Well, that title pretty much sums up what I had to say, that Joss Whedon is no longer writing or directing the film version of Wonder Woman in production. To be honest, as much as I do like Whedon's work, I think it's probably a good thing. Whedon himself has been unable to cross-over into the mainstream, and Wonder Woman, well, I could honestly see a big-budget Wonder Woman movie flopping and being the kiss of death for the current crop of superhero movies.
Wow! Where did you hear this? Last I heard the movie was still whedonesque...
If confirmed, I am really disappointed to hear this. The worst thing that could happen to a potential Wonder Woman movie franchise would be that it fell back on typical, uncreative Hollywood crutches: the foreign-princess-in-the-big-city crutch, the woman-who-has-never-met-a-man crutch, the girl-goes-shopping-and-"discovers"-fashion/shoes/whatever crutch, etc. All predictable, all likely to be poorly done, all unworthy of the character. I have occassional misgivings about Whedon, but I have more confidence in him than in anyone else that comes to mind that he could do justice to a strong, smart Wonder Woman without falling back into the standard template that so many movies do.
Good luck to the new writer/director. S/He has a big job ahead.
Okay, I see it now. http://whedonesque.com/comments/12385
I think Whedon may have been the best writer for the job, but I'm also not sure that anyone could do it well. Wonder Woman, for all her history and awareness in popular culture, is a pretty out there. Most people know the character chiefly from the cheesy '70s show. Once you start explaining her origin, with being made out of clay, and coming from a secret island super-advanced female-only culture, your average movie-goers' eyes would start to glaze over. I know Wonder Woman's place among super-heroes is right up there with Batman, Superman and Spider-man, but compared to those three, or even the X-men, I would say she's a much harder sell.
See I totally dont see wonder woman as a hard movie to make, he probably just wanted to do the comics wonder woman (aka superman 2) with her warrior style and plenty of villains and they probably wanted something fun and light hearted... like catwoman. :thumbdown:
In an update, David Goyer is also off the Flash movie that was in development.
Wow, my interest in Wonder Woman just plummeted back to zero. Big mistake on the part of the studio.
Ditto for taking Goyer off the Flash movie, though my interest in that was not quite as high due to the ridiculous casting of Ryan Reynolds.
well... look at the brightside... atleast now he'll have more time for runaways :thumbup:
Get ready for it......."Bah."
Personally, I'm glad to see Whedon off Wonder Woman as director and somewhat glad he's off as a writer.
He's been attached to the project for several years now (it's been a little over three years at least) and the story has moved nowhere near being out of the scripting phase. Meanwhile, Joss has done Serenity and how many runs on the X-Men comic?
It's time to let someone else have a crack at it. Preferably someone who is familiar with the character and will treat it fairly . . . and commit the time and effort to getting it done and done well.
Quote from: Mr. Hamrick on February 03, 2007, 06:09:45 PM
Personally, I'm glad to see Whedon off Wonder Woman as director and somewhat glad he's off as a writer.
He's been attached to the project for several years now (it's been a little over three years at least) and the story has moved nowhere near being out of the scripting phase. Meanwhile, Joss has done Serenity and how many runs on the X-Men comic?
It's time to let someone else have a crack at it. Preferably someone who is familiar with the character and will treat it fairly . . . and commit the time and effort to getting it done and done well.
Actually, it was just 2 years of Whedon on the project, and his X-men comics are always late. Still, I see your point.
My interest in this is still at zero since I'm not a fan of Whedon's work and Wonder Woman ranks pretty low on my cool super-hero list.
Regardless of whomever is set to direct this, he/she will have to contend with the studio execs demanding as many T and A shots as possible.
Quote from: Courtnall6 on February 03, 2007, 07:55:43 PMRegardless of whomever is set to direct this, he/she will have to contend with the studio execs demanding as many T and A shots as possible.
Well, jeez, the costume is pretty conducive to that. If the director can handle "frontal shot" and "rear shot" they'll have "T" and "A" :P
it just seems longer than two years, I guess . . .
Anyway, I was thinking about it. This is the person who needs to be directing Wonder Woman. HER name is Lexi Alexander. She directed and co-wrote a film I had the pleasure of seeing at The Atlanta Film Festival a few years ago called "Hooligans". It was released in limited markets here as "Green Street Hooligans".
Unfortunately, she is in pre-production on two films right now that she is attached to direct. My only concern with her would be that she might be familiar enough with the character.
However, how many directors and writers in Hollywood are going to be THAT familiar with Wonder Woman aside from the 70s/early 80s series with Linda Carter?
Warner Brothers has a lot on their plate with this movie.
Oh well.
I don't give Hollywood any credit at all for making Comics Movies. I'm always shocked when they pull them off well. I don't think I've ever seen one where I've been 100% satisfied, but the Spidey's have come closest.
hopefully, they will curtail the "big city/shopping spree" crap. It's old and stupid. Do you REALLY want to see a Wonder Woman montage set to "Girls Just Wanna Have Fun"?
My vision of Wonder Woman would start out Clash of the Titans, and switch to Dark Angel with an army base maybe thrown in.
and I just thought of a question I'm shocked to have never thought of before. On Themescria, they performed the Bullets and bracelets thing as one of their tests...where would they have gotten a gun? just wondering.
Who should her enemy be? A Sorcerer? Cheetah? Ares? Felix Faust? Giganta?
I'll have to say, I admire Joss Whedon's ability to put strong women on the screen in a way that doesn't imply that "strong"=="female canine" or that "smart"=="can match shoes with bag". But, Mr. Hamrick's comment above really does justify the studio's actions, and as much was implied by Joss himself in the announcement I linked above. Realistically, a studio cannot stay with someone who, for whatever reason, can't get the project out the door. The movie-making business doesn't work if the movie never gets made.
