The Wonder Woman Movie: What I Hope and What I Fear

I make no secret of my frustrations over how DC has managed the film development of its multiple properties. Some of the most iconic comic book characters call DC comics home and yet they have not seen a big screen adaptation. Marvel has rolled out multiple films under their own production banner and set up film franchises at several other studios. Yet DC, under the umbrella of the expansive Time Warner media empire, can’t seem to get its act together. Until recently.

After spending the last few years in Marvel’s cinematic shadow, DC has finally committed to releasing a huge slate of films based on its characters. Using the rebooted Superman film, Man of Steel, as an anchor there is going to be an entire shared universe populated by many of the characters from the DC comics. 2016 is going to bring a Batman versus Superman movie (cleverly titled, Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice) that not only introduces a Batman to the new DC cinematic universe but also a Cyborg, a Flash (rumored), an Aquaman and most importantly a Wonder Woman. Then following every year after that a solo film for each hero and (several) Justice League movie(s) and a couple of other fun surprises (a Suicide Squad film and a possible Justice League Dark).

But here’s the thing, all of this is still only potential. Yes work on Batman v. Superman is close to complete but as far as films starring all those other characters, that is still up in the air. If Batman v. Superman does not succeed, Warner Bros. could easily scrap the whole thing. They’ve done it before. Years ago a possible Justice League movie was set up and about to start production. The roles had been cast, a script written, director chosen, the cast had even begun costume tests. Then Marvel’s The Avengers hit the box office and suddenly the Justice League project looked rather pathetic. And coincidentally coming out this coming summer is, you guess it, ANOTHER Avengers movie.

And while I am frustrated at the lack of success of DC in getting its characters on the big screen, I am also angry because it seems to be their own fault. DC comics has some of the most iconic characters in their list of intellectual properties. They also have access to a major studio in that they are owned by Time Warner, parent company of Warner Bros. Marvel may currently be under the umbrella of Disney, but when they first started their cinematic universe they had to scramble to set up their characters at different studios (a move that many might regret since they have probably forever lost the rights to make films about Spider-Man or the X-Men).

The point is that even though Marvel had far more hurdles to produce their films, they have managed to produce far more movies. DC just keeps recycling films about Batman and Superman. Hell, even the launch of their new cinematic universe involves those two characters. And still no Wonder Woman movie. Marvel made a movie about a talking raccoon and his talking tree friend whose sequel we will see a full month before a solo Wonder Woman film is finally released in theatres. And the cruel irony is that the mastermind behind so much of Marvel’s cinematic success could have been the one to finally give Wonder Woman the big screen treatment.

In 2006 Joss Whedon was working on a draft to direct a live action Wonder Woman film. That’s right, the creator of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, one of the most iconic female super heroes, was going to direct THE iconic female super hero. Despite having little experience directing big budget films, it was obvious that he had a handle on what makes a good super hero movie and that he was knowledgeable about this world (anyone who watched Buffy and Angel can see numerous super hero comic book references on those shows). But apparently Warner Bros. didn’t think so and the project fell apart. Well I guess we’ll never see a Joss Whedon super hero movie (enter 2012’s The Avengers and 2015’s Avengers Age of Ultron).

This is not a uncommon occurrence with Wonder Woman. Famous TV producer David E. Kelley produced a pilot for a Wonder Woman TV show. Sadly (or not) the only people who ever saw it were the network executives and the rabid fanboys who traded bootleg copies at cons and online. Another attempt at Wonder Woman prequel series, titled Amazon, never even made it to the pilot stage. The only successful adaptation of Wonder Woman to the big or small screen was in the 1970s, when comic book characters were still campy and bizarre.

I have a bit of a theory about this. Batman and Superman have been adapted so many times (successfully and unsuccessfully) because there are definitive stories that can guide the new creators in their endeavors. Anyone who wants to adapt Batman need only look at The Dark Knight Returns or Hush to get a feel for how the character should be handled. Superman can be done by looking back at the Richard Donner film or Superman For All Seasons or any number of other stories (I might even read Dark Knight Returns for Batman AND Superman as apparently the new Superman movie did).

