Author Topic: Wonder Woman  (Read 2226 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Michael Hardner

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12472
Re: Wonder Woman
« Reply #60 on: June 28, 2017, 12:24:27 pm »
Deus ex machina can happen in any genre.  It doesn't require fantasy elements, it just requires bad writing.
  If you take the literal meaning, then not really but yes it has come to mean any hail mary pass thrown into a story by a desperate writer.

Law & Order.  Sheesh, yeah. 

Quote
 

Certainly I've experienced that.  Why would you think I haven't?

This kind of wording:

"you're willing to become emotionally invested in Indiana Jones...Whereas you're less able to empathize with Frodo Baggins, because he's..."

Just a hunch based on your wording and you being a writer.

Let's see if you watch Handmaid's Tale and I'll try to watch GoT. We may get somewhere after that.
 

 
Quote
I guess it's a start, although I'm not sure the phrase "emotional maturity" is exactly what I'm thinking of.  I will think more on that.

That's the best I could come up with, but I agree it's lacking.

Quote
What has made the death of major characters so effective in GoT is that it creates a strong sense of uncertainty.  With most stories you know the good guy will win and it's just a question of how.  With this one, when you see a character you thought was a primary focus meet an unexpected end, it changes your expectation greatly.

Yes, that's a mature story that expects more from its audience I agree.  You didn't say it was better, nor do I say that whatever we're talking about now in my examples are better.  I just see the stories I'm describing as being able to take you more in the direction of 'uncertainty' as you call it.
 

Offline kimmy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5033
  • Location: Kim City BC
Re: Wonder Woman
« Reply #61 on: June 30, 2017, 01:08:57 am »
Current projections are that Wonder Woman could close with domestic box office of $390 to $400 million, which would surpass Guardians of the Galaxy 2 as the biggest movie of the year to date. The box office totals as of last weekend have surpassed "Mamma Mia!" which makes it the highest-grossing film to have been directed by a woman.   Patty Jenkins last shot at directing a movie was Monster, in 2003.  Monster is the movie that won Charlize Theron an Oscar (and a truckload of other awards) and cemented her status as a top actress. In the time between directing Monster and Wonder Woman, Patty Jenkins has directed a few TV movies and some television episodes, but has surprisingly little on her resume for a writer and director who scored such a critically acclaimed movie in Monster.  I read an interview in which Jenkins said she hated the choice of Gal Gadot as the star, until she met Gadot in person, at which point she became an instant fan-girl.


I did finally get out to see the big movie yesterday.  I really enjoyed it.


This version of the character debuted in last year's not-very-good "Batman vs Superman" movie. In that movie, Bruce Wayne has an old sepia-toned photograph of Diana and 4 male comrades posing for the camera during World War 1.  He's of course very intrigued that Diana hasn't aged a day in almost 100 years.  This movie opens with that photograph, and tells the story behind it.

It's somewhat a fish-out-of-water story. Diana, having grown up on the idyllic Themyscira ("Paradise Island", as Steve Trevor dubs it) is appalled when she arrives in the modern world, from the industrial smog of 1918 London, to the horror of World War 1.  Initially believing it's her duty and birthright to bring peace back to the world, she's so shocked by the things that she encounters that she begins to doubt whether it's even worth saving.

Chris Pine is wonderful as Steve Trevor. Though she might be bulletproof and imbued with limitless strength, he's the real hero of the story, as his example convinces her that the world still has things worth fighting for. From Steve, and his comrades Sammy, Charlie, and "the Chief" (the four men beside her in the photograph) Diana gains a deeper understanding of the modern world and the people living in it.

The action scenes are spectacular, but there are also many scenes that are simply charming... Diana's attempts to come to grips with London are amusing, particularly her attempts to navigate a revolving door.  And Chris Pine and Gal Gadot have a pleasant rapport that's enjoyable to watch.



Aside from the movie itself, one of the highlights of the evening for me was when a dad and young his daughter arrived. The girl was perhaps 5 years old, and she was dressed in a Wonder Woman costume! She looked delighted.  I am sure she found the movie much more inspiring than a symposium on pay equity would have been.



 -k
Paris - London - New York - Kim City

Offline kimmy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5033
  • Location: Kim City BC
Re: Wonder Woman
« Reply #62 on: July 01, 2017, 02:48:10 pm »
  If you take the literal meaning, then not really but yes it has come to mean any hail mary pass thrown into a story by a desperate writer.

