SDCC 2014: Dawn of Justice's Wonder Woman Revealed

[vagabondwillsmile]

High heals. F-me boots. Swing-and-a-miss! Too scared to go full greek/roman warrior I guess. Seriously, amateur cosplayers have done it better.

 

[RJ Dalton]

While this does look better than I expected it to, I stand by what I've said earlier: as long as Zack Snyder is attached to the project, I'll pass. I don't care for him as a director.

 

[Phil the Nervous]

Calling it now, Snyder's going to use the raindrops-as-action lines trick that they did in Matrix Revolutions.

I want to be excited about this, but after remembering how great and memorable the DC cast managed to be in the Lego movie the I wish they'd just go ahead and make Lego Justice League.

 

[JimB]

I thought we had gotten past putting superheroes in leather outfits around the time Brett Ratner was trying to do his impression of the Dark Phoenix Saga.

sigh

 

[bug_of_war]

Black Widow gets away with it, to an extent

What!? NO! What the fuck is up with all this hypocritical bullshit that you people are spewing? Like, for fuck sake, Scarlett Johansson has the same muscle definition that Gal Gadot has, and she's been shown being able to beat the shit out of dudes whilst in high heels. And how in the fuck is, "she uses guns" a good enough excuse to cancel out, "OHHH FUCK SHE'S WEARING HEELS SHE'S NOW JUST A SEXUALISED CHARACTER FUCKING BULLSHIT INTERNET TEARS"? Women have been shown using guns in cinema for a long time, it isn't some magical wonder wash (heh...).
Also, just as a side note, there are fight forms that do take into account a persons weaker stature and use the opponents weight and strength against them. If you know what you're doing, you don't have to be toned.

Fuck me this is depressing watching people jump down this movie's throat regardless of what they do. Posters do not equal what the final look of the film will be (see the colour scheme of the Captain America posters as opposed to the colourful film that they actually were), colour schemes can show the tone though, it's a visual aid showing what the character may be feeling or going through in the film. Loss, angst, fear, anger, vengeance etc.
What the fuck is so important about Superman's underwear? With the fifty fucking different designs that there have been of Wonder Woman, why is this one such a blight?

And I highly doubt a warrior on a mission of...well, war...cares so much about looking good that she would sacrifice her own combat prowess so she can occasionally strike a sexy pose in the middle of a fight.

I doubt anyone going to war would wear ANY of what she's wearing. But if she got suited up in some proper gear than that would be heresy as well.

 

[JimB]

Posters do not equal what the final look of the film will be.

No, but they do in this case equal what the creators want us to think the film will look like.

With the fifty fucking different designs that there have been of Wonder Woman, why is this one such a blight?

I think the Wonder Woman most of us detractors are interested in is from pre-Nu52 DC comics; the woman who was the spirit of truth, a metaphor for honesty and perspective in the same way Superman was a metaphor for hope. Nothing about this design particularly instills a belief that this is the Wonder Woman I'd like to see, and in fact, by making it a dreary, brown, leather affair with no color or brightness, I'm fairly convinced they're actually feeling ashamed of the Wonder Woman I like and are apologizing for her by trying to make her more "realistic" with leather armor, like the in retrospect fairly cringe-worthy X-Men films. Style over substance seems to be the order of the day here, and it's a damned shame.

 

[JimB]

So should I assume most people posting didn't bother reading the article, or most people posting don't know what "Sepia tone filter" means? Either way, there's no proof in that picture that the final design will be brown or colorless.

I don't think that's really fair as a way of dismissing everyone's complaints. It doesn't matter if her outfit has colors if we're not able to see those colors, and asking us to take it on faith that there will be colors seems kind of baseless to me, particularly in light of the director's penchant for shooting entire movies through color filters. I can't honestly say I'd be too surprised if every shot of Wonder Woman didn't switch to 300-style filters.

 

[bug_of_war]

No, but they do in this case equal what the creators want us to think the film will look like.