And I echo Protomorph's comment that Hollywood's ability to put iconic comic book characters on the screen is questionable at best. Spider-Man II was very good, IMO and Batman Begins was pretty close, although somewhat offbeat for the genre. Superman Returns was disappointing, Fantastic 4 pretty bad and the third X-Men movie was fun but kinda marginal in parts.
Wonder Woman isn't my favorite character, but that's part of why the character could be the basis for a great movie franchise. If I were a WW zombie, quoting facts and history from sixty years of comics and fanzine interviews (as I might for certain other characters), then there would be no way the movie could work for me. But, as someone casually acquainted with the character, mostly from team comics like JLA, I will be happy if they capture the flavor of the character, even if they miss some details. And I think most potential fans of the movie are in a similar boat. I mean, my issues with Superman Returns weren't with things like "he was never really gone for five years" but with things like Superman spying on Lois' private conversations with her effective husband and working to disrupt the stable home she had set up for her son. Things that show the writers don't understand the nature of the character they are writing will kill the movie.
BTW, as an aside, guns are relatively simple devices. A machinist could make one in our world, so it doesn't seem like too big a stretch that whoever does the blacksmithing/gem cutting/clockmaking/etc. among the amazons could come up with a reasonable facsimile. I haven't kept up with her comics, so is the problem that they don't have access to any technology, in the current DCU?
It shouldn't be hard for the amazons to get a gun, considering that they have technology superior to that in the rest of the world, at least in some reboots. That invisible jet isn't magic, after all, though thematically, it would make more sense if it were.
I've always hated that stupid jet. Never made any sense to me. My wife HATES WW with an unreasoning passion, ha. I don't have anything against her, but I do have to say that there isn't a lot about her that makes sense. The Amazon armor just happening to be red, white, and blue, the inisible jet, etc., etc. They could have at least made the armor look more like something from a product of the culture it's supposed to descend from. Ha, sorry, I guess I've gotten a bit distracted. Anyway, I think Whedon could have done a good job, and I fear for this movie now that it is in limbo. Any wack-job might get assigned to it now. If one of the big three at DC has a movie that completely bombs, it could concievably break the flow of new projects.
Oh, I totally hate the invisible jet too. Everything Benton Grey said about Wonder Woman just adds on to my problems with Wonder Woman as a character, particularly as one to sell to mainstream audiences. She has a weird origin, what with being made of clay and all, the secret amazon island society, magic, Greek gods, and high technology all playing a part, not readily definable motives on being a super-hero, a costume and appearance totally at odds with her supposedly 'feminist' message of female empowerment and a weaker villain line-up. I like a lot of Whedon's work, but I don't think even he was up to this task. My interest and faith in this project was at zero when he was attached, now it's at negative levels. To make Wonder Woman work in a movie, I think you'd have to jettison a great deal of the established comic book material, which would automatically poison Wonder Woman fans against the movie.
I think a Flash or even a Green Lantern film has a much better chance of being a big hit over Wonder Woman, provided a Flash movie doesn't get bogged down in the Flash legacy or time travel, and a potential GL one doesn't get too silly with unnecessary ring constructs.
Pre-Crisis, the Amazons had all kinds of advanced technology, so having guns was no surprise. Post-Crisis, they only had one gun -- it was left over from when pilot Diana Trevor (Steve's mom) crash-landed on the island years before.
As for the movie, I try to be optimistic, but WW has got to be one of the toughest characters to translate (heck, it's tough enough to do anything with her in the comics!). Will a mainstream audience swallow all that crazy magic and mythology? It might actually work better as a period piece -- set it in World War II, and film it in a very stylized, slightly surreal way (ala Sky Captain or Sin City). Putting Wonder Woman in a realistic setting is just going to make her look ridiculous.
I guess there's no chance for a Thor movie then. :P
Seriously, all the detail issues with clay, Greek mythology, et cetera: forget about them. There is no reason for a movie to explain, for example, that WW was made from clay. It isn't a factor.
BTW, I agree that she is a tough character to put on the screen. But, the trouble, IMHO, in this sort of movie, is that Hollywood isn't very imaginitive when it comes to portraying female characters. There is a tendency to fall back into tried-and-true stereotypes which, apparantly, writers have been taught "work" on film. (And I am not saying that they never do, just that they aren't right for Wonder Woman.) That is where I think someone like Joss Whedon has an edge that his resume backs up.
Meanwhile, I am not sure that Wonder Woman's costume is at odds in any way with female empowerment, except in the antiquated PC view of women as creatures who need to be functionally indistinct from men, lest they embolden their oppressors. Keep in mind that Wonder Woman isn't physically weaker than men (quite the opposite) and so the old notion of a woman as a person sexually vulnerable to men is totally invalid for her and so are all of the notions derived from that. E.g., WW doesn't have an "immodest" costume because she thinks has nothing to offer other than an alluring body. She isn't using counting on her exposed skin to win her battles by evoking a protective empathy for the "weaker sex" from her male opponents. She goes toe-to-toe with anyone, wearing what she wants, and if they are dumb enough to underestimate her based on clothing, that is their mistake. But, it is not their only mistake, because she is Wonder Woman and she would have kicked their butts whether or not they were drooling. She is smart and strong because that is her nature, not because she needs to show she is equal to men. And, if she shows fury in battle it is because she fights with passion for what is right, not because she is "PMSing". When she battles women, she isn't competing for a man's attention (or a woman's) and she is not deterred by her opponent pulling her hair or scratching her face; she isn't a beauty contestant and she won't fight battles on cosmetic terms.
In my view, of course.
Look at Wonder Woman's costume vs. almost every male super-heroes: the men are covered from head to toe, hell many even wear boots, gloves and full head coverings. Almost every version of WW's shows significant cleavage, and for most she'd need fairly regular bikini waxes. Something that would require double-sided tape to avoid accidentally flashing people during a fight doesn't make much sense. There's no good in-character reason for WW to want to dress like that; simply put, her costume is revealing because cheesecake sells comics, and it always has. The character doesn't use her sexuality, but the artists & writers clearly do.