If one goes by the literal meaning, then the opening of the Ark in Raiders is the most literal interpretation of deus ex machina that I can think of! :p

This kind of wording:

"you're willing to become emotionally invested in Indiana Jones...Whereas you're less able to empathize with Frodo Baggins, because he's..."

Just a hunch based on your wording and you being a writer.

I don't mean that any conscious thought goes into becoming immersed in a story or invested in the characters.  However the viewer has to give it a chance.

I was thinking of a thread where August talks about "Inception" because he'd seen 30 seconds of about it by accident. (this also appears to be the thread where I debuted the "unattractive French couple on an ugly couch" meme!)
http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums/topic/16907-inception/#comment-568858

Quote
I turned to my friend and said that we were in the wrong hall. We had wandered about half way into Inception. As we walked out, I added that I hate such fake movies.
(...)
IMV, special effects and CGI are no substitute for content. Heck, good acting is no substitute for content. I have no desire to see Leo talk to people with weird eyes - if the movie wins Best Picture, so be it.
(...)
I can accept cartoons and CGI if the intention is child-like whimsy, fantasy. It's fake. I cannot accept bad CGI (and most is) to present the real world.

I guess the determining factor turns on one's ability to "suspend belief", the essence of all art.
(...)
the 30 second scene I saw involved a very serious Leonardo di Caprio (and di Caprio is so earnest; it's as if he's always trying to prove that he's a real actor and not someone who won a lottery) talking to some creature, I don't know how else to describe this, with weird eyes.

When we see scenes of cats flying planes or dogs talking, we know that we are not seeing reality. But it's also done tongue in cheek.
(...)
Di Caprio's earnestness. No smirk, no sense of irony.
(...)
So, it was perhaps the lack of a di Caprio nod to the absurdity of talking to a CGI creature that irked me. I mean, what would Shrek be for Western adults or teenagers without the irony of Eddie Murphy.

Ultimately, August's view is that "Inception" should have been played as a comedy because he can't take anything seriously if there are fantastical elements involved.  He won't (or maybe can't) look past the fantasy elements to become immersed in a story. 

And, reading your comments earlier regarding dragons, and mythical creatures showing up to fix everything, and so on, it made me think of the same thing: here's a guy who isn't willing to give this type of material a chance because of his preconceptions about it.



Let's see if you watch Handmaid's Tale and I'll try to watch GoT. We may get somewhere after that.


I'm not sure how getting me to watch Handmaid's Tale helps you illustrate your point.   If it's anything like the movie, then it's an example of a writer using a fantastical situation to tell a story that provides commentary on our present reality... more in the lines of "Gattaca" or "Minority Report" or maybe "A Clockwork Orange" than "Amour".
 
Yes, that's a mature story that expects more from its audience I agree.  You didn't say it was better, nor do I say that whatever we're talking about now in my examples are better.  I just see the stories I'm describing as being able to take you more in the direction of 'uncertainty' as you call it.

That's typically the direction they go, and it's typically what the audience wants, but it's not a limitation that comes from the setting or the inclusion of fantasy elements.  It's a limitation that comes from the type of audience the movie has targeted.

 -k
Paris - London - New York - Kim City

Offline SirJohn

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5801
Re: Wonder Woman
« Reply #63 on: July 01, 2017, 07:27:39 pm »
Current projections are that Wonder Woman could close with domestic box office of $390 to $400 million, which would surpass Guardians of the Galaxy 2 as the biggest movie of the year to date.

And neither left their audiences cursing...

I remember when I was younger I used to like horror novels. I picked one up by a guy named Peter Straub. He was a terrific storyteller, filled the book with tension and characters you cared about, solved the evil thingee with a chapter to spare. Then in the final chapter the evil thingee came back and killed everyone. Was I admiring of his brilliant storytelling? No, I threw the book across the room and the next time I saw a book by Straub in the book store I flipped to the back to see... yup, ended the same sort of way. I never bought another book from Peter Straub. Not everything ends in a happy ending, it's true. But people don't invest in stories to be depressed or to see some character they care about die in the end while the evil thingee wins. That's self-indulgent of the writer, in my opinion, and puts his own sense of artistry ahead of the satisfaction of his readers/viewers.