So I guess we were supposed to believe that the first Captain America was supposed to be a gritty WW2 movie showing the gritty origins of Captain America. Or how Captain America 2 was gonna be some sepia dark gritty noir detective film. I hate this thought pattern, not a single trailer or snippet has been released, but you apparently already know the mood of the films based on 3 separate images. If this is the case, tell me about the mood and tone for Avengers Age of Ultron. We've had a few snippets, a couple of posters, so come on then, tell me, based on those alone what is the tone of the film?

I think the Wonder Woman most of us detractors are interested in is from pre-Nu52 DC comics; the woman who was the spirit of truth, a metaphor for honesty and perspective in the same way Superman was a metaphor for hope. Nothing about this design particularly instills a belief that this is the Wonder Woman I'd like to see, and in fact, by making it a dreary, brown, leather affair with no color or brightness, I'm fairly convinced they're actually feeling ashamed of the Wonder Woman I like and are apologizing for her by trying to make her more "realistic" with leather armor, like the in retrospect fairly cringe-worthy X-Men films. Style over substance seems to be the order of the day here, and it's a damned shame.

I think you're judgement may be a tad clouded. The photo up there while being mostly brown, with only the torso having a tinge of red to it, does not NOT show what you just described. Spirit of truth, honesty and perspective. She looks like she's ready to fight for her beliefs, she looks ready to defend the truth, she looks earnest and not like a cackling, calculating cruel person with dishonest intentions. And as for perspective, well look at her photo compared to Superman and Batman, they're both very dark images, and they both look anywhere from somber to somewhat depressed. Meanwhile she actually looks determined, she's not in ponder about the circumstance she is in, she's made a decision, and she's prepared.

 

[JimB]

So I guess we were supposed to believe that the first Captain America was supposed to be a gritty WW2 movie showing the gritty origins of Captain America. Or how Captain America 2 was gonna be some sepia dark gritty noir detective film.

I don't remember the posters of either movie very clearly, so I can't say. The only memory I have is a vague one of the second film's poster, which I thought was, like, everyone standing in a sky-blue void with a bloom of light outlining them and high-tech aircraft hovering above their heads, which makes it hard for me to take a sense of film noir from.

I hate this thought pattern; not a single trailer or snippet has been released, but you apparently already know the mood of the film based on three separate images.

I did not say I know what the film's mood will be. I said I know what they want us to think based on what they have showed us. I offer no opinion on how accurate that forced impression of the overall product is save by extrapolating from the previous movie, which I have not done here.

She looks like she's ready to fight for her beliefs, she looks ready to defend the truth, she looks earnest and not like a cackling, calculating cruel person with dishonest intentions.

What about that image implies anything about her motivations for wanting to fight? I'm not seeing it. I personally think it looks less like an eagerness for battle than someone panting heroically while staring down a crowd of aggressors after having made an example of someone, if you know the kind of scene I'm talking about.

And as for perspective, well look at her photo compared to Superman and Batman. They're both very dark images, and they both look anywhere from somber to somewhat depressed. Meanwhile she actually looks determined.

Granted, but I don't know what determination has to do with a metaphor for truth. I think you also might be mistaking my use of the word "perspective," so please let me clarify: truth differs from fact, as Indiana Jones famously pointed out. Truth is a more subjective experience, and as such is dependent on the perspective of the viewer. I use the term in this case to refer to a level-headed, fair, and unprejudiced way of looking at the world, which is the best kind of truth.

 

[bug_of_war]

What about that image implies anything about her motivations for wanting to fight? I'm not seeing it. I personally think it looks less like an eagerness for battle than someone panting heroically while staring down a crowd of aggressors after having made an example of someone, if you know the kind of scene I'm talking about.

Maybe it's cause she has her sword out, has a stern look on her face, her posture is in quite a prepared stance and the background gives off the impression of a battleground. I never said she wants to fight, but that she looks prepared to fight for her beliefs, she's made a decision and unlike Superman and Batman's photo, she's ready to act, she's not still in contemplation.

Granted, but I don't know what determination has to do with a metaphor for truth. I think you also might be mistaking my use of the word "perspective," so please let me clarify: truth differs from fact, as Indiana Jones famously pointed out. Truth is a more subjective experience, and as such is dependent on the perspective of the viewer. I use the term in this case to refer to a level-headed, fair, and unprejudiced way of looking at the world, which is the best kind of truth.

