WONDER WOMAN MOVIE PREDICTION : 5 REASONS WHY WARNERS HAVE GOT IT RIGHT THIS TIME

So, this week is the moment of truth for DC/Warners. Not simply because Wonder Woman is seventy-five this year ( yes, that's how long it takes to get a female pop-culture icon in front of movie-going audiences ). No, for good or ill, this movie now comes loaded-down not only with expectation, but the kind of industry baggage that no-one at Warner Brothers would have remotely predicted even a year ago. The first DC Extended Universe movie, Man of Steel, was considered downbeat and dreary ( although it did have its supporters ). Batman V Superman was more of the same, with added incoherence ( both were directed by flashy action auteur, Zack Snyder ). Suicide Squad ( directed by David Ayer ) was simply appalling - a heist movie with no heist. It is therefore appropriate that in these times of gender politics, internet misogyny and glass ceilings, that an industry dominated by men, adapting a fictional medium traditionally associated with adolescent males, is about to get schooled by a female-fronted action movie directed by a woman. ( Cont'd below ).

Below: One of the many examples of the movie's inspired - and inspirational - promo posters.

There is no doubt that in the future, books will be written on the lamentable attempt by Warners to catch up with their arch rivals, Marvel Studios, in adapting their roster of celebrated comic-book properties. I will state upfront that I have not seen any preview screenings of the film, and stopped following any online reviews of Wonder Woman several weeks before its release. However, in this article I contend that the signs were there all along, that Wonder Woman would buck the trend, and not only get DC's troubled cinematic universe stabilised, but be the first female-led action movie to succeed in a meaningful way at the box office. If I'm wrong, I'll publish a review and say so!

Will Wonder Woman unite critics and fans alike? Here are five reasons why they just might pull it off.

1 ) THE AD CAMPAIGN. All the Wonder Woman trailers have been great, because, unlike the example of Batman V Superman, this is a case of Warners heroically holding their nerve, and not giving us the entire movie in soundbite form, a year in advance. