James Gunn's DCU TV / Movie Discussion

Beside the limp storyline and some questionable CGI choices, I really enjoyed the movie. To me It’s reminiscent of the animated Wonder Woman films.
Surely Batman Returns is one of the few (the only?) superhero sequels with multiple villains that handles it well.

One of the many criticisms that movie receives (both at the time and to this day) is that there were too many characters. If you think about it, you have Catwoman, Penguin and Max Shrek who are all villains. The movie is so busy trying to tell their stories that there's little/no story about Batman himself. He's like a side-lined character in his own movie.

As I say, I love that movie regardless but I can understand the criticism and I do think these movies often work best when it's one main villain (or one and a side-line villain they are building up for the next movie etc.)
I have mixed feelings on it on the first watch. It felt like the early Superman films in the beginning but didn’t fully commit to that. Very good action scenes and I enjoyed Kristen Wiig, I just wish she was the main villain. The pacing was off and it could of used some trimming here and there.
Surely Batman Returns is one of the few (the only?) superhero sequels that handles multiple villains well.
That was about the only one from the Burton/Schumacher era that got the balance right between Batman and the villains, but it's hardly surprising when you consider that one of the "villain" actors was paid more than the Batman one for each of the other three, while two of them demanded - and got - top billing.
Batman Begins and The Dark Knight are films that do multiple villains well.

Where Scarecrow and Two-Face (as their finalised, “we’re villains!” personas) are over very quickly. Scarecrow appears throughout the series of course, but they wisely chose to have one proper villain per entry - until Rises, which certainly...has Catwoman! We’ll say that!
I actually really liked WW84. I can only echo what others have said - Wiig is the best thing about the movie, the final act is strong and much better than the first movie's. Overall I found the pacing good and I probably would say I liked this one more than the first.
the monkey’s paw taking Steve from the moment before his plane exploded in the first film and bringing him to 1984 would have made a more powerful impact of Diana having to renounce her wish rather than having his soul possess a random person’s body. And I’m confused as to how they didn’t come up with something like that


Staff member
A 2 and a half hour runtime was terribly unnecessary.

I think the theme between the villains losing their humanity and Diana having to choose to be a god instead of giving up the more human needs of spending all day in bed with her lover was there but maybe not as explicit as it should’ve been, probably due to the over-bloating of the villains and that third act. It’s a simple but effective theme that I think was extended too far and maybe could’ve worked better just juxtaposed against Barbara’s quest for respect rather than all the exposition given to set up Max.

I do like that they returned to the Steve Trevor plot. One of the narrative takeaways I had from the first one was the way we were expected to believe that she was still carrying a flame for Steve decades later, looking regularly at his photograph. It was just sort of sad and didn’t provide the sense of closure I think they were going for. This was much more effective in providing that, and also gives some recency to her experience.

Also, please tell me this isn’t the end of Cheetah. All that buildup to her full animalistic mode and we get a dark 5 minute fight sequence in water? Why was the CGI budget so seemingly conservative?

Overall, it was fine. A nice addition to the otherwise stale DC offerings and I’d probably rank it high against those but it stumbled towards the finish line.
  • Like
Reactions: aux
WW84 was so bad but I still enjoyed it. The way Cheetah only gets about five minutes of screen time?! Like....what. The whole wish/monkey's paw thing was so absurd and I don't think this film is going to transcend. Maybe the third movie will be great?
  • Like
Reactions: aux
WW84 was fun, but all over the map. Definitely not as smooth as the first one. I felt like this Diana felt more like an amateur than the original which is odd since she’s been in America for decades now. I hated Steve in this film as well. They should’ve done like the tv series and made him a son or grandson and let them be partners, not lovers. I don’t need a love story, certainly not with him in someone else’s body which was icky. Plus, she had better chemistry with the guy whose body Steve was using. I HATED Steve teaching her to fly. The invisible plane should’ve just been her plane.

The highlights were the villains, but I feel they weren’t fleshed out as well as they could’ve been. Especially Cheetah. Then the Lynda Carter cameo was excellent. If they’re smart they’ll make that more than an Easter egg and use her in the next film. Lynda was so vibrant and even had she been in this film more she would’ve brought so much to the table.
I've watched it again.