And I really think Thor's odds are long indeed, unless he was done in a more Ultimates fashion, where his sanity was in question for claiming to be a Norse god.
As I stated earlier, I don't envy whatever writer in Hollywood (or whereever) gets the nod to write the script.
First of all, what everyone has said about portraying the character and getting all of her history in that one can into the flick that will make sense for the viewer.
Second, while the stereotypes are present in films (for men and women), there is a bigger problem with presenting Wonder Woman on film. Films with female leads are not perceived generally as doing well at the box office. There are rare exceptions to that rule (first Tomb Raider movie, comes to mind as does Charlie's Angels) but generally, those kinds of movies are not generally looked at as being bankable. Of course, one of the biggest reasons for this would be the writing, directing, or the acting (Halle Berry, I am looking at you and Catwoman). Another reason would be studios generally don't know how to market those kinds of movies past the T&A approach.
Third, you can ask every fan of the comic or the character what they want to see but you can only get so much in a roughly 2 - 2 1/2 hour movie. Additionally, you want to be able to attract audiences who don't read comics and get their ticket. And make no bones about it, the studios want to make their money back on this and preferrably a profit.
Quote from: Talavar on February 04, 2007, 05:49:42 PMLook at Wonder Woman's costume vs. almost every male super-heroes: the men are covered from head to toe, hell many even wear boots, gloves and full head coverings. Almost every version of WW's shows significant cleavage, and for most she'd need fairly regular bikini waxes. Something that would require double-sided tape to avoid accidentally flashing people during a fight doesn't make much sense. There's no good in-character reason for WW to want to dress like that; simply put, her costume is revealing because cheesecake sells comics, and it always has. The character doesn't use her sexuality, but the artists & writers clearly do.
No one is denying she has a sexy costume. Obviously, the fourth wall reason for the costume is that it sells comics. And, if DC thought they could sell more comics with Krypto the Superdog by giving him a smaller cape, they would do it. So I agree on that. But, the comparison with male superhero costumes isn't entirely fair. The male costumes typically show the musculature that is the hallmark of male cheesecake artistry. It isn't only that the (mostly male) artists have shown less sexism in designing the men's costumes, but that there is less visual appeal in seeing some guy's hairy gut or veiny arms, whether or not he has a six-pack.
But, the in-character reasons aren't really relevant. You could find practical deficiencies in many characters' costumes. How many characters really need a cape to getting caught on things, getting burned, getting pulled out, etc? I don't recall any real-world police, fire fighters, martial artists, soldiers or others who are involved in combat or sundry heroics running around in spandex or capes. The vast majority of comic book character costumes have little in-character justification that would stand up to serious scrutiny. Even the old saw that they want to be "easily recognizable" is kinda weak when you realize that most costumes also make them "easily impersonated". I have to think Wonder Woman deserves the same pass on that as anyone else.
Quote from: Mr. Hamrick on February 04, 2007, 05:57:56 PMSecond, while the stereotypes are present in films (for men and women), there is a bigger problem with presenting Wonder Woman on film. Films with female leads are not perceived generally as doing well at the box office. There are rare exceptions to that rule (first Tomb Raider movie, comes to mind as does Charlie's Angels) but generally, those kinds of movies are not generally looked at as being bankable. Of course, one of the biggest reasons for this would be the writing, directing, or the acting (Halle Berry, I am looking at you and Catwoman). Another reason would be studios generally don't know how to market those kinds of movies past the T&A approach.
Yep. And I have to imagine that the nightmare that anyone involved with the Wonder Woman project will have involves WW morphing into Catwoman or Elektra.
BTW, I am not some snooty prude when it comes to films having "visual appeal" in that >ahem< sense. I have respect (as I have mentioned) for Joss Whedon's ability to put strong women on the screen and make them compelling characters, but I have no illusions that part of the success of
BtVS (for example) was that there were good looking people in front of the camera, often engaged in pretty sexy behavior.
Quote from: Mr. Hamrick on February 04, 2007, 05:57:56 PMThird, you can ask every fan of the comic or the character what they want to see but you can only get so much in a roughly 2 - 2 1/2 hour movie. Additionally, you want to be able to attract audiences who don't read comics and get their ticket. And make no bones about it, the studios want to make their money back on this and preferrably a profit.
Totally. And they should. This is part of why I say the writers can't be concerned about getting all the details right or shoehorning them all into the movie. Get the
nature of the character right. Have some well-done defining moments and don't spend the rest of the movie contradicting them. The fans will deal with it and, if they are at all realistic, will appreciate that one of their heroes has found success in a new medium and be able to overlook some bits of canon that didn't make the crossing. By way of example, I am thinking that
Spider-Man (I) did well, despite fairly significant deviations, like his (lack of) web-shooters. A movie like this should never start out trying to put everything the fans want into the script.
here is what was reported about the matter on IMDB.com:
QuoteBuffy The Vampire Slayer creator Joss Whedon has quit as writer and director of the forthcoming Wonder Woman movie over "creative differences." Whedon signed up to adapt the popular comic book and 1970s TV show for the big screen in May, but has severed ties with the project after failing to agree to a script with the film's producers. He writes on his website, "You (hopefully) heard it here first: I'm no longer slated to make Wonder Woman...I had a take on the film that, well, nobody liked. Let me stress first that everybody at the studio and Silver Pictures were cool and professional. We just saw different movies, and at the price range this kind of movie hangs in, that's never gonna work. It happens all the time. I don't think any of us expected it to this time, but it did."
I'm equally curious as to what his take was vs. what the studio wanted.
Oh well, I look forward to his next project.
As far as the Flash movie is concerned, as long as they still cast Ryan Reynolds as the hero I'll be happy. :)
-MJB
I knew something was up when I heard about this:
http://www.mania.com/53492.html
This was a couple of days ago, before it was known he was off the project. Now, it seems like more than a few people aren't actually broke up that Whedon is off the project, but my concern is WWII? What are they trying to do? Recreate the TV show?
