And as long as you keep calling them excuses, your only recourse will be a thread on an internet forum asking if a Wonder Woman movie is really that hard to make. Nobody's saying you have to pick every version of Wonder Woman, but you have to pick the right version, and nobody knows what the "right" version is. Like I said, Superman and Batman have a core that you can say is violated if a portrayal steps out of the bounds of that core. Wonder Woman doesn't. You can't just pick whatever you like and go with it because this is Wonder Woman; she's an icon and carries all the expectations that come with it.
I call them excuses because that's what they are, where is this no core argument coming from ? People do know what the right version is, that's the version that cares for people and fights for peace. It's not even that hard to find out. That's constantly been shown in comics and even the old 70's TV show. Obviously when I say pick what you want, I'm saying recklessly change everything about WW. You can pick aspects you like, as long as you don't stray too far from the character.
It's like that comment that keeps popping up across the internet, the one that goes "If Rocket Raccoon can be in a movie, why can't Wonder Woman?". You know why Rocket Raccoon is going to be in a movie before Wonder Woman? It's because nobody gives a sh!t about Rocket Raccoon. He's a talking rodent who means absolutely nothing to comics or the Marvel universe at large. I haven't seen Guardians of the Galaxy yet, but let's just assume that Rocket Raccoon might be the worst part of that movie, hypothetically. Let's assume Rocket Raccoon is so bad Jar Jar Binks can wipe his weary brow and thank King Lucas that no one's talking about him anymore. Who would care? Rocket's fans might care; I can see all three of them writing strongly worded letters to Marvel, but the general population is just going to shrug their shoulders and go "It's a talking raccoon. What did you expect, Hitchcock?". If nobody expects anything great from a character, there's no burden on filmmakers to get it right the first time around, apart from their own creative aspirations. Wonder Woman is different. The very fact that she's an icon creates a burden on filmmakers because no one wants to be remembered as the artist who tarnished an icon. Ask Joel Schumacher if he likes being forever known as the director of Batman and Robin. And then amplify that with the fact that people have been clamoring for a Wonder Woman movie forever now, and you can get some idea of the pressure the studio's under to ensure a Wonder Woman movie comes out that isn't mediocre, or passable, or even good, but damn near perfect, regardless of the problems with adapting her.You think if Wonder Woman finally made it to the screen and it was a bad or mediocre portrayal, any studio would want to associate themselves with that kind of outrage again? You can dismiss the baggage of iconhood all you want, but it's a real thing, and it's one of the reasons your Wonder Woman movie isn't already in development.
Of course there is pressure in making it, that's a given. I could use the same argument for Batman vs Superman movie, that's a huge movie to take a risk on. Sure there's pretty much guaranteed money in it, but there is a hell of a lot pressure in making it a very good movie too right ? If it's a crap movie that's on them lol.
When you say you've seen a video of random people saying "Wonder Woman" when they're asked about female superheroes, you're not really disputing my point. Everybody's going to say Wonder Woman when they're asked that question because that is Diana's sole selling point these days: she's The Female Superhero. This Kate Beaton strip is one of my favorites because it's one of the most accurate depictions of what Wonder Woman's immersion into the popular consciousness is like. She's not famous because of her character, or her mythos, or stories or whatever. She's famous because she's famous.
Well yeah, the general public aren't going to know everything about her mythos and stories. She clearly hasn't appeared in as much media as Batman and Superman. You're saying that as if it will stop people from watching her movie if it was made. They don't need to know everything to want to watch a movie about her.
Compassion isn't something that's constant to Wonder Woman either. One of the things I find weird about the Wonder Woman forum as it is today if how much outrage some people can manifest about Azzarello's Wonder Woman while virtually ignoring Johns' Wonder Woman, particularly because that's where their outrage should be. Johns' role as Master and Commander of the DC Universe means that the Wonder Woman he's crafting will likely be one of the things that informs Gal Gadot's Wonder Woman, and I don't think anyone here wants that. And Johns' Wonder Woman is not that compassionate towards her enemies. Superman and Batman can believe in potential for rehabilitation; Johns' Wonder Woman believes in killing them off after their first strike. That's why you get golden moments like this, where Diana advocates swift executions for all those enemies you think she's compassionate about:
That's one version of Wonder Woman in the New 52. As I've said before in the majority of the comics she appears in her compassion is constant.
The Dark Knight is a Batman movie. The Winter Soldier is piggybacking off the success of the 3rd highest-grossing movie in history, which is why it's doubled the profits of the original already. Wonder Woman doesn't have either of those things going for her.
Sure they had that going for them, that's not what I was focusing on. You kept pushing Shazam as this kid friendly film like that's the only target audience that makes a successful movie. She doesn't really need that though, she's super powerful and recognisable that's enough to intrigue people of all ages.
Log in to comment