And make no mistake about it, the satisfaction of the readers/viewers is job one. Any sort of message you want to deliver on the side has to bear that in mind.
Having said that I have to admit that I bought the first book of Game of Thrones long before it became a TV show and it was so depressing with all the characters dying that I never finished it. I am watching the series, and enjoy it, but in a more cursory fashion. The only characters I actually like are the dwarf and the blonde.
"When liberals insist that only fascists will defend borders then voters will hire fascists to do the job liberals won't do." David Frum

guest4

  • Guest
Re: Wonder Woman
« Reply #64 on: July 04, 2017, 09:31:00 am »


What has made the death of major characters so effective in GoT is that it creates a strong sense of uncertainty.  With most stories you know the good guy will win and it's just a question of how.  With this one, when you see a character you thought was a primary focus meet an unexpected end, it changes your expectation greatly.


My opinion is that the killing off of major characters and 'good' people whilst 'bad' people continue to live is one of the elements that makes GOT realistic, even though it's a fantasy setting.   

Offline Michael Hardner

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12472
Re: Wonder Woman
« Reply #65 on: July 04, 2017, 09:53:48 am »
If one goes by the literal meaning, then the opening of the Ark in Raiders is the most literal interpretation of deus ex machina that I can think of! :p

Oh, I see what you're saying.  Yes.

Quote


Ultimately, August's view is that "Inception" should have been played as a comedy because he can't take anything seriously if there are fantastical elements involved.  He won't (or maybe can't) look past the fantasy elements to become immersed in a story. 

And, reading your comments earlier regarding dragons, and mythical creatures showing up to fix everything, and so on, it made me think of the same thing: here's a guy who isn't willing to give this type of material a chance because of his preconceptions about it.

That's a more extreme version of me.  I don't make a conscious decision, but it breaks the frame like Batman in the operating room.  Ally MacBeal was another example.  They tried to combine serious, or serio-comic with absurd and I couldn't deal with that.  I just turned it off.



 
Quote

I'm not sure how getting me to watch Handmaid's Tale helps you illustrate your point.   If it's anything like the movie, then it's an example of a writer using a fantastical situation to tell a story that provides commentary on our present reality... more in the lines of "Gattaca" or "Minority Report" or maybe "A Clockwork Orange" than "Amour".
 

HT is not fantasy.  I'm not trying to 'make a point' about you, just wondering if we can learn from watching each others' examples and examining how we react to those.

Offline kimmy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5033
  • Location: Kim City BC
Re: Wonder Woman
« Reply #66 on: July 09, 2017, 04:02:42 pm »
That's a more extreme version of me.  I don't make a conscious decision, but it breaks the frame like Batman in the operating room. 

I still feel like you're missing what Mr Brady was expressing.  Yes, Batman showing up in the OR on MASH breaks the frame.  But Batman showing up in a dark alley in Gotham City doesn't break the frame.  It's implied by the frame. You're not watching a dark alley in Gotham unless you're expecting Batman to arrive. If your reaction when Batman arrives is "I was interested in the urban crime drama aspect of this, but now that I know it's a superhero movie, I'm out" then clearly you were watching the wrong movie and you have only yourself to blame.

Leonardo talking to "a guy with weird eyes" in Wolf Of Wall Street would break the frame. Leonardo talking to "a guy with weird eyes" in Inception doesn't break the frame. The premise of the movie is, I gather, the ability to enter a person's dreams to interact with their subconscious.  If you're willing to accept the premise that you're watching someone's dreams, the notion that you might find weird or surreal or unsettling elements inside shouldn't break your suspension of disbelief.


Your complaint isn't about breaking the frame, it's that you feel some frames are just inherently not good at expressing mature themes.


Ally MacBeal was another example.  They tried to combine serious, or serio-comic with absurd and I couldn't deal with that.  I just turned it off.

I didn't watch much of Ally McBeal... I didn't like it very much.   My recollection is that the images on the screen were not always literal, but were sometimes representative of Ally's perception. I recall one episode where she was on a date... the man she was with was eating a Caesar salad and got salad dressing on his lips, which she found gross. Later when she looked at him, she (and we the viewer) kept seeing him with his whole face covered with gross creamy Caesar dressing, and she couldn't date him any more.

Later in the series she became haunted by a bizarre dancing baby that only she could see... it would prance around her to the "ooga chakka, ooga-ooga" chant from Blue Suede's "Hooked on a Feeling".  I gather it was intended to be a comical representation of her ticking "biological clock". 

The antics of her co-workers were sometimes too bizarre to be taken literally as well. I don't think the show was ever really meant to be taken as a literal attempt to portray reality.  I think it was intended as a caricature of real life.  They made fun of real character traits by exaggerating them. It was satirical commentary on society and human nature, but it was never intended as a documentary.  The absurdist elements were part of the commentary. 

