroes, as much as that's possible for an animated television series.

    I think the consensus is that the DCAU did the best job of cherry-picking the most worthwhile aspects of DC comics and translating them into moving pictures. The Timm shows were able to honor the comics without having to slavishly follow them. That distance is what's missing in the current DC animated films--they're tied too closely to what the comics are doing and have been obligated to adapt material that either doesn't translate well into animation or doesn't deserve to be adapted in the first place. There have also been some faithful adaptations that were dutiful but unexciting.

    Additionally, since the animated films are being steadily cranked out, the powers-that-be have not allocated budgets that allow the look of the comics to be truly emulated. Timm's style worked beautifully because it was designed with limited TV budgets in mind. The current films either go for an anime-influenced style that's far from the comics or with a half-assed comic-book look that doesn't do justice to the original illustrations (as in the film of The Killing Joke).

    +1 on everything you just said, although I’d also add the lack of Paul Dini as another reason why I feel the new DC Animated Movies just don’t hit the mark.

    I'd maybe agree about Paul Dini if not for the recent Batman: The Adventures Continue comic series, where he drops the ball somewhat regularly. The overall plot is good, but it plays things a little too safe at too many times.

    Between that and Batman and Harley Quinn, I'm not quite sure how a full on DCAU revival would ever work, but I'd love to see it happen.
  • Revelator wrote: »
    When it comes to my preferred versions of DC, I pretty much love the Bruce Timm shows. I revisited that entire run from 1992 thru 2006 and was astounded over how well they held up. It all felt like a near perfect summary of DC heroes, as much as that's possible for an animated television series.

    I think the consensus is that the DCAU did the best job of cherry-picking the most worthwhile aspects of DC comics and translating them into moving pictures. The Timm shows were able to honor the comics without having to slavishly follow them. That distance is what's missing in the current DC animated films--they're tied too closely to what the comics are doing and have been obligated to adapt material that either doesn't translate well into animation or doesn't deserve to be adapted in the first place. There have also been some faithful adaptations that were dutiful but unexciting.

    Additionally, since the animated films are being steadily cranked out, the powers-that-be have not allocated budgets that allow the look of the comics to be truly emulated. Timm's style worked beautifully because it was designed with limited TV budgets in mind. The current films either go for an anime-influenced style that's far from the comics or with a half-assed comic-book look that doesn't do justice to the original illustrations (as in the film of The Killing Joke).

    +1 on everything you just said, although I’d also add the lack of Paul Dini as another reason why I feel the new DC Animated Movies just don’t hit the mark.

    I'd maybe agree about Paul Dini if not for the recent Batman: The Adventures Continue comic series, where he drops the ball somewhat regularly. The overall plot is good, but it plays things a little too safe at too many times.

    Between that and Batman and Harley Quinn, I'm not quite sure how a full on DCAU revival would ever work, but I'd love to see it happen.

    I haven’t read Batman: The Adventure Continues, but I don’t see how bringing Jason Todd into the fold makes any sense from a timeline perspective. Haven’t seen Batman and Harley Quinn either, I only saw the clip where Harley farts in the Batmobile and decided that was enough to make me not watch it.

    How about JL vs The Fatal Five, is that any good?
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited December 2020 Posts: 5,970
    I only like Man of Steel and Wonder Woman. Not a fan of the others, and the only film in development that excites me (within that universe as Reeves' is separate) is The Suicide Squad.
  • Denbigh wrote: »
    I only like Man of Steel and Wonder Woman. Not a fan of the others, and the only film in development that excites me (within that universe as Reeves' is separate) is The Suicide Squad.

    Batman Vs. Superman took some getting used to for me and now I rather like it, but Man of Steel and Wonder Woman do seem to be the best of their output so far. The Suicide Squad is looking good though. The property is right up James Gunn's alley and you can't complain about the cast.
  • edited December 2020 Posts: 5,993
    It could be worse. Diana could have snapped Maxwell Lord’s neck.

    Like that, you mean ?

    wonder-woman-kills-maxwell-lord-4.jpg?fit=913%2C1417&ssl=1

    Don't worry, he got better. They always do, right ?
  • edited December 2020 Posts: 2,917
    Haven’t seen Batman and Harley Quinn either, I only saw the clip where Harley farts in the Batmobile and decided that was enough to make me not watch it.