Hmm. A WWII story was not the direction I was imagining either. But, it could work. Maybe add a touch of noir to the film...
BTW, the author of that article seems a little lost on the legal aspects of WB buying the other story. Even if DC/WB own the character, that doesn't make every story involving her theirs. If you write a story and that story shows up in their film without your permission, they have some 'spainin' to do, no matter who owns the character.
If done properly (there's the rub), a WWII angle for the first Wonder Woman film could work, and it would be something that both the TV audiences and the older comic fans could relate to. The newer, casual reader might have trouble understanding why it's set so far in the past, though. It could then be followed by a second movie (assuming the first was successful enough) more in present day, either still following Diana, or with her "daughter", or some other angle.
What I think would work better, though, would be for the (presumably) first movie to start out with some insanely powerful sorcerous (with some ties to Greek myths & legends) doing her thing in some major city, enslaving people, building a power base, etc, etc, etc. Enter Amazon warrior-princess, who proceeds to kick [expletive deleted] & take names. Introduce her in the film the way that Perez introduced her to the general public when her title got restarted Post-Crisis. Origin bits can then be done via flashbacks, dialogue sections, and such. This early into the game, there's no real need to get into the whole "made from clay" thing, if/how the Amazons had any guns to train with, how much technology they actually have, or even much about the island at all. Leave it a mystery. I think this is one of the few characters that there doesn't need to be *that* much back story done first. Seriously, do we really *need* to have the first half of a new super-hero movie be origin story? I think this style worked well for the first Batman and, even though it's not a great example, Daredevil.
EDIT: I can't believe I spelled sorceress wrong. :doh:
Well the producer Joel Silver said he doesn't want to make a period movie... I think they bought the second script so they could use its plot, rewritten to take place in modern times, and maybe use some of Joss' ideas. there is a review of the script here:
http://www.latinoreview.com/scriptreview.php?id=48
[spoiler]Anyway, in regards to Wonder Woman – the spec that Silver picked up ROCKS!
A fun filled adventure packed girl power action movie in the 1940s!
1943 to be exact. Just where this character belongs.
Now I know ya'll are not here to hear my rants in colloquial Spanglish so let's get to it and preview the first act.
We open with QUEEN HIPPOLYTE and her THREE THOUSAND AMAZON WARRIORS all clad in battle armor and bracelets.
We pull back even further and FIFTY THOUSAND MEN, all armed for war, advance on the Amazon.
In VOICEOVER HIPPOLYTE tells us that they were created to guard against the evils of the world. Strong, wise, and compassionate, Hera gave breath to the AMAZON. In the ancient days, they lived among Mankind...but Man fears what it cannot control. Man sought to take the power of the Amazon but doing so would have destroyed Man's World.
Hippolyte erupts in a battle cry and the Amazon charge forward, meeting the army of man head on.
The action is fierce. The Amazon are superior warriors, but the numbers of Man's army are too great and the Amazon take heavy casualties.
Hippolyte further tell us that to protect the world from such devastation they would do anything. Even flee.
We next see Hippolyte leading twenty Amazon ships into the open ocean. An Armada is in hot pursuit. She further tells us that they sailed forth without a destination, guided only by their faith.
Hera heard her prayers.
Hippolyte steers her ships toward a Heavenly star and the Amazon make it past the storm, which engulfs man's ships towards – THEMYSCIRA. Hippolyte finishes her voiceover by telling us that Themyscira has been The Amazon's home for three thousand years, a place where they could live in peace, hidden from the world of man.
After the credit sequence over a montage of military imagery showing the history of mankind's warfare growing even deadlier, we open in 1943 Germany and meet
STEVE TREVOR (30)
A tall, handsome son of a senator but made it on his own American in a Nazi SS disguise, snaps photos of Nazi Jet blueprints that look incredibly advanced for the 1940s.
The words "AMERIKA BOMBER" and FLEISCHER GESELLSCHAFT" appear on the bottom of each design. Steve discovers that the Nazis are going to bomb Washington D.C. and New York.
Steve's cover is blown and gets chased by the Nazis. He makes it to the Nazi hangar and steals a Nazi jet, which looks more like a stealth bomber than a WWII era plane. It's the Amerika Bomber from the blueprints.
He navigates it out of there as the Nazis open fire on the jet. He flies over the Ocean and is leaking fuel. He makes it through the clouds and head towards a tropical island.
THEMYSCIRA.
A majestic city hugs the coastline and stretches up into the mountains. Its architecture is a mix of Greek Temples and Elaborate Towers standing watch over the gleaming streets.
A huge coliseum stands in the center of the city, its rim decorated with statues of the Grecian gods.
We descend into a long street-level tunnel that empties into the arena floor. At the end of the tunnel we see the silhouette of a young woman – DIANA.
She takes a deep breath and places a helmet overhead obscuring her face before we see it. She enters the coliseum and wears a black skirt of leather strips and a GOLDEN BREASTPLATE with the form of an eagle, wings spread. Her bodice and leather boots are both DARK RED.
Thousands of Amazons in colorful robes fill the stands. A cheer rises as the red Amazon warrior moves to the center of the ring, where another masked Amazon waits, and this one in dark green – she is PHILLIPUS.
Four challengers remain to determine the strongest and best suited to find their sister, GALINA. Hera's choice will soon be revealed.
We then get some super cool girl on girl gladiator action – DIANA VS PHILLIPUS.
It is no secret who wins. Then we get WHITE (ARTEMIS) vs BLUE (ODIA).
Artemis wins, then gets disqualified from the final round and doesn't fight Diana.
Diana, her face still covered, kneels before Hippolyte on the coliseum floor and has proven herself the greatest warrior of the Amazon. Now it is her duty to return to Man's world and find Galina.
She removes her helmet and for the first time we see her. She is barely twenty; she's beautiful, with long black hair and just like her mother – HIPPOLYTE.
