The Mego Museum needs your help!
The Mego Museum needs your help!

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Wonder Woman 1984 will be released in both theaters and HBO Max

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Hector
    replied
    Remember how awesome the first movie was?



    What the heck happened, Patty Jenkins?

    Leave a comment:


  • Hector
    replied
    Originally posted by thunderbolt
    WB/ATT have got to have rights to tons of 80s music. Disney had no problem with the music budget for Guardians.
    Exactly.

    Leave a comment:


  • thunderbolt
    replied
    Originally posted by jwyblejr
    ^Maybe Warners didn't want to fork over the extra cash for music rights? Execs seem to do things that would make regular people heads explode.
    WB/ATT have got to have rights to tons of 80s music. Disney had no problem with the music budget for Guardians.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hector
    replied
    Originally posted by jwyblejr
    ^Maybe Warners didn't want to fork over the extra cash for music rights? Execs seem to do things that would make regular people heads explode.
    Heck, I’ve seen low budget movies that feature 80s music. New Order’s Blue Monday was on the darn trailer, lol. Many artists from the 80s would love the exposure.

    Leave a comment:


  • J.B.
    replied
    Originally posted by CrimsonGhost
    So, I watched it. I have to assume this was meant for young children. The story is very cartoony, so much so, it reminded me of an 80’s Spider-Man cartoon.
    That's what I thought, too. I didn't go through every comment on this thread, so I don't know if it was already mentioned, but she was using that Lasso in a Spidey way of swinging around. Don't remember her doing that in the first movie, which I really enjoyed.

    Leave a comment:


  • Goblin19
    replied
    Yeah, they barely use the 80’s trappings at all. Music would have been the most obvious.

    Leave a comment:


  • jwyblejr
    replied
    ^Maybe Warners didn't want to fork over the extra cash for music rights? Execs seem to do things that would make regular people heads explode.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hector
    replied
    Ok, there’s the one thing that really, really bothered me about WW 84...

    NO 80s MUSIC WHATSOEVER...NOT EVEN ONE SONG!!!



    What was the point of having it set in 1984 then?

    Remember how cool was that very first trailer with New Order’s Blue Monday music? So 80s!

    What was Patty Jenkins thinking?

    Leave a comment:


  • sprytel
    replied
    The movie was... ok? A jumbled ridiculous mess of mediocrity. Frankly, the most entertaining part has been the angry debate over this movie online. Well, second most entertaining part...

    Leave a comment:


  • CrimsonGhost
    replied
    So, I watched it. I have to assume this was meant for young children. The story is very cartoony, so much so, it reminded me of an 80’s Spider-Man cartoon. The tone and pace were very uneven. I really enjoyed the parts where it was being playful, like the first 20 minutes or so, but then it fell off a cliff of ridiculousness to where I was laughing at what was happening as opposed to laughing with it.

    I had some fun watching it, sometimes MST3K style, but I doubt I would watch it again. I give it a thumbs sideways.
    Last edited by CrimsonGhost; Dec 28, '20, 12:41 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • jwyblejr
    replied
    Warners is saying it's a success and is planning a third.

    Leave a comment:


  • hedrap
    replied
    Originally posted by Mr.Marion
    I think fans wanted Superman 2 , they got Superman 3. Sometimes such odd choices can be entertaining. For it being an 80's theme film they didn't take advantage of putting an early 80's soundtrack in the scenes. Kajagoogoo- too shy would have been a good fit.
    It truly is the soulmate of Superman III. The flat-out campy bad guys, a comedian cast as the villain, technology macguffins, oil wars! Even the magical doppleganger. All that was missing was the Lana Lang sub-plot.

    The best parts of 84 is when it plays like an inversion of Forever Young, and they had the elements for that story. My biggest issue is there was no legit reason to set this in the 80's. It actually works in every facet as a 50's period film so I tend to believe that was the original idea, and they they scrapped it just to make the Reagan-Trump analogy.

    I raised my oldest on WW. We watched every Carter episode, superfriends, JLU etc...We really liked the first movie and the WW scenes in BVS/JL were always the best parts. But Jenkins and Gadot just got way too much sway this time. Reeves did the same thing with Superman, Raimi and Maguire for Spidey3, RDJ with IM3. By the time actors are working on a third production, they're utterly bored with the part.

    And I've said since the Trek reboot: Chris Pine is Hal Jordan and he's the spitting image in 84. I honestly thought at one point that his "new body" was going to turn out to be Hal.

    Leave a comment:


  • CrimsonGhost
    replied
    Originally posted by Mr.Marion
    I think fans wanted Superman 2 , they got Superman 3. Sometimes such odd choices can be entertaining. For it being an 80's theme film they didn't take advantage of putting an early 80's soundtrack in the scenes. Kajagoogoo- too shy would have been a good fit.
    So they had low expectations and were still disappointed? Yikes!

    Leave a comment:


  • Mikey
    replied
    Didn't see the movie yet, but i'd watch Gal Gadot in her WW outfit hawking a Ron Popeil pasta maker

    Leave a comment:


  • Mr.Marion
    replied
    Originally posted by CrimsonGhost
    This movie is getting blasted!! I had little interest in it, but now I can’t wait to see what they did!
    I think fans wanted Superman 2 , they got Superman 3. Sometimes such odd choices can be entertaining. For it being an 80's theme film they didn't take advantage of putting an early 80's soundtrack in the scenes. Kajagoogoo- too shy would have been a good fit.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
😀
🥰
🤢
😎
😡
👍
👎