I just want to say that there WERE things I genuinely enjoyed very much, but I still am just...confused about the choices they made.

A) Cheetah. As others have said, Cheetah was BARELY in this movie. Literally only ONE scene. It feels like comic book movie makers think that the mere EXISTENCE of a character is enough for the viewer. That is not the case, ESPECIALLY when the character will undoubtedly be revealed in one of the trailers. A slow build up to a startling new appearance does not work when we all saw that appearance months ago. (Plus, they didn't even have Cheetah claw Diana! What point is there in using "Cheetah" when you don't even really do the one thing she's known for – blurry slashes resulting in claw marks drawing blood?!? It's like never doing a full Phoenix effect or ramming Psylocke's knife through someone's head...why bother having the character?!? She barely did anything "predatory," she just jumped around a few times...). Wiig was good, but could have been far better given better material. Her heel turn into villainy was not believable, and could have been so much better if perhaps her career had suddenly been recognized etc. That would give her something more meaningful to want to keep, rather than just the "sudden attention from men" that they showed us.

B) Max Lord was...not Max Lord. There was literally no connection to the actual Max Lord short of that one nose bleed he got. He could have been named anything else and it wouldn't have made a difference. They teased the fact that Diana would be forced to kill him like in the comics (which I am NOT a fan of, but...at least it would have been a reason to have the character be Max Lord?), and then they KIND of tried to switch that story onto Cheetah (though she didn't end up killing her, which...made no sense either? Cuz the electricity probably should have, but even if it didn't, Diana certainly seemed to THINK it would, which...WTF Wonder Woman?!? You gonna just kill your friend?!?). I thought the backstory and ultimate character moment were nice (if a little rushed), but...they just should have called him something else?

C) The Indian guy who was...Mayan somehow? A Mayan named Frank Patel? A name they clearly drew attention to...?

D) The real villain was the Duke of Deception, but he was not in the movie? I think the main problem of WW that plagues both her comics (which I read) and now her films is: Wonder Woman being more of a symbol than a person means her villains are not great. She fights more against ideas than against an actual "villain" most of the time. They have tried, unsuccessfully, to give her new/better villains and it never works. Cheetah and Circe are the only ones that seem to stick (Max Lord wasn't created as a WW villain and in my opinion doesn't really work as one no matter how hard they try).

E) We want a slugfest but Diana can't hurt actual people, so fight sequences are difficult. It was a nice moment when she told Steve not to hurt the secret service men (who, I guess were mind controlled? Not really, they were..."wish" controlled? Cuz Max took the "commander in chief" title from the President? But it still makes little sense...). I campaign for Circe as the villain in WW3, and just make Diana fight giant mythological creatures through the streets of DC. Let her beat up a giant Hydra in the reflecting pool of the Lincoln Memorial, etc.

F) The "strongest armor in history that could withstand 1000 men" or whatever ended up lasting less than five minutes. I appreciated the nod to the comics, but they should just not have bothered with an explanation if they were gonna ignore it in the end. When Diana first wears the armor in the comics, there is no explanation. She just puts it on for a battle, and no one makes a big deal out of it and it looks cool. They could have done the same thing here and it would have been better than "here's a long explanation of what it is" and then "never mind it's pointless."

I hate that I'm pissing all over it. I love Wonder Woman and wanted it to be so good. There were some wonderful things – I love that she overcame greed with love and truth, I love that they gave little girls action scenes to literally identify themselves in, but...most of it was just disappointing.
So, so bad. From start to finish, it lags and lacks suspense, any real drama, heart, or even a decent set piece. The "plot device," which 'moves' the film, is exceptionally dumb, and the way exposition is added to this device throughout is capital 'B' Bad Screenwriting. Everyone was on a different plane of acting, leaving Gadot lost and wooden in a sea of uneven performances around her. It pulls off the difficult trick of feeling like a Blank Check Movie signed off by the studio and Made By Committee, where a dozen opinions coalesced into this one, unimaginative, generic superhero movie.