Hippolyte has a fit. She forbade Diana from partaking in the contest. Hippolyte orders her to go to the palace.
Steve meanwhile crashes into a forested park in Themyscira. Diana runs into Steve and they meet. Diana saves Steve's life and frees him the wreckage. Steve then gets arrested by the Amazon. Hippolyte and her entourage appear on a hover chariot.
Hippolyte takes Diana on the hover chariot. Here we learn that Galina was sent to Man's world to ensure that Pandora's Box is secure but she apparently went missing hence the contest for an Amazon warrior to go find Galina. Phillipus, who Diana beat in the contest, is going to man's world to find Galina much to the dismay of Diana. Mother and daughter get into an argument.
Steve is taken to the Senate Hall. Hippolyte puts the GOLDEN ROPE around Steve and he tells the truth. The Amazon doesn't believe him, they think man captured Galina and stole the Amazon technology. Steve is sentenced by the senate to death.
We then find out that the Amazons protect the key – a crystal that hangs on Hippolyte's neck. If man came into possession of Pandora's box and the key - it would be catastrophic.
Diana rescues Steve from his cell. She also steals a GOLDEN BELT – the belt of Aphrodite, which allows an Amazon to walk in disguise among men. Diana also steals a GOLDEN ROPE – Hestia's Golden Lasso, which is unbreakable and any whom it binds, must speak the truth.
Diana and Steve make their getaway from Themyscira on you guessed it – THE INVISBLE JET.
Diana controls the jet with the GOLD TIARA with RUBY STAR on it. It resembles Hippolyte's crown but is shaped to lie flat across the forehead.
On page 34 – Steve and Diana race out of Themyscira – cross the first threshold – and head back to Washington.
End Act 1
Like I said, the script rocks. We of course get Diana repelling Nazi bullets with her bracelets and she beats the dren out of Nazi bad guys by the dozens. She has the strength of ten men.
For those fans concerned about her outfit – no worries.
When she finally makes her debut as Wonder Woman on page 86, her Wonder Woman outfit is a combination of her Amazon battle gear and the American flag, the costume we all know as Wonder Woman but slightly more combat ready. SHE LOOKS HOT!
The first part of the 2nd half of Act 2 (the test, allies, and enemies stage) takes place in Washington and of course Nazi bad guys (to good effect in this script) and double agents – Threshold Guardians – keep Steve and Diana busy.
The 2nd part of Act 2 takes place in Berlin as Diana and Steve intensify their search for Galina.
The 3rd Act and battle royale finale takes place back on Themyscira as the Amazons and their hover chariots fight a fleet of the Nazi Amerika Bombers as the main villain, who is revealed late in the game (which I won't spoil) goes all out for the key on Hippolyte's neck. The 3rd act is wall-to-wall action.
Overall, a very great read. The writers did their homework. As a comic book character origin movie - it is just as good as Batman Begins.
I can see why Silver supposedly took it off the spec market. If I was a betting man, I figure this is the origin story that Warners might stick with. My note to the studio is to not touch the script, leave it intact, get yourself a good director and shoot this script. It is all there on the page.
Spec Screenwriting 101
My only beef with the script, which could have shaved 10-15 pages off the thing, is the overuse of CONTINUED at the top and bottom of the script, which is OFF LIMITS in a spec, and the use of German dialogue then it's subtitled English counterpart. When you write any language, either below the character's name, or as in vogue today, next to the character's name – use a parenthesis (in German, with English subtitles) then the English dialogue. It is a waste of space and lines and supremely redundant to include foreign dialogue, which a reader can't understand anyway only to translate it right after. Damn noobies. Read David Trottier's books! One of my pet peeves about specs. I $#% you not, I know readers who pass on bad screenplay format no matter how good the story is.
Personally, i hate the fact that she steals the lasso and gear like on the JLU cartoon. She is supposed to earn them. And also, her mother is supposed to be overly protective and willing to send another Amazon into danger to save her daughter. Diana is supposed to decide to go into danger because she believes it is her destiny. I don't like that the Amazons are willing to put Steve to death either, don't they trust their own magic lasso? Where is the peaceful civilization?[/spoiler]
I kinda like what they did in the comics, in that Hypolita was the WWII era Wonder Woman. This would also easily explain the star-spangled costume. Diana's mother had already been to man's world, and knew that over the top patriotism worked well in the 1940's America.
This way, there could be both modern and period pieces in the film.
I heard that Silver the producer has fast-tracked the movie, and another unfounded rumor that they were finding locations for shooting in Canada..
I've not heard anything about them fast tracking the movie or location scouting in Canada. I do know that to fast track the movie they would at least need a treatment they liked and in all likelihood a rough script.
Something random I came across:
http://omg.yahoo.com/news/beyonce-i-want-to-play-wonder-woman/15160?nc
No.
Agreed. For one thing, and I don't mean this to come across as racist or anything, but there's no way Wonder Woman, or at least the tradition Diana version, should be black. It just doesn't fit in with the WW mythology. Olive skinned or more Mediterranean, yes. Maybe even mid-eastern, but not black.
If she really wants to play a superhero, I'm sure one more suitable could be found, depending on her acting skills, which I know nothing about.
Recently, there have been rumors and a fake web site about Megan Fox playing WW, but this has been revealed as a hoax. Personally, I think Cote de Pablo from NCIS would work, as she can do a physically strong yet still feminine character that can actually be threatening at times. Her Mediterranean look would work fine, and be a break from the normal completely white look which still fitting the Greek mythological origins of the character and still looking like the character.
Haha, my thoughts exactly. The problem with a black Wonder Woman has nothing to do with societal restrictions, but the fact that she is GREEK. Ha...anyway, Cote de Pablo looks WW'ish enough in the face but she lacks...erhm...the build for the Amazon.
For a real life woman, she is quite physically strong. I'm not sure what you mean by that in this case.
He's talking about her mammaries.