"the woman who was the spirit of truth, a metaphor for honesty and perspective"

I hope you can see how I may have had a bit of trouble understanding the context that you wanted that sentence to convey. If what you meant is what you've just responded with, than expand on that first, otherwise misunderstandings will arise.

As for how determination can be associated with a metaphor for truth, if one is supposed to be this all encompassing caricature of an idea, than they should also have the determination to fight for that belief. Someone who looks sure of themselves is gonna look more like the metaphor of truth that they're supposed to be conveying, and that's what I believe the picture is showing.

 

[Gordon_4_v1legacy]

It's a good costume. Nice mixture of old, new and realistic to work. I remain unconvinced about the ability of the woman wearing it but I do have to give props to the designer.

 

[JimB]

What about that image implies anything about her motivations for wanting to fight? I'm not seeing it.

Maybe it's 'cause she has her sword out, has a stern look on her face, her posture is in quite a prepared stance and the background gives off the impression of a battleground.

Yeah, but what about that says or implies anything about her motivations?

As for how determination can be associated with a metaphor for truth, if one is supposed to be this all encompassing caricature of an idea, than they should also have the determination to fight for that belief.

I don't understand how that follows. What about truth implies a determination to fight engage in physical and apparently, based on her weapon of choice, mortal combat? What about being right means you need to stab people?

Also: "caricature?"

 

[bug_of_war]

Yeah, but what about that says or implies anything about her motivations?

Well the way they've presented the character. Her posture, her look, the background, the colour, it all suggests (key word here) that she's a good character. Her look shows a determination, her stance shows a willingness to fight, the background shows that the character is most likely in a battle and the colour can show that the battle may be one that carries a certain amount of weight to the story. You are very much welcome to say that that is all a stretch, which is fine.

But if you do, then why is it not a stretch to say that her wearing high heels immediately makes her nothing more than a sexualised character who will do nothing but strike sexy poses so as that to get a rise out of young men?

I don't understand how that follows. What about truth implies a determination to fight engage in physical and apparently, based on her weapon of choice, mortal combat? What about being right means you need to stab people?

Also: "caricature?"

A fight can be more than just physical combat. Though she does have her sword drawn, she's not surrounded by dead bodies, it can be seen more as a, "I'm willing to engage into physical combat if need be" but she still looks like a character that is determined to fight for her beliefs in a manner that does not involve blood shed. She looks stern, yet calm and in control, if she had her sword risen and was yelling/screaming and scowling than that would be a different story. But she's not, she looks like someone who can be reasoned with, but if it all goes south she's prepared for a physical fight.

Caricature was the only word that popped in my head, couldn't think of anything better.

 

[Adamantium93]

Black Widow gets away with it, to an extent

What!? NO! What the fuck is up with all this hypocritical bullshit that you people are spewing? .

[snip]

I doubt anyone going to war would wear ANY of what she's wearing. But if she got suited up in some proper gear than that would be heresy as well.

You need to revisit what the word hypocrite means. Black Widow is not Wonder Woman, and vice versa. Black Widow's sexuality has always been an integral part of her character. She uses it as a weapon to make people underestimate her. And that wonderful fighting style that uses an opponent's strength against them? That's Widow's fighting style. And it works for her.

But Wonder Woman is not a super spy trained in the arts of espionage and seduction from age 8. She was trained in the art of war and brute force. Your argument essentially boils down to: "both are women, so both should be sexualized in exactly the same way for no good reason" even though they have wildly different personalities, fighting styles, and backstories.

I'm not against portraying female sexualty on screen when it makes sense, but adding it in where it doesnt belong is just dumb. It would be like making Thor look like Edward Cullen. Wrong character, wrong place.

As for her outfit, most of it looks like something a greek soldier would wear (minus the heels). Even her knee high boots and short skirt at least make sense in that context (shin guards protecting her weak point and a short skirt that won't hamper her mobility.

And I do agree that it is too early to gleen anything from the color tone on the posters.

