That's why we'll be" stronger together "with Supergirl.
(Never mind that she's an undocumented alien under 35)
Wonder Woman (2017)
- Thread starter M.A.C.O.
- Start date
(Never mind that she's an undocumented alien under 35)
When Krypton sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime.. And some, I assume, are good people.”
I'm really liking what I'm seeing for this film.
Have you actually watched it or are you still going on second hand knowledge?
Have you actually watched it or are you still going on second hand knowledge?
All they have to do is not use the piss yellow filter that Zack uses.
I have to admit, I was going to argue when I first saw the headline about her saying only a woman could direct Wonder Woman, but then I read the actual quote and I understood what she was saying. It would be nice if more people actually did that, rather than just sticking with their first assumption and making an ass of themself.
She's around 20,000
New poster is out
Nice colors, nice tag line, but it would be nicer if the composition drew the eye to her face rather than her chest...
It draws focus to the iconic costume and sword, can't help that she has breasts.
Nothing ever "just happens to be" about breasts in our media culture. They could've easily used a different camera angle, a more front-facing one that showcased the costume's emblem. Instead, they chose a sidelong pose that clearly calls attention to her breasts, and the logo is not particularly noticeable. The breasts are the most brightly lit portion of the entire image, more so than the rest of the costume. And her eyes are virtually unseen, which removes a lot of personality from the image. Look at similarly posed posters of Batman and Superman from the previous movie, and their faces are usually turned toward the camera, or are at least visible as they stare at each other.
Besides, isn't Wonder Woman's tiara an important part of her costume? If the focus is truly on the costume, shouldn't it include the top of her head?
I'll grant that it could've been much worse. At least she isn't thrusting her rear end toward the camera. At least her face is actually visible, sort of. And the pose wouldn't be nearly as sexualizing if not for the absurd boob-cup molding of her armor. But most of the reactions I've seen to this poster from female observers -- the ones who are actually qualified to say whether it's objectifying or not -- have agreed that, yes, there is an element of objectification here. Men don't see it because we're so used to gratuitous sexualization of female characters in media that we take it for granted.
Last edited:
Fuck, I don't know. I didn't think about her breasts until you made a point of it, noticed the popping of the costume colors and gear more.
Seemed in the same vein as this:
Yeah, it's not as much of a side shot or whatever but Superman doesn't have a lasso and a sword on his hip. Staring down, light on the chest. Whatever, I ain't gonna go on about it for 20 pages, I like the WW poster, awful thing that it is.
Seemed in the same vein as this:
Yeah, it's not as much of a side shot or whatever but Superman doesn't have a lasso and a sword on his hip. Staring down, light on the chest. Whatever, I ain't gonna go on about it for 20 pages, I like the WW poster, awful thing that it is.
It's not awful; it's just that it could be better. It could be a whole lot worse, but there's still room for improvement. Progress comes a little at a time, but it doesn't happen at all if we don't push for it.
I'll agree that, aesthetically, the poster's bright colors and optimistic tone are a vast improvement on the past couple of movies' advertising. Good grief, no image of Superman should ever be that dark and somber.
I'll agree that, aesthetically, the poster's bright colors and optimistic tone are a vast improvement on the past couple of movies' advertising. Good grief, no image of Superman should ever be that dark and somber.
I didn't really find myself focusing that much on her breasts either.
I would think if that was really what the focus was supposed to be, they were be emphasized a lot more. They are fairly centralized in the image, but it really feels to me like it's simply because it's a full body shot, not necessarily because they were meant to be the focus of our attention.
I would think if that was really what the focus was supposed to be, they were be emphasized a lot more. They are fairly centralized in the image, but it really feels to me like it's simply because it's a full body shot, not necessarily because they were meant to be the focus of our attention.
I think it says more about you really @Christopher as I didn't notice her breasts until you pointed it out, I did notice her costume though when looking at it and asking the wife, what is the first thing she noticed and that was the costume.
Maybe. Judging from the reactions I'm seeing elsewhere, some people (mostly women) see it, while others (including some women) don't seem to notice. So it's not as blatant as something like, say, an Avengers poster where all the men are in heroic tough-guy poses and Black Widow is sticking her ass at the camera. Still, there are some people who find it distracting, and it could've easily been tweaked a little to diminish that -- make the costume a bit less molded, turn the torso a bit more toward the camera, show more of the face and eyes, any or all of those things.
I mean, sexualization issues aside, why not showcase Wonder Woman's face? She's a character we admire for her compassion, her kindness, her wisdom, her strength of character, her reassuring presence. Those are things that would be best conveyed by an image that showcases her face, her eyes, her smile. It is a very aesthetically pleasing poster what with the colors and brightness and all, but having her face in darkness and her eyes unseen takes something away from it. It feels incomplete.
I dunno, it seems to be a general trend among graphic artists these days to de-emphasize faces. I heard recently that a lot of book covers these days are doing compositions like that, focusing on the torso and cutting off the face, on the theory that it lets readers imagine the characters however they wish -- or maybe on the theory that it saves money on model or actor likeness rights. None of that would apply here, but maybe it's just a case of a graphic designer falling back on a common formula. I just don't think it's ideal here.
Nice to see you seem to be insulting my wife's opinion there or the fact you couldn't directly reference what I said.