    To be fair, Dini was not involved with that film, though in several ways it was a feature-length expansion of Dini's "Harlequinade" episode of BTAS. In any case, Batman and Harley Quinn can be safely skipped.
    How about JL vs The Fatal Five, is that any good?

    It was just okay. Going with Timm's designs was a last-minute decision--Timm remarked that if the decision had been made at the project's start the story would have been much different.

    As it is, the Fatal Five are dull villains, the PG-13 dialogue is more juvenile than adult, and the "big three" members of the Justice League take a backseat to Jessica Cruz and Starboy--and neither of those characters did much for me. The film addresses issues like trauma, depression, and anxiety, but its handling of those issues felt trendy and calculated. It tries for a dramatic gravitas that it never earns. The fight scenes and other action sequences move well, but there are several moments of clumsy animation.

    In the end, JL vs. The Fatal Five is not essential viewing. The only post-2006 DC animated film that has earned my enthusiasm is Justice League: The Flashpoint Paradox.
  • Agent007391Agent007391 Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start
    Posts: 7,854
    Revelator wrote: »
    When it comes to my preferred versions of DC, I pretty much love the Bruce Timm shows. I revisited that entire run from 1992 thru 2006 and was astounded over how well they held up. It all felt like a near perfect summary of DC heroes, as much as that's possible for an animated television series.

    I think the consensus is that the DCAU did the best job of cherry-picking the most worthwhile aspects of DC comics and translating them into moving pictures. The Timm shows were able to honor the comics without having to slavishly follow them. That distance is what's missing in the current DC animated films--they're tied too closely to what the comics are doing and have been obligated to adapt material that either doesn't translate well into animation or doesn't deserve to be adapted in the first place. There have also been some faithful adaptations that were dutiful but unexciting.

    Additionally, since the animated films are being steadily cranked out, the powers-that-be have not allocated budgets that allow the look of the comics to be truly emulated. Timm's style worked beautifully because it was designed with limited TV budgets in mind. The current films either go for an anime-influenced style that's far from the comics or with a half-assed comic-book look that doesn't do justice to the original illustrations (as in the film of The Killing Joke).

    +1 on everything you just said, although I’d also add the lack of Paul Dini as another reason why I feel the new DC Animated Movies just don’t hit the mark.

    I'd maybe agree about Paul Dini if not for the recent Batman: The Adventures Continue comic series, where he drops the ball somewhat regularly. The overall plot is good, but it plays things a little too safe at too many times.

    Between that and Batman and Harley Quinn, I'm not quite sure how a full on DCAU revival would ever work, but I'd love to see it happen.

    I haven’t read Batman: The Adventure Continues, but I don’t see how bringing Jason Todd into the fold makes any sense from a timeline perspective. Haven’t seen Batman and Harley Quinn either, I only saw the clip where Harley farts in the Batmobile and decided that was enough to make me not watch it.

    How about JL vs The Fatal Five, is that any good?

    It's not terrible, but it's not up to par, either.

    I did a series of short reviews on the post DCAU films from Superman: Doomsday until Justice League Dark: Apokolips War. They're over in the Last Movie You Watched thread, if you feel like skimming through to find them.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,183
    It’s been awhile since I’ve seen any of the animated films. Just kinda lost interest sometime after the adaptation of THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS. I thought the most inspired voice casting was Bryan Cranston as Jim Gordon in Year One. He’s often pointed as someone who should be Lex Luthor (likely just because he pulled off the bald look in Breaking Bad) but him as Gordon was actually something I hoped to see in a live action role.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,383
    Gerard wrote: »
    It could be worse. Diana could have snapped Maxwell Lord’s neck.

    Like that, you mean ?

    Is he supposed to have a really tiny head? Or is that appallingly drawn?
  • Revelator wrote: »
    When it comes to my preferred versions of DC, I pretty much love the Bruce Timm shows. I revisited that entire run from 1992 thru 2006 and was astounded over how well they held up. It all felt like a near perfect summary of DC heroes, as much as that's possible for an animated television series.