 

[bug_of_war]

You need to revisit what the word hypocrite means. Black Widow is not Wonder Woman, and vice versa. Black Widow's sexuality has always been an integral part of her character. She uses it as a weapon to make people underestimate her. And that wonderful fighting style that uses an opponent's strength against them? That's Widow's fighting style. And it works for her.

But Wonder Woman is not a super spy trained in the arts of espionage and seduction from age 8. She was trained in the art of war and brute force. Your argument essentially boils down to: "both are women, so both should be sexualized in exactly the same way for no good reason" even though they have wildly different personalities, fighting styles, and backstories.

I'm not against portraying female sexualty on screen when it makes sense, but adding it in where it doesnt belong is just dumb. It would be like making Thor look like Edward Cullen. Wrong character, wrong place.

As for her outfit, most of it looks like something a greek soldier would wear (minus the heels). Even her knee high boots and short skirt at least make sense in that context (shin guards protecting her weak point and a short skirt that won't hamper her mobility.

And I do agree that it is too early to gleen anything from the color tone on the posters.

My point is that both characters have worn heels in their own comic series and have both been shown being capable of fighting whilst wearing said heels. So why is it okay for one character to have the same costume carry over to a movie portrayal, but not the other? I get the difference between the two in terms of who they are as people, but what I'm saying is that it's hypocritical to lament one character for wearing heels while excusing another, even though both fight people whilst wearing heels. Iron Man 2, Black Widow wore heels when she was doing her corridor run. WHY though? She wasn't there to seduce anyone, they weren't staring at her body making them distracted. At no point did what she look like have anything to do with her fight style nor the effect her outfit had on the men other than not wearing clothing that would hang and give the enemies a chance to use it against her. Tactically the heels would have been useless, but that's the outfit she wore in the comics and people were happy to see her, in fact I remember the only thing people were mildly irritated about was her lack of a Russian accent.

So whilst one is a super assassin spy trained in the art of seduction and one is a straight up warrior, they're both utilising the outfits that they wore in the comics and (presumably they'll make Wonder Woman kick ass) have both women be strong and more than just eye candy.

As for her attire being like old school Greek military garment, it's somewhat close, only the armour would cover her entire torso, the gauntlets would be thicker and cover more of her arm, the skirt would be longer, there would be a helmet and not a tiara and they would probably have a shield.

 

[funksobeefy]

I think the color pallet has been altered to fit the style of the background and not what it will actually be in the film.

Honestly I think she looks pretty gorgeous and look forward to learning more

 

[endtherapture]

However, the fact that a warrior woman who often fights people of equal power to herself is also bone thin without a lick of muscle is not plausible either in the world of the IP or in the real world. Same goes for fighting in high heels. You simply cannot maneuver quickly enough or gain enough leverage when you have to worry about landing the heels just right.

The heels aren't even heels, they are wedges, giving more surface area.

Anyway, Wonder Woman has super strength and can fly, why do you need to worry about fighting in high heels when you can just levitate?

That would carry more weight if half the population of the DC universe did not also possess super strength and flight. Those heels/wedges negate a lot of her strength. So long as she's flying, everything is good. But if she has to face someone one the ground (and she will because, as pointed out, half the cast can negate her inherent strength advantage and a super strong character in mid air is much weaker than a super strong character with both feet on the ground), she loses out on both mobility and solid footing, two things that are crucial to a fight. If that person happens to be stronger than her, she's screwed because her other strengths (martial prowess, mobility) are lost when she can't plant her feet properly and shift her stance effortlessly. And don't get me started on the impracticality of trying to lasso something in heels. A woman who was raised to be a warrior would know this.

Besides, the whole "how much do they really impede her fighting" discussion is moot. She has no reason to have them on her costume, except to emphasize her sexual appeal. And I highly doubt a warrior on a mission of...well, war...cares so much about looking good that she would sacrifice her own combat prowess so she can occasionally strike a sexy pose in the middle of a fight.

She's designed that way to titillate male viewers. That's the crux of the issue, not so much that its unrealistic, but that its a sacrifice of her character (a powerful warrior who would never trade combat potential for OMG THOSE HEELZ!) for the sake of making young male viewers feel good.