But there has never been a definitive Wonder Woman story. There is no run of the comics that can be pointed to that completely encapsulate the character of Wonder Woman. Every writer and artist takes a completely new vision of the character, and deservedly so. The original vision of the character of Wonder Woman would not really fly with today’s audiences. The creator of Wonder Woman, Dr. Henry Moulton Marsden, was into so kinky things and that came through in the portrayals of the women in the comic. More often then not each comic featured Wonder Woman being tied up in some manner or other. It is doubtful that will be featured in the big screen Wonder Woman film.

Things could always be worse.

Just because no one HAS made a decent Wonder Woman film yet does not mean it is not possible to do so. Before 2008 I might not have been convinced someone could make a good Iron Man film (and I would be wrong). I can only hope that this is a legitimate attempt to bring this iconic character to the screen and not simply a mad dash by DC to establish a cinematic universe while the competition passes them by. I look forward to 2017 to see what the outcome will be.

The Happy Couple Is Dead

I recently saw the cinematic masterpiece that is the film Gone Girl. Ben Affleck and Rosamund Pike star as a married couple that have long ago lost their wedded bliss. I won’t spoil it but I will say the words bitch, cunt, and asshole get thrown around quite a bit in this film. There is no love lost between them. And then I took a look at a lot of the shows I watch on television and realized that almost none of them feature happy couples. While I understand that Drama is born of conflict, it seems like not a single relationship can be portrayed on television these days without it being either hanging by a thread or deeply abusive.

In the past shows used to thrive on the concept of “will they/won’t they.” The idea that two characters who worked together or lived together would eventually give into the romantic tensions between them and fall into bed. Now most couples are shown already in bed and fighting each other so furiously you as an audience member are just wondering how the hell did they ever get together to begin with? And why? Honestly most relationships on TV and in movies have no right to exist. They feature people who would never have any sort of romantic chemistry if placed in a situation different from the confines of their story.

The Honeymooners would fight and argue but you never thought they would break up. Ricky and Lucy had the occasional row but were still in love (in the show, in real life there was all sorts of dark activities in their relationship). Even Al and Peg Bundy, who were miserable together, never seemed to indicate that they might break out in violence any second. There was no heartbreak in classic television.  Married couples stayed married and single people found love. This was considered the norm for many years.

Modern television has to have people either divorced and remarried, trapped in loveless marriages, constantly cheating, constantly fighting, and no end in sight. The moments of loving happiness have now become the anomaly that breaks up the action in a show when it used to be the fighting that was the anomaly. Three of my favorite shows (all created by the same writer) are Grey’s Anatomy, Scandal and the brand new How To Get Away With Murder. Each of these shows feature damaged relationships. Usually more than one in a single episode.

There might be a brief tender moment to lure us into the story. Usually a kiss or some kind words, but just wait a few minutes and someone will say the wrong word or get seduced by the wrong person or learn their significant other put his or her genitals up against the wrong person. Seriously, watch the shows. I just described the plot of nearly every episode while the characters are treating a bizarre medical case or dealing with a political scandal or defending a convicted murderer. And amid all that there’s usually a lot of screaming and plotting between people who share a bed.

Current television is constantly trying to push the edge of what they can get away with. Since cable TV is not subject to any rules or regulations they are free to show as much violence and/or sex as the writers wish. But even though cable is where the best television tends to be found, Broadcast (the name for the major networks as a group) is the majority of Television viewers. The ratings numbers for Network always dwindles the numbers for cable. But that will not last if the quality of Network TV does not make the most basic of efforts to try and entertain its audience. And the people in charge of these channels have realized that.

Despite being under the shackle of the FCC, Network television has been pushing the envelope. So that means more sex, more violence, more what we like to call adult situations. It’s hard to keep a happy loving couple in a world where a writer feels the need to constantly screw with the products of their creation. The truth is most writers are a bit sadistic at heart (I am speaking for myself and the hand full of writers I know and am familiar with). We may feel like these characters are our children when others are writing them but when we are in charge of our own creations we feel free to visit horrible situations upon them.