    I think the consensus is that the DCAU did the best job of cherry-picking the most worthwhile aspects of DC comics and translating them into moving pictures. The Timm shows were able to honor the comics without having to slavishly follow them. That distance is what's missing in the current DC animated films--they're tied too closely to what the comics are doing and have been obligated to adapt material that either doesn't translate well into animation or doesn't deserve to be adapted in the first place. There have also been some faithful adaptations that were dutiful but unexciting.

    Additionally, since the animated films are being steadily cranked out, the powers-that-be have not allocated budgets that allow the look of the comics to be truly emulated. Timm's style worked beautifully because it was designed with limited TV budgets in mind. The current films either go for an anime-influenced style that's far from the comics or with a half-assed comic-book look that doesn't do justice to the original illustrations (as in the film of The Killing Joke).

    +1 on everything you just said, although I’d also add the lack of Paul Dini as another reason why I feel the new DC Animated Movies just don’t hit the mark.

    I'd maybe agree about Paul Dini if not for the recent Batman: The Adventures Continue comic series, where he drops the ball somewhat regularly. The overall plot is good, but it plays things a little too safe at too many times.

    Between that and Batman and Harley Quinn, I'm not quite sure how a full on DCAU revival would ever work, but I'd love to see it happen.

    I haven’t read Batman: The Adventure Continues, but I don’t see how bringing Jason Todd into the fold makes any sense from a timeline perspective. Haven’t seen Batman and Harley Quinn either, I only saw the clip where Harley farts in the Batmobile and decided that was enough to make me not watch it.

    How about JL vs The Fatal Five, is that any good?

    It's not terrible, but it's not up to par, either.

    I did a series of short reviews on the post DCAU films from Superman: Doomsday until Justice League Dark: Apokolips War. They're over in the Last Movie You Watched thread, if you feel like skimming through to find them.

    I’ll check those reviews out.

    Revelator wrote: »
    Haven’t seen Batman and Harley Quinn either, I only saw the clip where Harley farts in the Batmobile and decided that was enough to make me not watch it.

    To be fair, Dini was not involved with that film, though in several ways it was a feature-length expansion of Dini's "Harlequinade" episode of BTAS. In any case, Batman and Harley Quinn can be safely skipped.
    How about JL vs The Fatal Five, is that any good?

    It was just okay. Going with Timm's designs was a last-minute decision--Timm remarked that if the decision had been made at the project's start the story would have been much different.

    As it is, the Fatal Five are dull villains, the PG-13 dialogue is more juvenile than adult, and the "big three" members of the Justice League take a backseat to Jessica Cruz and Starboy--and neither of those characters did much for me. The film addresses issues like trauma, depression, and anxiety, but its handling of those issues felt trendy and calculated. It tries for a dramatic gravitas that it never earns. The fight scenes and other action sequences move well, but there are several moments of clumsy animation.

    In the end, JL vs. The Fatal Five is not essential viewing. The only post-2006 DC animated film that has earned my enthusiasm is Justice League: The Flashpoint Paradox.

    They’ve been hit and miss with me. Really loved Batman Gotham Knight, Under The Red Hood, and Superman/Batman Public Enemies though
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,183
    Thankfully the movie never stoops low like that comic book.
  • Fire_and_Ice_ReturnsFire_and_Ice_Returns I am trying to get away from this mountan!
    Posts: 25,107
    UK viewers WW1984 released on VOD 13/01/21, in meantime I am going to stay away from this thread to avoid spoilers.
  • Posts: 2,917
    They’ve been hit and miss with me. Really loved Batman Gotham Knight, Under The Red Hood, and Superman/Batman Public Enemies though

    Yes, Under The Red Hood is one of the best of the bunch, and I should have mentioned it alongside Flashpoint Paradox. Also worth seeing is Justice League: Crisis on Two Earths, which began as a script for a never-produced feature between the Justice League cartoon and Justice League Unlimited and was later rewritten.

  • Revelator wrote: »
    They’ve been hit and miss with me. Really loved Batman Gotham Knight, Under The Red Hood, and Superman/Batman Public Enemies though

    Yes, Under The Red Hood is one of the best of the bunch, and I should have mentioned it alongside Flashpoint Paradox. Also worth seeing is Justice League: Crisis on Two Earths, which began as a script for a never-produced feature between the Justice League cartoon and Justice League Unlimited and was later rewritten.