Oh, well I'm not going to insist on that level of accuracy.
Haha.....well, not precisely, no, but the lady in question does seem to be a bit too slim for the role, and not only in chest-like-region-area....
Fair enough, although I don't think she's that bad off. There are plenty of other decent candidates, I am sure. I'd just rather it not be a pop star or big hollywood person. A no name or a small screen person like the one I suggested would be preferred.
I would also caution you that there may not be another Lynda Carter out there, so they may have to just make do.
I agree wholeheartedly, Cat. I imagine we're on the same page.
First off, I'd like to point out Wonder Woman is not Greek but rather an Amazon. Second there were interactions between the ancient Greeks and northern African kingdoms. Herodotus of Halicarnassus describes the people of Nubia (modern Sudan) in great details as well as the Greeks interactions with them. So there being a African (Black is not a race nor a skin color, it's a superficial label like "Latin") Amazon who happens to be a Wonder Woman wouldn't that far off.
From a purely nerd perspective, there are several black Amazons on Paradise Island and most notably Diana pre-crisis sister, Nu'bia. Nub'bia was Wonder Woman of the Floating Island and was in fact Wonder Woman's twin sister who was created from darker clay when Hippolyta created Diana.
http://www.comicvine.com/nubia/29-34121/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nu%27Bia
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FYeDNFfgGsQ
Also Beyonce = $$$ which is all Time Warner cares about. Kthanxbai!
A WW, yes, I worded my first post very carefully to allow for that possibility. But I'd rather the Diana version not be. My preference would be a Mediterranean look with a slight accent to match, but that's just me.
Interesting points AA, although "African" is as erroneous a racial category as black, seeing as Africa contained a rather large variety of ethnicities before Europeans ever began to settle there. The world contains infinite varieties and exceptions, while language is, alas, finite. Still, historically speaking, Amazons were of Scythian/Sarmatian descent, and had nothing to do with Africa, one way or the other. Now, you've shown precedent for black Amazons in comics, and that is definitely worth noting, but I suppose my final objection (other than the idea of a celebrity just 'wanting' to play a superhero rubbing me the wrong way) is that I hate it when the character's classic appearance is change for no good reason.
Quote from: BentonGrey on November 10, 2008, 09:14:58 AM
Still, historically speaking, Amazons were of Scythian/Sarmatian descent, and had nothing to do with Africa, one way or the other.
Comically, Amazons are a group of slain women who were reincarnated from all ethnic backgrounds and we are defending the comic Amazons, right?
Quote from: BentonGrey on November 10, 2008, 09:14:58 AM
although "African" is as erroneous a racial category as black, seeing as Africa contained a rather large variety of ethnicities before Europeans ever began to settle there.
While you are correct about there being people of many ethnic backgrounds living in modern Africa, my usage of "African" is no different than say someone using the word "Asian" to label a large group of people who physically look similar yet are not of the same cultural or ethnic background. The word "black" could be used in the place of "African" but it takes away any cultural link a group of people have to their ancestral homeland yet their ethnic identity has been robbed of them (Beyonce can be correctly called African because she has no direct link to her ethnic African identity but is aware of an Ancestry link to an African area. Example, if an Japanese child is taken from Japan and placed in the home of Americans who have no clue of her ethnic background she would mostly call herself "Asian" because of her facial features.
I personally frown on the usage of the word Black because Aboriginals are sometimes called "Blacks" but they are not Africans as well as dark skinned Indians and the Negrito of Asia. Essentially, when you say Wonder Woman can't be black, what you are really saying is Wonder Woman can not be non-"White". Also if we are to believe where the origin myth of the Amazons come from Wonder Woman and the Amazons should be rather dark skinned and someone like Pooja should be Diana: http://www.sunyaprajna.com/Beauty/Pooja.jpg or even Morena Baccarin http://www.btinternet.com/~crippsy_99/pictures/autographs/inara.jpg ?
Quote from: BentonGrey on November 10, 2008, 09:14:58 AM
I suppose my final objection (other than the idea of a celebrity just 'wanting' to play a superhero rubbing me the wrong way) is that I hate it when the character's classic appearance is change for no good reason.
I'm just saying she doesn't have to be Diana to be Wonder Woman. Same way, Jon Stewart can be a Green Lantern and be "black" and Eartha Kitt (Good) and Hallie Berry (Very Bad) could be Catwoman. I personally think that has been my biggest problem with Comic to TV/Film movies, it is not the changes to the character but rather the bitching from the comic purest who will never be satisfied and act as if different interpretation of a character will destroy their personal view.
Quote from: AfghanAnt on November 10, 2008, 10:15:16 AM
Quote from: BentonGrey on November 10, 2008, 09:14:58 AM
Still, historically speaking, Amazons were of Scythian/Sarmatian descent, and had nothing to do with Africa, one way or the other.
Comically, Amazons are a group of slain women who were reincarnated from all ethnic backgrounds and we are defending the comic Amazons, right?
Ahh, you obviously know more about the comic WW than I do. I'm not a huge fan of hers. My knowledge is much more historical. As far as I knew they were the mythical Amazons saved from the ravages of time by Hera.
Quote from: AfghanAnt on November 10, 2008, 10:15:16 AM
Quote from: BentonGrey on November 10, 2008, 09:14:58 AM
although "African" is as erroneous a racial category as black, seeing as Africa contained a rather large variety of ethnicities before Europeans ever began to settle there.
While you are correct about there being people of many ethnic backgrounds living in modern Africa, my usage of "African" is no different than say someone using the word "Asian" to label a large group of people who physically look similar yet are not of the same cultural or ethnic background. The word "black" could be used in the place of "African" but it takes away any cultural link a group of people have to their ancestral homeland yet their ethnic identity has been robbed of them (Beyonce can be correctly called African because she has no direct link to her ethnic African identity but is aware of an Ancestry link to an African area. Example, if an Japanese child is taken from Japan and placed in the home of Americans who have no clue of her ethnic background she would mostly call herself "Asian" because of her facial features.
