Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
William, I saw something in Wonder Woman most didn't. My ex loved it, I didn't. She didn't think it was original but she loved it for the whole female superhero thing. I saw it as a movie that copied from another movie which most do not in any of the movie fan pages I frequent.
But, mkpunk... how do you know that if Captain America: The First Avenger had never been made, that DC would have taken the exact same approach to Wonder Woman? Especially, considering that in the comic books, Wonder Woman's origin story involved a world war. However, it sounds like you wanted DC/Warner Bros. to change WW's world war origin story, and to do away with it entirely.
Also, I came across something that shows that you are looking at this issue all wrong, mkpunk:
Quote:
When the Amazonian princess was created by William Moulton Marston back in the early 1940s, the setting was World War II. Diana of Themyscira had won the right to return Steve Trevor (who was a U.S. intelligence officer whose plane crash-landed on Paradise Island) to Man’s World, where she fought not only crime but also the evilness of the evil Nazis.
As most of you already know, the movie directed by Patty Jenkins has shaken things up a bit by changing the setting to 1918 Europe, toward the end of the First World War. The reason invoked? The similarities with today’s world. “We are in a very WWI world today with nationalism and how it would take very little to start a global conflict,” Heinberg told Entertainment Weekly, adding: “It’s the first time we had an automated war. The machine gun was a new invention. Gas was used for the first time. New horrors were unleashed every day.”
Jenkins added that, at first, she had some reservations about setting the movie during the Great War, since the superheroine's comic book origins were rooted in World War II. But I have to say, I really dig the reasons for the change. There's also the fact that it sets the Warner Bros. movie apart from Marvel's Captain America: The First Avenger, which took place during the Second World War:
“At first, I questioned it because it wasn’t her actual origin story, but very quickly I saw the genius behind it. World War I is the first time that civilization as we know it was finding its roots, but it’s not something that we really know the history of. Even the way that it was unclear who was in the right of WWI is a really interesting parallel to this time. Then you take a god with a moral compass and a moral belief system, and you drop them into this world, there are questions about women’s rights, about a mechanized war where you don’t see who you are killing. It’s such a cool time.”
After Captain America: The First Avenger came out the process of adapting Wonder Woman to the big screen suddenly got a lot harder. How could DC make their own version of this movie without feeling like they were ripping off the Marvel movie? It would require changing the origin story and director Patty Jenkins was reluctant to do that though until she heard the pitch by screenwriter Allan Heinberg. The similarities between the two eras was becoming more and more evident it became clear that this was the change that needed to be made.
Therefore, mkpunk, they actually made changes to the actual Wonder Woman comic-book origin story... in order to differentiate it from CA:TFA. However, you mistakenly think that Warner Bros. is copying off of CA:TFA.
Last edited by William Taylor; 07-23-2017 at 05:32 AM..
But, mkpunk... how do you know that if Captain America: The First Avenger had never been made, that DC would have taken the exact same approach to Wonder Woman? Especially, considering that in the comic books, Wonder Woman's origin story involved a world war. However, it sounds like you wanted DC/Warner Bros. to change WW's world war origin story, and to do away with it entirely.
Also, I came across something that shows that you are looking at this issue all wrong, mkpunk:
Therefore, mkpunk, they actually made changes to the actual Wonder Woman comic-book origin story... in order to differentiate it from CA:TFA. However, you mistakenly think that Warner Bros. is copying off of CA:TFA.
IT'S NOT THE SETTING, I've always said that it was one to distract. Had they done World War 2, I think more people would see it my way. For me, it's the core plot and beats of the movie that was the rip off. Wonder Woman and Captain America both were World War 2 American creations to fight Nazi Germany. I never denied that. However there are too many glaring lazy beats from the Wonder Woman movie that came from The First Avenger. What really annoys me is people think this is some amazing movie, it is nearly a blatant ripoff. The main change is the Amazonian heritage. Seriously Wonder Woman fights a rogue German military officer with a scientist trying to create a super weapon. Where have we heard this before in a comic book movie?
IT'S NOT THE SETTING, I've always said that it was one to distract. Had they done World War 2, I think more people would see it my way. For me, it's the core plot and beats of the movie that was the rip off. Wonder Woman and Captain America both were World War 2 American creations to fight Nazi Germany. I never denied that. However there are too many glaring lazy beats from the Wonder Woman movie that came from The First Avenger.
