Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Wonder Woman 1984

1246714

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,263 ✭✭✭DeWitt


    Have any tv spots aired for this advertising it's out in theatres? I've had the telly on the last couple of nights and the Disney+ ads are non stop, but I haven't seen anything for Wonder Woman.


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I thought the first one was awful. Can't believe it got 93% on RT.

    If they had gone with an African-American wonder woman it would have gotten 101% on RT and have been judged a more important film than Black Panther


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,575 ✭✭✭Mr Crispy


    Nonsense.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,782 ✭✭✭Brief_Lives


    Any tie-ins with the other members of the justice league?


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,926 ✭✭✭✭titan18


    Any tie-ins with the other members of the justice league?

    Nah, none. One post credit scene but more of a nod to something else than the DC universe.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 35,714 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Like many well-received films, it's worth remembering the context in which it was released. That when Wonder Woman came out, the DC "extended universe" was in the toilet, and generally much reviled, thanks to Zack Synder's at-best divisive Man of Steel & Batman v. Superman films - and especially Suicide Squad (despite its box office success). The DC films were by and large, garbage.

    Wonder Woman came along, and amazed everyone by being competent and broadly entertaining. Nothing special, not even remotely but "not awful" was the barometer of success with DC at this point. It was also the first time DC functionally abandoned the shared universe aspect, with no convoluted connection with Supes or Bats (later completely embraced by Aquaman)


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Mr Crispy wrote: »
    Nonsense.

    Well obviously you can't get 101% but the point that I was making was that both Wonder Woman and Black Panther were very much both over-rated as movies due to respective reasons of gender and race roles of hero protagonists.


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,575 ✭✭✭Mr Crispy


    glasso wrote: »
    Well obviously you can't get 101% but the point that I was making was that both Wonder Woman and Black Panther were very much both over-rated as movies due to respective reasons of gender and race roles of hero protagonists.

    I know what you meant, I just don't agree.


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,822 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    Im getting a vibe of a long movie and thin on content

    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 12,909 Mod ✭✭✭✭iguana


    pixelburp wrote: »
    Like many well-received films, it's worth remembering the context in which it was released. That when Wonder Woman came out, the DC "extended universe" was in the toilet, and generally much reviled, thanks to Zack Synder's at-best divisive Man of Steel & Batman v. Superman films - and especially Suicide Squad (despite its box office success). The DC films were by and large, garbage.

    Wonder Woman came along, and amazed everyone by being competent and broadly entertaining. Nothing special, not even remotely but "not awful" was the barometer of success with DC at this point. It was also the first time DC functionally abandoned the shared universe aspect, with no convoluted connection with Supes or Bats (later completely embraced by Aquaman)

    It was also the first film about a female superhero that wasn't just completely awful.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 35,714 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    iguana wrote: »
    It was also the first film about a female superhero that wasn't just completely awful.

    Also true; we've come a long way since the "Supergirl" film of the 1980s, and would encourage many to watch that older film to appreciate just how far superhero films - and especially those with a female lead - have come.

    Wonder Woman ain't the best superhero film by any stretch, but I think it did enough things well enough to forgive a tiny bit of hype. Its ending remains utter trash, but then that's a curse many if not most Superhero films suffer from. They can almost never stick the landing. It's the easiest point to notice the studio interference and wouldn't single out Wonder Woman when (say) most of the MCU have terrible last acts that devolve into CGI mush.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 6,609 Mod ✭✭✭✭pinkypinky


    Seeing it later tonight. Can't wait!

    Genealogy Forum Mod





  • glasso wrote: »
    Well obviously you can't get 101% but the point that I was making was that both Wonder Woman and Black Panther were very much both over-rated as movies due to respective reasons of gender and race roles of hero protagonists.

    Black Panther created one of the interesting parts of The Marvel world imho. Basically built a culture and the villain was probably the most sympathetic and interesting that the franchise has output imho. The first Wonder Woman felt a bit like the first Captain America but did have pretty spectacular sequences, weak final act though.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,298 ✭✭✭santana75


    silverharp wrote: »
    Im getting a vibe of a long movie and thin on content

    Yeah thats pretty much it. Definitely overstays its welcome by about 20 minutes. But as new films are so thin on the grounds these days its worth checking out, you could do worse for a night out at the movies.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 35,714 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Blockbusters seem required to be 2.5 hours minimum these days, I've no idea why. EndGame was positively bladder torturingly long. Not like it feeds into the argument over short attention spans. Perhaps it makes it easier to dominate a cinema's screens if the film runs longer (but then surely a shorter movie would mean more showings a day).


  • Registered Users Posts: 15,416 ✭✭✭✭AMKC
    Ms


    pixelburp wrote: »
    Blockbusters seem required to be 2.5 hours minimum these days, I've no idea why. EndGame was positively bladder torturingly long. Not like it feeds into the argument over short attention spans. Perhaps it makes it easier to dominate a cinema's screens if the film runs longer (but then surely a shorter movie would mean more showings a day).
    Only right. I am not going to pay for a film that is 90 mins long but if its 150mins or longer I am happy to pay to see it as I know I am getting my moneys worth and good value.
    If you can't hold you pee then that's your problem.

    I always say the longer the film the better the film.

    Honestly I get it very hard to pay to go see a film that's 90mins or less. That's just too short for a film.

    Live long and Prosper

    Peace and long life.



