• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Wonder Woman (2017)

This is all true. However, in WWII - and especially since then, which is what matters when you decide where to set a story - there were clearly defined villains to be fought against, and however horrific the particulars may have been, fighting Imperial Japan and especially the Nazis was a Good Thing. Hitler was a terrifying monster, the monster to end all monsters in the decades since, and the crimes of Japan are well known. "The Axis of ____" continues to be a shorthand phrase for power. That's what made WWII "The Good War" ever since, because however terrible it was and especially the effect it had on various civilian populations, it had to be fought because Hitler had to be taken down.

Well, that's the comfortable myth, sure, but there were evils on both sides. We allied with Stalin, remember, not to mention imprisoning our own Japanese-American citizens in concentration camps. Not to mention that both sides bombed each other's civilian populations into oblivion with equal brutality. The American wartime propaganda against the Japanese was as horrifically racist as any Nazi propaganda. Yes, Hitler had to be fought, but neither side's hands were clean.

WWI is... much much less cleanly defined. Yeah there were clearly sides, but what made the goals of the German Empire and France really all that different? The whole thing grew into a monster of its own making because of the interlocking forces of nationalism and alliance-building and the simmering rivalry between the UK and Germany. The War itself is poorly understood today because it can't be summed up in simple emotional phrases and its the more likely to be seen as a pointless waste of human life.

I think it's easy for us to see WWII as "good" in retrospect than it was for the people who lived through the horror of it all. The attitude I've heard in period fiction produced shortly after the war's end was not "Wow, that all-out war against evil really worked, let's use the same tactics next time!" It was "This war was necessary, but it was awful and it took a horrific physical and moral toll on all of us, and if we ever let this happen again, it will doom the world. So we must make sure there is never another war like this, period." And they kinda succeeded. They didn't banish war altogether, as they hoped to do, but every war since then has been on a much smaller, less globally cataclysmic scale.


You're underestimating the effect that the Great War had on the collective psyche of the world. Nobody in the aftermath of WWII tried to write a Kellog-Briand Pact - perhaps because nobody thought it would work after the first failed, but it's still notable that after WWI, much of the world collectively decided to outlaw war itself.

And they did so after WWII as well, as I've been saying. Sure, WWI was the start of it, but it was the dress rehearsal for WWII. They're both really just one long, continuous process with a lull in the middle.
 
"Dress rehearsal"? :wtf:

Listen, the whole point is that during and after the Second World War, as you say it was seen as necessary if awful and hopefully never to be repeated. During and after the First World War you had people - lots of people, not just pacifists - openly saying the whole thing was completely unnecessary, wanton slaughter with no point.

In other words, "that all-out war against evil" but the evil was clearly the Nazis and Imperial Japan. As opposed to "that all-out war that was evil" where the evil was the war itself.
 
In other words, "that all-out war against evil" but the evil was clearly the Nazis and Imperial Japan. As opposed to "that all-out war that was evil" where the evil was the war itself.

And that sentiment was definitely present after WWII. The idea that it was an unambiguously positive war is latter-day revisionism, or the result of taking wartime propaganda too literally. As I said, I've encountered fiction from the immediate postwar era that was emphatic about the idea that war itself was, yes, absolutely, an evil that must be banished from the world. Sure, maybe WWII seemed less arbitrary and senseless, but it was also far more devastating and global, and the debut of nuclear weapons at the end of it suggested that the next world war, if it were allowed to happen, would destroy the world. No matter how justified the fight had been, it had to be the last fight on that scale, or it would've all been for nothing.

I mean, it's not like we have to choose. It's not like there's some conservation law that requires that attitude to have existed after only one war. Yes, WWI was seen as senseless, but WWII was hardly perceived in the simplistic terms you're reducing it to. The propaganda during the war sold it that way, but the people who lived through the horror of it would've seen things differently. Including people who were victimized by the supposedly "good" side in WWII, like the millions of German women who were raped by Soviet soldiers.
 
I'm personally excited to have it set during the WWI era mostly because right now it seems like a fresher period for any film, let alone a superhero one. Cap has WWII, Wonder Woman can have this one, and it's exciting.
 
I'm personally excited to have it set during the WWI era mostly because right now it seems like a fresher period for any film, let alone a superhero one. Cap has WWII, Wonder Woman can have this one, and it's exciting.

I go along with this thought, and although there is this quote above (No Spoilers, please)...

Her reasoning is explained in Batman vs Superman. :)

...I was thinking that maybe the film makers decided to go with WW1 to be different from the canon of the comics. Influenced by, but with their own take on things. After all, we've had two different Batman film series (the two Micheal Keaton movies, of course, plus the Christian Bale movies), and the X-Men and Avenger movies were not direct copies of the comic stories they are based on.
 
Oh.

I can see Diana beating Adolf to death.

That's not a hard sell.

But really?

Why would she burn the body?

How about this.

Wonder Woman is Interrogating Adolf Hilter with her magic lariat, but the lies he is telling himself about his motivations and denial about whether he is or is not a good man, sets the old man on fire.
 
I think they wanted to avoid copying Captain America.
That's certainly more likely than "wanting to do something different." If Marvel hadn't already beaten DC to the punch, Wonder Woman would likely have stuck to the title character's strong connection to World War II.
 
Well, it works thematically as well. In BvS she says after WWI she retired from the world of men due to the horrors that war showed they are capable of. WWII has a reputation as being the 'good war' (though Christopher makes some excellent points about that), but WWI is universally regarded as a horror show.

And 'bullets and bracers' will be a whole 'nother thing when it comes to taking on a Maxim in No Man's Land....
 
Super friends and Justice League cartoons put WW very firmly into the minds of several generations.
 
JLU ended about ten years ago, Young Justice ended three years ago. Granted, the latter didn't feature WW that prominently, but she was around, and Wonder Girl certainly was.

And, of course, there are the animated movies.
 
What we call wargames, they call sport.

Maybe Hippolyta has spent three thousand years Mr. Miyaging her subjects?

"Wax on wax off people!"
 
JLU ended about ten years ago, Young Justice ended three years ago. Granted, the latter didn't feature WW that prominently, but she was around, and Wonder Girl certainly was.

And, of course, there are the animated movies.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
What we call wargames, they call sport.

Maybe Hippolyta has spent three thousand years Mr. Miyaging her subjects?

"Wax on wax off people!"
My mind went to thoughts of women sunbathing topless on the beach and applying oil (since they wouldn't have lotion). I'm terrible.
 
My mind went to thoughts of women sunbathing topless on the beach and applying oil (since they wouldn't have lotion). I'm terrible.
Just topless? Paradise Island would be the perfect place to pull out the "What's a bathing suit?" trope.
 
Just topless? Paradise Island would be the perfect place to pull out the "What's a bathing suit?" trope.
This is true. It's confirmed that in the comics that Diana, Donna and the other Amazons pray and bathe nude. Donna wears bathing suits when she's around the Titans because, modesty and decency of course. Starfire on the other hand, doesn't care.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top