If this was...idk...Zatanna, I wouldn't care because her powers aren't based around martial prowess and she wasn't raised to be a warrior (besides, they would fit with that half suit she wears and her stage magician theme). But this isn't Zatanna, and if anyone in the DC universe would wear a practical outfit, it would be Wonder Woman.

Who cares about high-heels breaking "realism" when you are watching a film about an orphaned alien from another planet and a man who dresses up as a bat and beats people at night?

Its less about realism and more about degrading a character to their sexual characteristics, which is especially out of character in this instance. Doesn't necessarily matter if it seems realistic to us, it matters whether its realistic for the character in question, within the universe in question. Would Wonder Woman, an extremely dedicated warrior who fights with swords and shields and spears, really run out into the battlefield wearing shoes that specifically exist for highlighting sexual characteristics, and serve no practical use? She'd be better running around barefoot. Black Widow gets away with it, to an extent, because she uses firearms. Have you ever tried lassoing something while wearing high heels? Those heels would snap and cause her to fall onto her ass the moment she tugs on anything human-sized.

1. The heels are wedges. Most girls I know say big heels are much easier to walk in than stiletto heels - they can even run etc. in wedges

2. How comes a character is sexualised SOLELY because she wears high heels? We get women all of the time telling them they wear heels for themselves, to feel empowered. To simply say "heels are worn for sex appeal and the titillation of men" is in fact a very sexist thing to say. Or whenever you see a woman wearing heels do you think "Oh boy I am so glad she dressed like that to turn me on today" ???

 

[endtherapture]

Look, I actually liked Man of Steel, and when this movie was still just Batman and Superman I was hopeful, but Jesus fucking Christ it's exploded into a complete mess as they try to squeeze more and more characters into it. The whole thing looks like they're sacrificing this movie as it's own entity to introduce audiences to the Justice League at lightning speed so the next movie can be done. That is not how you start things off if you want to build your own successful cinematic universe.

i don't think it has.

i have a very strong feeling this was always planned and something the people involved wanted to leverage and i think Man of Steel might have been greatly underestimated...

remember superman pretending to be a superhero ? when the big joke was "who the fuck is he pretending to be ?".

remember how everyone shouted about how...messy...Superman was ?

it's the perfect excuse for other heros to show up, initially conflict with and then later bond with the new, "inexperienced" superhero superman as new threats emerge.

i put it to you the jury

that this was in fact planned all along !

.

think of it as ironman and the captain turning up to loki and thors meet up in the avengers.

but on a larger scale and straddling two movies now.

and with with two leading new heros who, for the most part, "don't need any introduction".

just as was done in the avengers.

that's what they're doing imo.

and in that light, like i said, perhaps we underestimated some aspects of Man of Steel as an opening gambit.

and perhaps continue to underestimate what they intend to do go forward.

this move is "ballsy"...i'll give you that...but it's not "made up on the spot" by any means imo..."superman" grows up in a world where superheros exist...except he grew up in "small town Kansas"...that is basically true to "the DC universe" is it not ?

and he does make quite an mess his first time out...

Yeah I agree with this. Justice League doesn't have to be built up and created in the same way as the Avengers movie was.

 

[Eri]

Not a great choice. Not only does she not look muscular like she should, she also needs a bigger bust. Wonder Woman is a D cup, if not DD.

oh come off it.

my 1st serious girlfriend had DDs, suffered from back problems due to them and had to get bras that claimed they we're designed using the same engineering principles and the Forth bridge...

and "Amazons" infamously supposedly cut their breasts off ffs...

here's a tip: the commonwealth games are on atm. go look at the athletes. that's the kind of shape a real warrior would be in.

not some gravity defying page 3 girl fantasy.

You can argue all you want. I'm the one with years of comics behind my side. She looks like what she looks like.

 

[MrBaskerville]

Could have been worse, the Stars and Stripes design is gone so that's defineately a good thing, she can probably work in the context of the movie. It seems that they have found some balance between the original design and something that could work in a somewhat realistic setting.