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,416 ✭✭✭✭AMKC
    Ms


    titan18 wrote: »
    Just went to see it and thought it was ok. 6, or 7 at best our of 10. I thought some of the cgi was pretty poor, particularly the running scenes. Just looked very unnatural, more like a video game than a film. The non action scenes might have been the best part tbh.

    Not at all the action scenes especially the one in Egypt was very well done. I would happily go watch the film a 2nd time just for that
    Mr Crispy wrote: »
    Nonsense.

    What is you because it certainly is not this film. It's an 8 out of 10 or a 4 out of 5 film.
    silverharp wrote: »
    Im getting a vibe of a long movie and thin on content

    Not at all. Tenet was far worse. That film just dragged on and by was it a mess. Wonder Woman 84 an the other hand is very good and time flys buy.

    Live long and Prosper

    Peace and long life.



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,575 ✭✭✭Mr Crispy


    AMKC wrote: »
    What is you because it certainly is not this film. It's an 8 out of 10 or a 4 out of 5 film.

    Huh?




  • AMKC wrote: »
    Only right. I am not going to pay for a film that is 90 mins long but if its 150mins or longer I am happy to pay to see it as I know I am getting my moneys worth and good value.
    If you can't hold you pee then that's your problem.

    I always say the longer the film the better the film.

    Honestly I get it very hard to pay to go see a film that's 90mins or less. That's just too short for a film.

    Thing is, you are getting your money's worth if you get a well cut 90 minute film. Unnecessarily elongating a film adds noise much of the time. Ones that are coming to mind that are pretty short as films go. Phone Booth clocks in at 71 minutes but a great action film imho. A Quiet Place is about 90 minutes. A Nightmare Before Christmas is at 81. Plenty around but sadly the number are diminishing.

    I fully appreciate when a director has something to say that needs extra time but there a lot of films that are over the 2 hour mark that are self indulgent. Film making is an art but tight cutting can be too. You can watch a longer Apocalypse Now for example but it's not more bang for your buck..


  • Registered Users Posts: 16,815 ✭✭✭✭Sleeper12


    Well worth the price imo. Great movie for the family to watch on Christmas day /Stephens Day


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 10,288 ✭✭✭✭branie2


    I really enjoyed it


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,822 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    santana75 wrote: »
    Yeah thats pretty much it. Definitely overstays its welcome by about 20 minutes. But as new films are so thin on the grounds these days its worth checking out, you could do worse for a night out at the movies.

    this review (first half no spoilers) TLDR summary is, its a mcdonald's meal , objectively not good but cant hate it and was fun, and its a kids movie so take some kids to it and you will enjoy it more.

    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,437 ✭✭✭biggebruv


    Not available on vod here till jan 13 once again Ire&UK get shafted and they wonder why people just turn to the illegal streaming sites and torrents actual paying customers always get the raw deal


  • Registered Users Posts: 16,815 ✭✭✭✭Sleeper12


    biggebruv wrote:
    Not available on vod here till jan 13 once again Ire&UK get shafted and they wonder why people just turn to the illegal streaming sites and torrents actual paying customers always get the raw deal

    I'm watching it Christmas day on HBO MAX. Easily done if you use smart dns or vpn. 7 days free trial so you just pay for the movie itself. Then you have full HBO MAX free for the week


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,437 ✭✭✭biggebruv


    Sleeper12 wrote: »
    I'm watching it Christmas day on HBO MAX. Easily done if you use smart dns or vpn. 7 days free trial so you just pay for the movie itself. Then you have full HBO MAX free for the week

    Oh I know there stills ways around it but it’s just ridiculous in 2020 that we should even have to do that. The fact it’s easier to get an illegal stream of the movie is laughable and they wonder why people turn that way for movies and tv


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,117 ✭✭✭The White Wolf


    silverharp wrote: »
    this review (first half no spoilers) TLDR summary is, its a mcdonald's meal , objectively not good but cant hate it and was fun, and its a kids movie so take some kids to it and you will enjoy it more.


    Mr H has been claiming for ages the film wasn't good so you can't exactly take him at face value when he says it's bad but entertaining or whatever the **** he's trying to spin.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,143 ✭✭✭✭B.A._Baracus


    biggebruv wrote: »
    Oh I know there stills ways around it but it’s just ridiculous in 2020 that we should even have to do that. The fact it’s easier to get an illegal stream of the movie is laughable and they wonder why people turn that way for movies and tv

    What do you expect tho?

    It's not like HBO max is over here in Ireland.




  • Loved Gal Gadot. 2 and a half hours of her is not the worst way to spend an afternoon.

    I thought the actual premise was dreadful stuff. I did like the Chris Pine bits, but it was almost cartoon like and sadly couldn't justify watching a second time. I'd watch WW one repeatedly.

    If I was feeling generous 3/10.


  • Registered Users Posts: 16,815 ✭✭✭✭Sleeper12


    biggebruv wrote:
    Oh I know there stills ways around it but it’s just ridiculous in 2020 that we should even have to do that. The fact it’s easier to get an illegal stream of the movie is laughable and they wonder why people turn that way for movies and tv


    I hear you. Im in my 50s so I remember waiting months between the US cinema release or even the VHS release & the Irish release.

    I tried illegal streaming via kodi years ago and stuck with it only for a few months. Freezing, buffering, low quality etc.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,990 ✭✭✭ThePott


    Sleeper12 wrote: »
    I'm watching it Christmas day on HBO MAX. Easily done if you use smart dns or vpn. 7 days free trial so you just pay for the movie itself. Then you have full HBO MAX free for the week
    HBO Max removed their free trial in anticipation of people doing just this


Advertisement