In this new frontier of freedom for creative individuals, the idea to show the familiar and mundane to audiences is equal to ratings death. Couples fighting and scheming shall probably be the norm for TV from now on. Even sitcoms will see an end to loving kissy couples. No more Lucy and Ricky. Now it will be more like Lucy and Ricky as they were in real life (fighting and cheating on each other). If the Honeymooners were on today, Ralph wouldn’t just threaten to hit Alice, he would have sent her to the moon in the pilot episode. Conflict breeds drama and the people want drama.

Amateurs and Rookies Always Win

Recently sitting on my couch I was flipping channels when I came upon Dark City on HBO. For those unfamiliar with the film, it deals with a mysterious city that is in perpetual darkness and the people who live there. Every night when the citizens of this city fall asleep they are implanted with new memories and placed in new homes all by a mysterious alien race that is trying to study the human soul (I know, trippy, right?). It’s a cool dark film that should be in any Sci-Fi fan’s queue. But the thing that struck me was that the final battle of the film involves the leader of the aliens doing battle with a human who has gained the same reality altering abilities as the aliens. The human of course wins. And of course my question is “why?”

This alien leader was born (or hatched or spawned, they don’t really get into the origins of these aliens) with the ability to alter reality with his mind. While we don’t know how long he has lived, let’s assume his appearance as an elderly person indicates he is old (there were young aliens depicted as well, who are very creepy). My point is he has experience altering reality. Our human protagonist? He has literally just discovered these abilities that afternoon. Now through memory injection our human hero gets a course in how to use these abilities but still, the evil alien has spent years doing this. Yet the hero wins.

Now yes, I know this is drama and the hero is supposed to win. And yes it is always more interesting for an underdog to beat a superior foe. But fiction is full of characters who are not just underdogs. They are downright beginners. Star Wars features Luke Skywalker getting a crash course in Jedi training and defeating a fully trained messiah Jedi Darth Vader. Harry Potter, who essentially dropped out of Wizard school, defeats the all powerful master of all evil magic Lord Voldemort. The Last Starfighter learned how to pilot from a video game. The list goes on and on. An ambitious beginner with good intentions will always defeat a more seasoned villain.

My complaint is not that good triumph over evil. Good is SUPPOSED to triumph over evil (unless the story is about a dark anti-hero but that’s a whole ‘nother blog entry). My complaint is why can’t good be a bit more experienced. Judge Dredd (yes the bad Sylvester Stallone version, bare with me) wins out in the end of his film. But Dredd is a seasoned law enforcement officer. He has experience. His winning in the end makes sense. Robin Hood (the not so bad Kevin Costner version) spent years fighting in the crusades. Why can’t heroes be people with the ability to win? In the real world the underdog rarely wins.

Just because audiences love an underdog does not mean we need to make the underdog so completely handicapped that his victory is nearly impossible. That’s just bad filmmaking. I can suspend disbelief only so far. Even for the most engaging stories there is only so far I am willing to believe a hero has come in order to defeat a villain. And so I am going to commit an act of sacrilege and attack the most beloved of underdogs, Luke Skywalker.

Luke Skywalker is a believable underdog for one simple reason. He loses. Like a lot. True he blew up the first Death Star. True he killed the Rancor. But other than that, Luke Skywalker gets his ass handed to him pretty regularly in all three (soon to be six, or at least four) movies. Vader cuts off his hand while he is running away. He gets electrocuted by the Emperor. He even gets caught by a bunch of Ewoks. In fact the few victories Luke manages to get notched on his belt could almost be considered luck (though Obi-Wan would say “There’s no such thing as luck”).

Part of the reason why I believe the underdog is so prevalent in American cinema is because America itself was an underdog. We became a country despite being a mostly untrained and unorganized fighting force against a much more powerful foe. And certainly all telling of American history reinforces this notion. So it would make sense that this idea of the underdog triumphing overwhelming odds would seep into our fictional media. Especially sports movies. You can’t watch a film about a team sport without seeing the championship (and dislikeable) team take on a group of misfits and screw ups who manage to band together for glory.

The simple truth is that the only way the underdog story can really be believeable is if we see a lot of pain and effort from our protagonist. It can’t just be a magic injection that unlocks the secrets of the universe. There needs to be work and persistence so that the victory of the underdog is earned.