    I saw Crisis on Two Earths long ago, but I kind just forgot about it really. I’ll have to go back and revisit it.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    edited December 2020 Posts: 24,179
    I've seen WW84 a second time now, and I must say that while I don't resent the film, I find myself severely disappointed by it. A few days ago, I called it stupid fun. It still is, but more stupid than fun. I will save my more detailed thoughts for later.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,383
    I'm a bit fascinated by WW84: I'm trying to think of another film that I've seen such varied reviews for. I'd definitely suspect that it's not very good (I didn't think the first was as good as everyone else seemed to) but there doesn't seem to be any sort of consensus at all about this one.
  • Posts: 1,165
    WW84 is frustratingly awful. It’s the first time in my life I found myself fighting against a movie. I was trying so hard to like it, willing myself to go along with it, but every single scene was bad choice from the filmmakers followed by an even worse choice by the filmmakers. It’s a bafflingly terrible film.
  • edited December 2020 Posts: 440
    I think it's worth remembering too, that Wonder Woman 1984 was filmed back in early 2018 and the state of the DCEU was very different then.

    It had basically collapsed almost entirely by that point apart from the first Wonder Woman, with Batman v Superman drastically underperforming and Justice League not even breaking even. All this is reflected in the finished film.

    Because WB hadn't worked out where they wanted to take the franchise, this movie essentially has to just jog in place and not allow Wonder Woman to develop as a character in case it might risk future movies.

    Not to mention how the two and half years this movie spent in post-production likely had something to do with its fractured nature as well.

    Of course, it doesn't help that Gal Gadot can't act.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    edited December 2020 Posts: 24,179
    Gal Gadot is the only saving grace. I don't think she's a particularly great actress either, but she looks the part and she can do the physical stuff. The only problem with that in WW84 is that
    she gets absolutely nothing to do! Sword? Shield? Only the lasso and her kick-ass moves, but too little of any fighting in a 2.5 hour film.

    So there's little Wonder in this Woman this time, and that leaves little else for us to enjoy.

    Others have already pointed out the confusing morals of the film. I also want to express my disappointment in Zimmer's score. Why
    are we hearing Murphy's Sunshine and Zimmer/Junkie XL's opening music to BvS, which has nothing to do with the world of Wonder Woman? And where's that ass-kicking Wonder Woman Theme that was superbly used by Rupert Gregson-Williams in the 2017 film, not too much, not too little? This film actually shies away from that cool little theme. Then again, when should it be used when the film has almost no cool action to offer...

    I hate to go "dark" here, but the film feels to me like it comes with an agenda. Almost no violence, very little action, and the villain's plans are thwarted
    not by some cool epic action climax, but by talking the bad guy out of doing his thing. Even Suicide Squad went for a big boss fight, however cliché it felt.

    There's an obvious message of
    anti-consumerism and anti-materialism in this film, a monkey-paw cautionary tale replete with "careful what you wish for" exclamation marks, ironically emphasised by wasting one of the most effective characters from the previous film on a reversed fish-out-of-water gimmick, some sista-needs-a-man romance and a car chase, only to make him conveniently go away when the time is right.

    If Wonder Woman subtly went for "female empowerment", this one goes for "everyone de-powerment". There's no clash of Titans here, only weakened characters pursuing weak goals.

    If this had been the pilot episode of a Mandalorian-type of Wonder Woman TV series, I'd have praised the Olympic gods. But this was conceived as an expensive cinematic new chapter, the follow-up to one of the very strongest films in the DCU so far. So why does it feel like the very opposite of PG-13, namely a "max-13"? If your kids need another Full House type of life lesson, this one might be a good Saturday afternoon adventure.

    Having seen the film twice now, I can safely say that I have gone from a happy "sure!" to a sour "mèh, not good". Right now, my ranking, sadly, looks a little like this:

    1) WW
    2) MOS
    3) BvS
    4) BOP
    5) JL
    6) H2O-man
    7) Shazam!
    8) SS
    9) WW84
  • Wow, don't think I'll cough up the 30 dollars for a rental so soon then. Disappointing, as I really enjoyed the first WW.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,183
    Below SUICIDE SQUAD?

    That's beyond harsh.
Sign In or Register to comment.