I didn't care for McBeal myself either, but I think that's where they were coming from. I think if I'd understood what they were doing at the time it was on the air, I'd have probably enjoyed it more.

Absurdity has a place in storytelling.  Franz Kafka blended absurdist elements into his stories as a way of making commentary, but probably did so with a little more subtlety and gravitas than Ally McBeal.

HT is not fantasy.  I'm not trying to 'make a point' about you, just wondering if we can learn from watching each others' examples and examining how we react to those.

I don't think you're trying to make a point "about me", I think you're trying to make a point that realistic settings make better vehicles for expressing mature themes.

In regard to the Handmaiden's Tale, the movie is set in a dystopian future where fertile women have become just commodities, due to widespread sterility.  There are many other totalitarian aspects as well.  This is speculative fiction, as we discussed earlier.  It's not a realistic setting, it's a fictional setting created to advance certain premises for exploration-- like Gattaca and Jurassic Park and others in that vein.

But as I said earlier, I'm already very open to that sort of material... I feel that these kinds of settings are a great vehicle to explore all kinds of challenging ideas that could never be adequately discussed on a couch in an apartment in Paris.

 -k
Paris - London - New York - Kim City

Offline Michael Hardner

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12472
Re: Wonder Woman
« Reply #67 on: July 09, 2017, 05:41:02 pm »
If your reaction when Batman arrives is "I was interested in the urban crime drama aspect of this, but now that I know it's a superhero movie, I'm out" then clearly you were watching the wrong movie and you have only yourself to blame.

Right, but if Batman starts talking about themes that are too serious, I think "Why did they put this in the Batman movie ?"
 
Quote
Your complaint isn't about breaking the frame, it's that you feel some frames are just inherently not good at expressing mature themes.

Maybe.


Quote
 
  The absurdist elements were part of the commentary. 

Sure. But after a scene like that, the evocative piano music could come on and someone could say "Ally... I need to talk to you..." in a serious tone.

Really ?

Quote
...did so with a little more subtlety and gravitas than Ally McBeal.

Surrealism and pathos are hard to make work.  I don't think I have ever felt like crying during a surrealist movie.

Quote
I feel that these kinds of settings are a great vehicle to explore all kinds of challenging ideas that could never be adequately discussed on a couch in an apartment in Paris.
 

You have to give me the name of that movie ?

Offline kimmy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5033
  • Location: Kim City BC
Re: Wonder Woman
« Reply #68 on: July 10, 2017, 11:05:33 pm »
Right, but if Batman starts talking about themes that are too serious, I think "Why did they put this in the Batman movie ?"


That's because your preconception is that Batman should be Adam West running around in tights talking about "shark-repellant Bat Spray".




But that's your expectation imposed on the genre, not the genre itself.  The Tim Burton/Michael Keaton version expressed a much darker vision that was very successful both commercially and critically.   The Christopher Nolan/Christian Bale version was darker still, and even more commercially and critically successful.  "The Dark Knight" is the single most successful comic-book adaptation ever from both a commercial standpoint and a critical standpoint, and one of the most commercially successful movies of all time, period.  And it was extremely bleak.  No shark-repellent Bat Spray, not a "Biff!" or "Pow!" to be found.

You can consider that the idea of a grown man running around in tights is inherently funny.  You can also consider that the idea of a mentally unstable vigilante hunting down criminals is inherently disturbing.  Both views have been applied to the "superhero" concept with great success. Both are completely valid.


I argued earlier that the comic book superhero is just a modern incarnation of an archetype character that has been with us for millennia in one form or another.  As such, it shouldn't be overlooked. It shouldn't be shrugged off because you grew up with the Adam West comedy/satire Batman on your TV.


Surrealism and pathos are hard to make work.  I don't think I have ever felt like crying during a surrealist movie.

I don't think I have either, but I don't think I've watched much that would qualify as surrealist. I wouldn't discount that it's possible, though.

I used to read my little brother's comic books once in a while when I was a teenager. Most of them were just what you'd expect. But I became very attached to the Uncanny X-Men... one issue in particular left me with a lump in my throat, I felt so badly for the character involved. If an author can create a character you empathize with, and put her in a situation you can relate to, it doesn't matter what the genre is. It's all in the execution.

