Re: I wonder how much my impression of the movie was harmed by not seeing it first in the theater.
Cannoli Send a noteboard - 30/12/2020 11:16:59 PM
View original post
I liked the concept of the main villain. It was my first exposure to the Max Lord character. I don't know what he is like in other media. I liked that he didn't feel like a typical bad guy who just wants to blow everyone up for some reason. While greed isn't a novel motivation for a villain, he still felt refreshingly different to me. I liked his performance overall.
I liked the concept of the main villain. It was my first exposure to the Max Lord character. I don't know what he is like in other media. I liked that he didn't feel like a typical bad guy who just wants to blow everyone up for some reason. While greed isn't a novel motivation for a villain, he still felt refreshingly different to me. I liked his performance overall.
He's basically evil Tony Stark, without the suit.
I like Gal Gadot's performance. I think she does well. Also, she is lovely.
It will never not amuse me that they had Robin Wright and Connie Nielsen affect Israeli accents because it was easier than teaching Gal Gadot to drop hers. And apparently it's easier to train a 10 year old girl to talk like Gal Gadot than to train her to speak English properly.
I thought the score was pretty lame.
The final heart to heart with Diana and Steve was the point when I noticed the score, while thinking "this music is awfully loud and feels like it is trying too hard to make you sad."
Also, the opening is a waste of 10 minutes or so. I get what they were going for, but it felt totally unnecessary to the story.
Yes, because nothing in the main plot had to do with Diana "cheating" or taking shortcuts. She had no idea wishing Steve were still alive would have any effect, and it's not really cheating. I guess the message is that Max Lord is evil because he never got the change to participate in the Amazon Olympics and learn the lesson too?
I still don't understand what the point was of Steve coming back in a different looking body. The magic couldn't reproduce his body? It needed to steal someone else's body? It was just weird and felt pointless.
I know, right? It can create a wall out of nothing, it can create multiple nuclear missiles and Porsches but it has to possess a living guy to bring Steve back? Which is the thing I had a problem with, because Diana & Steve basically raped that guy, and they even brought him back for the joke about his outfit to make it absolutely clear this is a real human being with a life and people who care about him, that I was not misreading the situation. So her thing with Steve was not about giving up something she wanted for the greater good, it was actually a moral abomination that she SHOULD HAVE renounced, even without any consequences to civilization.
I thought it was a good decision by the director to not show them somehow refueling the stolen fighter jet 5 times on the way to Egypt. Or am I misremembering how they got to Egypt? Alright, now I am just nitpicking the standard types of plotholes that happen in a movie like this.
Invisible jets use less fuel.
Cannoli
“Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions.” GK Chesteron
Inde muagdhe Aes Sedai misain ye!
Deus Vult!
*MySmiley*
“Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions.” GK Chesteron
Inde muagdhe Aes Sedai misain ye!
Deus Vult!
*MySmiley*
Wonder Woman 1984 (2020)
- 30/12/2020 03:23:57 AM
340 Views
I wonder how much my impression of the movie was harmed by not seeing it first in the theater.
- 30/12/2020 10:59:25 PM
163 Views
Re: I wonder how much my impression of the movie was harmed by not seeing it first in the theater.
- 30/12/2020 11:16:59 PM
165 Views
They won't stop making stupid "superhero" movies until you stop watching them
- 04/01/2021 08:29:44 PM
146 Views