I personally frown on the usage of the word Black because Aboriginals are sometimes called "Blacks" but they are not Africans as well as dark skinned Indians and the Negrito of Asia. Essentially, when you say Wonder Woman can't be black, what you are really saying is Wonder Woman can not be non-"White". Also if we are to believe where the origin myth of the Amazons come from Wonder Woman and the Amazons should be rather dark skinned and someone like Pooja should be Diana: http://www.sunyaprajna.com/Beauty/Pooja.jpg or even Morena Baccarin http://www.btinternet.com/~crippsy_99/pictures/autographs/inara.jpg ?
Well, see, there's the rub. Many people who would identify themselves as, say, "African American" may, in fact, be descended from some people group from Africa, but many others very well may not be. The "African" part of their identity is often purely a construct. This is not necessarily a bad thing, and it is understandable considering the woeful history of "black" people in the Americas, but it does create some interesting paradoxes. For example, many actual Africans resent the use of the identifier "African" by Americans and Europeans, precisely because of the constructed form of said identification. The natives view these others as no more African than they, themselves, are American. So, once again, we are confronted by the vagaries of language. Who has the right to the term "African?" Those who may be descended from Africans? Those who live in Africa? Does ANYONE have the right to a term, anyway? I actually prefer the terms "black" or "white" because they, to me anyway, represent how utterly meaningless the designations are, taking on equal significance to "green eyed" or "attached earlobes" in the service of pure convenience in identification. My ancestors MAY be from Wales, in part, some of them may be from England, some from France, some of them may even be from Germany. I know a few of them were Native Americans, but I am no more English, French, German, or Welsh than Clark Kent.
As far as the physical characteristics of mythical Amazons, ha, as far as such things may be guessed at, she would be dark haired, light skinned (but not, say, norse skinned), and fairly close to Greek. You're going a bit too far East with your people groups with Pooja, although Inara there would be pretty close, I imagine. It is all, of course, moot conjecture, as the Amazons were only supposed to have intermarried with the Scythians, then the Sarmatians, so for all we know the mythical Amazons may have been bright blue. ^_^
Quote from: AfghanAnt on November 10, 2008, 10:15:16 AM
Quote from: BentonGrey on November 10, 2008, 09:14:58 AM
I suppose my final objection (other than the idea of a celebrity just 'wanting' to play a superhero rubbing me the wrong way) is that I hate it when the character's classic appearance is change for no good reason.
I'm just saying she doesn't have to be Diana to be Wonder Woman. Same way, Jon Stewart can be a Green Lantern and be "black" and Eartha Kitt (Good) and Hallie Berry (Very Bad) could be Catwoman. I personally think that has been my biggest problem with Comic to TV/Film movies, it is not the changes to the character but rather the bitching from the comic purest who will never be satisfied and act as if different interpretation of a character will destroy their personal view.
Interesting that you'd bring up Jon Stewart. When Justice League first aired I was really annoyed with the inclusion of him as GL and Hawkgirl, not because they were "black" or a woman respectively, but because I thought that the makers of the show had just changed Hal Jordan's appearance and Katar Hol's sex for no other reason than to add "diversity" to the show. When I realized that Jon Stewart was a classic character with a really cool history, and the same for Shayera, my opinion changed greatly. That being said, you'll have to forgive my adherence to Diana as WW, as I've never really known that there were others. It has only been recently through FF that I've even heard of her being replaced, and I had no clue that Nub'ia had been a WW too. I wouldn't cite Hallie Berry to defend your position, though. ;) Who could complain about Ertha Kitt though? :D Anyway, I'm a purest, and I make no apologies about that, but I do try to be reasonable in my desire for adherence to sources.
Quote from: BentonGrey on November 10, 2008, 11:41:11 AM
Interesting that you'd bring up Jon Stewart. When Justice League first aired I was really annoyed with the inclusion of him as GL and Hawkgirl, not because they were "black" or a woman respectively, but because I thought that the makers of the show had just changed Hal Jordan's appearance and Katar Hol's sex for no other reason than to add "diversity" to the show.
Well, they included two minor characters for no other reason than to add diversity to the show.
Do you mean Jon Stewart and Hawkgirl? I wouldn't really call Hawkgirl a minor character, and Stewart was a pretty interesting GL.
Agreed, but to the general public they're pretty unknown. And with the caveat that I am not up on my Hawk-history, my understanding is that the Hawkgirl in the show bears very little similarity in character to the various established Hawkfemales.
The argument still stands - these two specific characters were included so that the JLA wouldn't be a bunch of white guys plus Wonder Woman.
None of which has anything to do with the topic of this thread. I think Beyonce would be great eye candy, and I personally don't give a rip about WW's race as long as the actress can pull off the grit and physicality of the role. But "color blind casting" or no, I just don't think Beyonce could pull off the character.
Actually the Hawkgirl of the series was very similar to the Hawkworld incarnation of the character, as I understand it. Anyway, while I don't care for people monkeying with stuff to increase diversity, their portrayal of the characters was so good I had no cause to complain.
no to beyonce as WW. She doesnt even come close to giving me the idea she can be tough at all.
Casting Wonder Woman, they should probably go with an unknown. Hair and eye color don't matter, since they can always dye her hair or slap on a wig and use contact lenses or recolor her eyes in editing.
However, the problem is that to be accurate they should cast someone fairly tall - at least 5'10" - who is either in their mid-20's or looks like they are. I've cringed at several of the suggestions I've heard, with Monica Belucci being the only one that would work - if she was 20 years younger.
Quote from: BentonGrey on November 10, 2008, 09:14:58 AM
When Justice League first aired I was really annoyed with the inclusion of him as GL and Hawkgirl, not because they were "black" or a woman respectively, but because I thought that the makers of the show had just changed Hal Jordan's appearance and Katar Hol's sex for no other reason than to add "diversity" to the show.