Such as?.....
Also, I guess you don't believe what the people said in the articles that I quoted about them being concerned about similarities to CA:TFA and wanting to avoid that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mkpunk
What really annoys me is people think this is some amazing movie. . .
But why does that annoy you? Also, don't you believe that people are entitled to their own opinions and that perhaps it's people's opinion that this is an amazing movie?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mkpunk
it is nearly a blatant ripoff.
Well, I'm still looking forward to you explaining to me how.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mkpunk
The main change is the Amazonian heritage. Seriously Wonder Woman fights a rogue German military officer with a scientist trying to create a super weapon. Where have we heard this before in a comic book movie?
IT'S NOT THE SETTING, I've always said that it was one to distract. Had they done World War 2, I think more people would see it my way. For me, it's the core plot and beats of the movie that was the rip off. Wonder Woman and Captain America both were World War 2 American creations to fight Nazi Germany. I never denied that. However there are too many glaring lazy beats from the Wonder Woman movie that came from The First Avenger. What really annoys me is people think this is some amazing movie, it is nearly a blatant ripoff. The main change is the Amazonian heritage. Seriously Wonder Woman fights a rogue German military officer with a scientist trying to create a super weapon. Where have we heard this before in a comic book movie?
I think the question is: "Where have we heard this before in a comic book?"
Hmmm. So let me see... So I guess, Mark, if some violent criminals broke into your house one evening with the intent on doing you and your family harm... instead of doing everything in your power to stop, hurt, or kill these violent criminals before they do the same to you or your family, I'm guessing that you would sit back and let them do what they wanted to... because you knew that it would be a violent offense again these criminals if you would try to do them any harm. ....
See. You just made an argument that there is a just and necessary use of force to preserve peace and justice. And it's one I agree with.
But my problem with WONDER WOMAN was that the story never made that argument. They could have. In Act 1, the morality of the Amazons and their mission would have been a great place to do it. In Act 2, when Diana was first taking in the horrors of war would have been a great place to do it. In Act 3, when Diana decides that humanity is worth saving would have been a great place to do it. But the movie never did it.
What is Peace? When is violence justified? When the script demand it apparently. When Diana says, "I believe in Love," what does she mean by that? We don't know. When Gandhi or Martin Luther King or Dorothy Day or St. Francis says they believe in love, you can say: Okay. Seeing how you behave, I get what you mean. When Diana says it after killing dozens of people and bringing mayhem down on her enemies, then says, "I believe in Love," by reaction is: WTF?
IT'S NOT THE SETTING, I've always said that it was one to distract. Had they done World War 2, I think more people would see it my way. For me, it's the core plot and beats of the movie that was the rip off. Wonder Woman and Captain America both were World War 2 American creations to fight Nazi Germany. I never denied that. However there are too many glaring lazy beats from the Wonder Woman movie that came from The First Avenger. What really annoys me is people think this is some amazing movie, it is nearly a blatant ripoff. The main change is the Amazonian heritage. Seriously Wonder Woman fights a rogue German military officer with a scientist trying to create a super weapon. Where have we heard this before in a comic book movie?
I loved both movies. Is Canada Dry just another flavor of ginger ale like Schweppe's? Yeah. I don't care. I like both. Given that comic books have been ripping each other off for decades makes it hard for me to care who ripped off who first, if at all. Doesn't matter to me. Just give me a good movie.
The following is from post #227, just edited into a list
Quote:
It was basically putting Wonder Woman and her type of Greek mythos into Captain America:
The First Avenger and it was EXACTLY what I feared when I saw set photos and heard the synopsis.
Germans get a super-weapon with "God like power" (the Tessarct for First Avenger, super mustard gas for Wonder Woman)
Super human joins war effort (an experiment in Captain America and an Amazon in Diana Prince)
Said super human has a powerful shield (Capt with his vibranium shield and Wonder Woman with her mythical shield)
Germans led by a deranged leader (Red Skull in First Avenger and Ludenoff in Wonder Woman)
the deranged leader had a top scientist first-mate (Arnom Zola in First Avenger and Dr. Poison in Wonder Woman)
A romance between the hero and the ranking British military officer working with them (Peggy Carter in First Avenger and Steve Trevor in Wonder Woman)
A sacrifice by a hero on the plane with the super-weapon who by the way, has a first name of Steve
The super hero returns to action in the "modern day" at the end off the film.
