DC Should Just Announce A Wonder Woman Movie Already

[Palindromemordnilap_v1legacy]

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

 

[Autumnflame]

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

 

[Super Cyborg]

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.

 

[Scarim Coral]

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).

 

[Vault101]

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

 

[Kameburger]

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...

 

[RossaLincoln]

"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?

 

[Callate]

*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 BvSoJ 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.))

 

[Falterfire]

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.

 

[Shiftygiant]

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).

 

[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.

 

[Callate]

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.

 

[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...

 

[Shiftygiant]

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.

 

[ZZoMBiE13]

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.

 

[KingsGambit_v1legacy]

How can they just "announce" a Wonder Woman film if they don't have a screenplay, a release date, production schedule or whatever? Why would it give "marvel the finger"? Marvel have made billions and made umpteen films. Why would DC announcing one film be so vital?

DC: "Marvel, here's the finger, we're making A FILM!"
Marvel: "Errr....good for you. We've already made 10."

Nonsense.

 

[RossaLincoln]

"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...

It's a dramedy, not a Romcom, but yeah. In brief: in the summer after he graduates high school, the main character Lloyd Dobbler (played by John Cusack) starts dating one of his (now former) classmates, an honor student named Diane Court (played by Ione Skye). They hit it off, clearly have a really special connection, fall in love, lose their virginity to one another, etc. But her dad (played by John Mahoney!) doesn't approve - he thinks Lloyd isn't good enough to date his daughter basically because Lloyd isn't as academically minded and, so dad, fears, will drag her down. So he pressures Diane and eventually convinces her to break up with Lloyd in a really casual way that suggests "sorry I never really liked you that much, lol sorr kthxbye". Lloyd kind of goes into a depression spiral, since obviously an 18 year old is perfectly equipped to know they've met The One for the rest of time (sarcasm). He tries a few times to win her back, which the viewer is meant to find sincere and touching but kind of comes off as sad and pathetic. Eventually, Diane's dad turns out to have been defrauding the government by claiming taxes for residents of the assisted living facility he runs long after they had died, and goes to jail. Diane previously hero-worshipped her father and this completely sends her into a spiral of her own. But, she goes to Lloyd for support, they get back together, she basically breaks up with her father in the same way he convinced her to break up with Lloyd (IRONY), and Lloyd and Diane fly to England together (she is moving there for college). THE END.

ANYWAY, The film's most iconic scene has him show up at her house during one of his unsuccessful attempts to win her back. It's rainy, and he stands in front of his car holding up a boombox blasting In Your Eyes, which is the song they lost their virginity to. It's such a super serious, unintentionally hilarious scene, especially as the years go on and the film does not age well at all.

 

[SeeDarkly_Xero]

"DC is afraid of Marvel" is absolutely the wrong takeaway.
"DC wants to earn the kind of money Marvel movies do, and more" is WAY more relevant.

But more than that... the idea that being the first with a super-heroine film is a "PR WIN" is (while not incorrect) a wholly obtuse objective on which to focus. Part of WB/DC'S overarching problem IS... RELIANCE on PUBLIC RELATIONS and marketing interests. It's at the very core of everything they are doing wrong.

I don't want watch Wonder Woman in her own film because it "screws the image of the other company!"
I want to see it done creatively well with a great story.
And I am willing to WAIT for them to do it RIGHT.

Everything DC does is already a transparent display of their need to keep the attention on themselves. Meanwhile they do not put creative talent with passion for the characters in charge of the development of what they want to make money on.

Hate to say it again, but let's never forget that DC had Joss Whedon on to do Wonder Woman, and when their marketing/PR focused management got too much in the way of the story and creative process, he walked away from the effort.
Once again... DC was already in a position to do a Wonder Woman film...
and let marketing interest prevent them from keeping the creative talent that brings us two Avengers films!

Oh and let's not forget they could not get the Adrianne Palicki-led Wonder Woman TV show off the ground for lack of good writing and characterization. And their recent depiction of Wonder Woman in the Justice League: War adaptation toon was of her horribly characterized as little more than a doe-eyed fan-girl fawning over Super(Bro)Man (Seriously, it was astounding that they got her so wrong following Flashpoint & Doom... and 5 years of DCAU!)

Clearly DC could potentially intend to use one of the dates they've locked down for a film focused on her. IF they can come up with a suitable story and back it with creative talent that they would be willing to trust to get it right... fantastic. But the goal should be for them to find the best story and creative talent to present it FIRST, BEFORE announcing they have marked a date for it.

But why would ANYONE think fabricating a "HUGE PR VICTORY" is in the best interest of fans?
Why even make that part of the conversation?
The advice you give DC should always be more about satisfying the public, more than swaying public interest with a stunt.

"PR WIN" is a bad prime motivation and is never the right reason anyone should do anything.

Marvel is less concerned with "winning PR" on the matter. The fact is, and we ALL know it, they WANT to put their super-heroines on the screen. And we know they will. If it takes some time for them to do it, and get it right... it'll be worth the wait. They have, by trusting the creation of their films to passionate talent who are ALSO fans of the material, built their reputation by respecting fans and have shown integrity. Sure, they have marketing and public relations, and want to make money also. The difference is clear if you are paying attention. ESPECIALLY if what you are paying attention to is P.R.

It's kind of disgraceful that anyone would suggest that it would be good for DC to WIN over Marvel that way.
They've already employed such reactive tactics numerous times, and largely to resounding failure or mockery.

We all WANT great representations of the super heroes and heroines we love to come to life on screen. If DC would just focus on how to give us that, instead of how to win us over to what they decide is marketable to give us, then they will have learned the lesson of Marvel's successes.

Meanwhile, DC will still make money even when they utterly fail their fans. But at least they get GREAT PRESS! >_<

(By the way... Gamora being excluded from merchandising is BS. The fact is her action figure is packaged as all of them are to include a piece of Groot, all but REQUIRING her purchase in order to get it. I'd say that is substantial inclusion.)

 

[Stupidity]

Honestly I kinda wish DC would stop making films.
Theyre not doing DC fans any favors through association.

Only Batman 2 was anywhere near as good as a marvel film.

 

[Camaranth]

Alternatively DC could focus on getting an awesome interconnected television universe.
Arrow is better than agents of S.H.I.E.L.D
Let marvel have the cinema universe and DC can work on slower paced, more dramatic, character focused (if less flashy) tv.