Originally Posted by keg in kc:
Probably the same reason marvel wants a female director for captain marvel.
It's silly. I have absolutely zero problems with female directors but to purposely hire a female director because the film's feature star is female just seems odd to me.
Where's the mandate to hire a female to direct Aquaman or Planet Hulk? Or are female directors just relegated to female lead characters? [Reply]
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud:
It's silly. I have absolutely zero problems with female directors but to purposely hire a female director because the film's feature star is female just seems odd to me.
Where's the mandate to hire a female to direct Aquaman or Planet Hulk? Or are female directors just relegated to female lead characters?
My interpretation is that it's a pr-/marketing-motivated decision. Look how we're empowering women in Hollywood by having women write/direct/produce female comic heroines. Women are by far a minority audience for any geek media, whether it's science fiction or comic-inspired, and I interpret these hires as targeting that audience.
At the end of the day there are major issues with gender imbalance in entertainment, so I don't really have an issue with it, so long as the women hired are qualified and do a good job. Maybe some success here will help open doors and help balance the scales down the road. To the point that gender isn't relevant to the discussion. Although at the same time there's the risk that box office and/or critical failure by either of these films (referring to ww and cm) will result in a step back toward the perception that female leads can't carry franchises and female directors can't deliver the goods. Because there's little doubt in my mind that they'll face tougher scrutiny than their male counterparts, whether we're talking writers, actresses or production staff.
Regardless, they can't afford for either of these movies to fail, not just for that reason, but because they're both such major characters in their respective comic universe. [Reply]
Originally Posted by keg in kc:
My interpretation is that it's a pr-/marketing-motivated decision. Look how we're empowering women in Hollywood by having women write/direct/produce female comic heroines. Women are by far a minority audience for any geek media, whether it's science fiction or comic-inspired, and I interpret these hires as targeting that audience.
I agree that it's probably part of the marketing ploy. But with all of the great female producers, directors, screenwriters and show runners working each and every day, it almost comes across as pandering and in some ways, condescending, as if only a female director can faithfully interpret Wonder Woman.
It just seems like an unnecessary ploy. But that's not to say that Patty Jenkins isn't talented or unworthy of the gig. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud:
I agree that it's probably part of the marketing ploy. But with all of the great female producers, directors, screenwriters and show runners working each and every day, it almost comes across as pandering and in some ways, condescending, as if only a female director can faithfully interpret Wonder Woman.
It just seems like an unnecessary ploy. But that's not to say that Patty Jenkins isn't talented or unworthy of the gig.
I want nothing more than to believe it is irrelevant and that a good story teller should be able to tell any story, but all we have to look at is female archetypes because most roles don't dare to step outside those definitions.
Monster, however, does get way outside the boundaries. If Wonder Woman is meant to fall outside of female norms, I see that as a great choice for a director. Is is because Patty Jenkins is a woman? There isn't enough evidence to answer that definitively, so I won't, but I look forward to a day when there is enough evidence to answer the question properly. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud:
I agree that it's probably part of the marketing ploy. But with all of the great female producers, directors, screenwriters and show runners working each and every day, it almost comes across as pandering and in some ways, condescending, as if only a female director can faithfully interpret Wonder Woman.
It just seems like an unnecessary ploy. But that's not to say that Patty Jenkins isn't talented or unworthy of the gig.
It's especially odd considering a man created the character. So now he couldn't possibly correctly interpret his own character if he were still alive? [Reply]
Originally Posted by BigRichard:
They needed a little humor in the B vs. S movie. They should have used something like this.
I thought it would be funny if WW and Batman were walking along in a field and suddenly Batman bonks his head on the invisible jet. That would have been hilarious. [Reply]
Originally Posted by KC Tattoo:
I thought it would be funny if WW and Batman were walking along in a field and suddenly Batman bonks his head on the invisible jet. That would have been hilarious.
She's so fuckin' sexy. Don't care at all if she can act or not. I'll see it just because she's eye candy.
One of the most beautiful women on the planet IMO.
And it's a Marvel popcorn flick. It ain't winning an Oscar for best picture/screenplay/actress etc. It's a kid's film based off a comic book I mean wtf else do you expect?
As long as it's not a Megan Fox Jennifer's Body or TMNT abomination, then I don't think there should be anything to worry about. [Reply]
Originally Posted by CoMoChief:
She's so ****in' sexy. Don't care at all if she can act or not. I'll see it just because she's eye candy.
One of the most beautiful women on the planet IMO.
And it's a Marvel popcorn flick. It ain't winning an Oscar for best picture/screenplay/actress etc. It's a kid's film based off a comic book I mean wtf else do you expect?
As long as it's not a Megan Fox Jennifer's Body or TMNT abomination, then I don't think there should be anything to worry about.
Agreed. I will watch this while eating popcorn. :-) [Reply]