While I am sure they were chosen for that reason, you make diversity sound like a bad thing.
Also I'd like to point out I am in no way saying Beyonce would be a good Wonder Woman because honestly she is a "meh" actress at best. She should stick to singing.
QuoteWhile I am sure they were chosen for that reason, you make diversity sound like a bad thing.
They were, but the results turned out well, and millions were introduced to the John Steward GL for the first time.
Well, diversity isn't a bad thing, and I can certainly understand the value in giving viewers characters that they can identify with, but it bugs me when existing ideas that I'm fond of are changed in an attempt to do so. The problem is that the changes are mostly wrought by people who don't know anything about them, and therefore don't care about them at all. The characters existed for fifty some years, so obviously there was something compelling about them. Anyway, as I said, JLA ended up doing this in the best way possible and I was infinitely pleased with the result. If you want to add diversity to a show, that is how you do it.
Sorry if this was posted before, but this is so cool
http://www.wonder-who.com/index.html
I made a reference to the original version in an earlier post, but the hoax had just been revealed and the site was down at the time, so I left out a link.
At any rate, the author is talent, but he's wrong about Megan looking the part. Stick skinny, willow, delicate waifs should never, ever be allowed anywhere close to that costume. You can't even where it unless you've had at least two meals the day before. It's a rule.
Quote from: catwhowalksbyhimself on November 19, 2008, 07:28:17 AM
I made a reference to the original version in an earlier post, but the hoax had just been revealed and the site was down at the time, so I left out a link.
At any rate, the author is talent, but he's wrong about Megan looking the part. Stick skinny, willow, delicate waifs should never, ever be allowed anywhere close to that costume. You can't even where it unless you've had at least two meals the day before. It's a rule.
That's cold, :)
I think she be WW if she really work at it. Toby looked like Peter Parker, but look how much he had to bulk up so he could Spider-man. Christopher Reeves had to work out too before he was Superman.
Nah, Cat's right, she could work at all she wants, she just doesn't have the build for it. If Christopher Reeve had been built like Jude Law or Johnny Deppe, he couldn't have played Superman, no matter how much he worked out.
Plus I don't think I could take Megan seriously if she tries to act tough and threatening. Maybe I'm wrong about that, but whoever plays WW has to be attractive, look physically strong, but still feminine (so no body builder types) and be able to be scary and threatening when it's called for.
Olga Kurylenko... movies: The Hitman and Qauntum of Solace.
(http://newpowerinc.com/myspace/olga.jpg)
(http://newpowerinc.com/myspace/olga-jb.jpg)
Emmanuelle Chriqui...recent movies: Don't Mess With the Zohan and Cadillac Records (release Dec5)
(http://newpowerinc.com/myspace/chriqui.jpg)
I think either one could play the role. I think they would fit the bill of up and coming actresses with some credible acting experience with familiar but still not overly famous faces. It all depends on what direction the eventual producers and directors of the film would want to go with Diana... but I wouldn't mind either of these actresses in the role.
Definitely not Olga, she's another stick. Let Diana be a real woman. :P
It's Hollywood, folks. Unless it's Catherine Zeta Jones there are no drop-dead gorgeous women with meat on their bones. Face it, we live in a society where attractive = skinny.
Quote from: Uncle Yuan on November 20, 2008, 04:33:21 AM
It's Hollywood, folks. Unless it's Catherine Zeta Jones there are no drop-dead gorgeous women with meat on their bones. Face it, we live in a society where attractive = skinny.
That is the truth of Hollywood... the fashion world... the music industry... etc.
But if an actress like Olga was up for the role... I'm sure she'd do as other women (and men) who has had to do in other films past... and put on some extra meat and muscle for the role.
Quote from: House Quake on November 20, 2008, 05:19:16 AM
Quote from: Uncle Yuan on November 20, 2008, 04:33:21 AM
It's Hollywood, folks. Unless it's Catherine Zeta Jones there are no drop-dead gorgeous women with meat on their bones. Face it, we live in a society where attractive = skinny.
That is the truth of Hollywood... the fashion world... the music industry... etc.
But if an actress like Olga was up for the role... I'm sure she'd do as other women (and men) who has had to do in other films past... and put on some extra meat and muscle for the role.
I have to echo what HQ (and Yuan) has said here but add some things . . .
First of all, it's called ACTING! Before you go saying how this actress or that actress might do, get them a screentest with a good script. Because as it is, you are not going to find the perfect actress to play Wonder Woman. This is especially the case with the way Wonder Woman has been portrayed and has often been drawn for the past 25+ years.
Second, Hollywood and the movie business do function along the lines of a majority of the "marquee faces" do the thin/waifish/model look or whatever you want to call it. See #3
Third, Any good actor or actress will gladly do the prep-work for role. A really good one will do that and then some. In the case of Wonder Woman, an actress is going to have to spend a good deal of time in the gym. I mean more than usual and do more than just cardio and light weights. Megan Fox put on 10lbs of muscle to play Mikayla in Transformers. Hilary Swank put on around 20lbs or so of muscle to play her role in Million Dollar Baby. An actress who plays Wonder Woman is going to have to do pretty much either somewhere in between there or closer to what Hilary did. Granted, Wonder Woman doesn't need to look "uber-buff" but it wouldn't hurt for her to have some "fitness model" type definition to her (ala Trish Stratus or Victoria in the WWE).
Fourth, depending on the way they wanted Diana portrayed, I think Megan Fox or Olga Kurylenko would not be bad. Though I do not think either of them have shown a lot of range in their roles. I have not seen the roles you mentioned for Emmanuelle Chriqui nor any of her other work.
Fifth, Olga is not as much of a "stick figure" as some actresses out there during her Bond role. Granted, she is no where near as built athletically as Wonder Woman would need to be. The same goes (to a slightly lesser extent) for Megan in Transformers. Now away from those roles, however, both women do not maintain the same look they had in those two movies.