I came up with more after this post including but not limited to:
The German scientist gives super human strength to their leader
The German leader breaks away from the German military (HYDRA in First Avenger, Ludenoff's crew in Wonder Woman)
Said super human, goes on a secret mission without the knowledge of the military officers they are reporting to.
Said super human gets a group of multi-cultural camandos as their team members in a bar.
A few too many coincidences if you ask me...
Quote:
Also, I guess you don't believe what the people said in the articles that I quoted about them being concerned about similarities to CA:TFA and wanting to avoid that.
Then they should have done a better job differentiating Wonder Woman from Captain America: The First Avenger. As I mentioned, too many beats from The First Avenger was in Wonder Woman. The only originality was the Greek Myth and the moved up time period. Captain Marvel (now known as Shazam!) did just as much and actually got sued by National Comics (now D.C.) over copying Superman. If I were to change as many details as D.C. did, I would be facing plagiarism claims in college (as I alluded to in post #292) That's like saying Ten Things I Hate About You wasn't a copy of Taming the Shrew because it was in 1990's America or Oliver & Company was in 1980's NYC with animals rather than Oliver Twist's 1800's London...
Quote:
But why does that annoy you? Also, don't you believe that people are entitled to their own opinions and that perhaps it's people's opinion that this is an amazing movie?
Because it was a rip-off. Look at all the glaring similarities I reposted and added to.
Quote:
Well, I'm still looking forward to you explaining to me how.
I can't explain it any further if you chose not to listen.
That did happen and in a way the Red Skull faced what the Nazis in Raiders did.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ralph_Kirk
I think the question is: "Where have we heard this before in a comic book?"
And as I mentioned in post #364 by 1942, almost all heroes whether pre-WW2 or post-WW2 were in WW2.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AFtrEFkt
Dr. Poison is an old foe of Diana's. And by old, I mean 1942.
Doesn't mean that they had to turn Dr. Poison into Arnom Zola...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark S.
I loved both movies. Is Canada Dry just another flavor of ginger ale like Schweppe's? Yeah. I don't care. I like both. Given that comic books have been ripping each other off for decades makes it hard for me to care who ripped off who first, if at all. Doesn't matter to me. Just give me a good movie.
Then you are a better man than I. I think this was Segram's Ginger Ale and I don't like Segram's. I tried it in a Coke Freestyle and YUCK! At least Wonder Woman did have redeemable qualities, namely Gal.
The following is from post #227, just edited into a list
Quote:
It was basically putting Wonder Woman and her type of Greek mythos into Captain America: The First Avenger and it was EXACTLY what I feared when I saw set photos and heard the synopsis.
Germans get a super-weapon with "God like power" (the Tessarct for First Avenger, super mustard gas for Wonder Woman)
Okay, but I'm curious. So could you give me an example of what sort of threat the Germans could have posed so that it was worthy of Wonder Woman's powers?
Super human joins war effort (an experiment in Captain America and an Amazon in Diana Prince)
But isn't that the way the comic book was? For both of them? Also, how do you think that should have been made differently for the Wonder Woman movie?
Said super human has a powerful shield (Capt with his vibranium shield and Wonder Woman with her mythical shield)
But you act as if Wonder Woman never used a shield before in the comic books. But click on the link below:
Germans led by a deranged leader (Red Skull in First Avenger and Ludenoff in Wonder Woman)
But, mk... aren't all comic book villains deranged? And if not, are you saying that the writers could have made Ludenoff not be deranged?
the deranged leader had a top scientist first-mate (Arnom Zola in First Avenger and Dr. Poison in Wonder Woman)
Yeah, but this movie took place during a war, with lots of people and lots of soliders and lots of commanders and lots of subordinates. Therefore, are you saying that they should have had a villain who was working all by themself in the war effort against their foes?
A romance between the hero and the ranking British military officer working with them (Peggy Carter in First Avenger and Steve Trevor in Wonder Woman)
But didn't Diana and Steve have a romance in the comic books? So therefore, are you saying that DC/Warner Bros should have changed that so that that aspect of the movie wouldn't be like the Captain America movie?