I was never struck numb with shock while watching a fantasy program until I saw season 3, episode 9 of Game of Thrones. I was never overcome with rage while watching a fantasy program until I saw season 4, episode 8 of Game of thrones.  I never covered my eyes in terror while watching a cartoon until I saw the B-17 sequence from "Heavy Metal".

You have to give me the name of that movie ?

As I say, it's a hypothetical film that only exists in my imagination... it's what I envision would be August's ideal, perfect movie.

This is about the closest real-world comparison I can find.



 -k
Paris - London - New York - Kim City

Offline Michael Hardner

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12472
Re: Wonder Woman
« Reply #69 on: July 11, 2017, 06:20:59 am »
Buried thread...

Offline Michael Hardner

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12472
Re: Wonder Woman
« Reply #70 on: July 11, 2017, 06:53:36 am »


That's because your preconception is that Batman should be Adam West running around in tights talking about "shark-repellant Bat Spray".

No, it's because it's being done by a guy in a cape who can fly.
[/quote]

Quote
But that's your expectation imposed on the genre, not the genre itself.  The Tim Burton/Michael Keaton version expressed a much darker vision that was very successful both commercially and critically.   The Christopher Nolan/Christian Bale version was darker still, and even more commercially and critically successful.  "The Dark Knight" is the single most successful comic-book adaptation ever from both a commercial standpoint and a critical standpoint, and one of the most commercially successful movies of all time, period.  And it was extremely bleak.  No shark-repellent Bat Spray, not a "Biff!" or "Pow!" to be found.

Dark does not equal real.  And to state that it's my expectation because of the genre is correct, it's also universal to anybody with any culture who watches any performance and goes back to Robert Reed's essay.

Quote
You can consider that the idea of a grown man running around in tights is inherently funny.  You can also consider that the idea of a mentally unstable vigilante hunting down criminals is inherently disturbing.  Both views have been applied to the "superhero" concept with great success. Both are completely valid.

Once again I have never said any of this is invalid.

Quote
I argued earlier that the comic book superhero is just a modern incarnation of an archetype character that has been with us for millennia in one form or another.  As such, it shouldn't be overlooked. It shouldn't be shrugged off because you grew up with the Adam West comedy/satire Batman on your TV.

Once again I have not shrugged it off.

Quote
I don't think I have either, but I don't think I've watched much that would qualify as surrealist. I wouldn't discount that it's possible, though.

I used to read my little brother's comic books once in a while when I was a teenager. Most of them were just what you'd expect. But I became very attached to the Uncanny X-Men... one issue in particular left me with a lump in my throat, I felt so badly for the character involved. If an author can create a character you empathize with, and put her in a situation you can relate to, it doesn't matter what the genre is. It's all in the execution.

Of course, but there are limits which is what I have been arguing.



Quote


 -k

This looks good.

Look, I don't think we're making forward progress.  There is just a taste for profoundly affecting performance that I got from theatre, that barely exists in film that I feel I have that you don't.  I detect that in your aversion to the 'ugly French people in apartments' genre, whatever it is.  I have no parallel aversion.

Until you try something in that genre, and like it or at least don't dismiss it outright and see something in it I don't know what we can talk about. 

Offline cybercoma

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2956
Re: Wonder Woman
« Reply #71 on: July 11, 2017, 08:39:52 pm »
I suppose now that I've seen Wonder Woman, I should actually read this thread.

Offline kimmy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5033
  • Location: Kim City BC
Re: Wonder Woman
« Reply #72 on: July 12, 2017, 09:37:08 am »
I suppose now that I've seen Wonder Woman,

What did you think of it?

I should actually read this thread.

... uh, mostly just me and Mike bickering, really.

 -k
Paris - London - New York - Kim City

Offline Michael Hardner

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12472
Re: Wonder Woman
« Reply #73 on: July 12, 2017, 10:40:54 am »


... uh, mostly just me and Mike bickering, really.

 

Not so much.  I bicker your bickering.

I think that such movies are limited in what they can give the viewer, and Kim seems to think not.  I feel that the kind of experience I get from non-cape-wearing films likely hasn't been experienced by her, and that until she comes and experiences something like that she can't agree or disagree with my assertion.

Also these movies are stupid.  Sorry. :D

Offline cybercoma

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2956
Re: Wonder Woman
« Reply #74 on: July 12, 2017, 12:03:14 pm »
What did you think of it?
 -k
I was expecting it to be great, given the media buzz, but it was even better than I expected. DC finally has a winner, but it feels kind of like an empty victory considering how awful the Justice League teasers have been.