A sacrifice by a hero on the plane with the super-weapon who by the way, has a first name of Steve
Hmmm. So you believe that DC/Warner Bros. did this on purpose to copy the Captain America movie?
The super hero returns to action in the "modern day" at the end off the film.
So since both Captain America and Wonder Woman originally took place during WWII in the comic books, and both movies wanted to do their comic book origin stories, they had to return to action in the modern day if these heroes were to exist in our modern day. However, the only way that they could have changed that was by either eliminating Wonder Woman's origin story... or take Wonder Woman out of our present day and out of the Justice League, and have her story continue back in the early part of the 20th century after WWI. Therefore, do you think that that is what they should have did in the Wonder Woman movie?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mkpunk
I came up with more after this post including but not limited to:
The German scientist gives super human strength to their leader
But isn't that usually the way super villians get their powers? Or do you think that he should have encountered a radioactive meteorite or something in the Wonder Woman movie? And if he did, then you would have probably compared the meteorite to the Tessarct. Therefore, how do you think that they should have went about in making the villain? Perhaps just a regular human?
The German leader breaks away from the German military (HYDRA in First Avenger, Ludenoff's crew in Wonder Woman)
I don't recall that he actually broke away from the German military in the way that HYDRA did. However, basically, Ludenhoff just wanted to go about winning the war in an unconventional way that was different from the rest of the German military. But he had no aspirations of creating an organization that was seperate and/or superior to them.
Said super human, goes on a secret mission without the knowledge of the military officers they are reporting to.
But the Red Skull became the military officers/leaders that were to be reported to. But Ludenhoff was still working on behalf of Germany.
Said super human gets a group of multi-cultural camandos as their team members in a bar.
So are you saying that you think that only Diana and Steve should have fought the bad guys by themselves?
A few too many coincidences if you ask me...
So then you think that DC/Warner Bros. made those similarities on purpose? And for the purpose of ensuring success to the Wonder Woman movie by making it like Captain America in a lot of ways? Even though the writers and the director expressed concern about this movie not being a rip-off of Captain America?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mkpunk
Then they should have done a better job differentiating Wonder Woman from Captain America: The First Avenger. As I mentioned, too many beats from The First Avenger was in Wonder Woman.
But did you ever stop to think that those similarities were only coincidences? Because some of those similarities that you mentioned, I really didn't even notice. And it seemed like only someone who was going through this movie with a fine toothed comb could notice them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mkpunk
The only originality was the Greek Myth and the moved up time period. Captain Marvel (now known as Shazam!) did just as much and actually got sued by National Comics (now D.C.) over copying Superman. If I were to change as many details as D.C. did, I would be facing plagiarism claims in college (as I alluded to in post #292) That's like saying Ten Things I Hate About You wasn't a copy of Taming the Shrew because it was in 1990's America or Oliver & Company was in 1980's NYC with animals rather than Oliver Twist's 1800's London...
Sorry, but I can't read your post #292 now. Also, as far as your comparison of Ten Things and Taming and Oliver & and Oliver Twist... the thing that you keep overlooking is that unlike those different-version-of-the-same-movie movies, Wonder Woman and Captain America both had similar origin stories in the comic books. But now it almost sounds like you think that they should have made Wonder Woman conspicuously different from the Captain America movie so that no one could see any similarities between them.
Quote:
But why does that annoy you? Also, don't you believe that people are entitled to their own opinions and that perhaps it's people's opinion that this is an amazing movie?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mkpunk
Because it was a rip-off. Look at all the glaring similarities I reposted and added to.
Well, I don't mean this as an ad hom, but you almost sound a bit obsessed with this, mk.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mkpunk
I can't explain it any further if you chose not to listen.
That did happen and in a way the Red Skull faced what the Nazis in Raiders did.
Well, at least it looks like one of my points go through to you.
Last edited by William Taylor; 07-23-2017 at 06:01 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
When Diana says, "I believe in Love," what does she mean by that? We don't know. When Gandhi or Martin Luther King or Dorothy Day or St. Francis says they believe in love, you can say: Okay. Seeing how you behave, I get what you mean. When Diana says it after killing dozens of people and bringing mayhem down on her enemies, then says, "I believe in Love," by reaction is: WTF?
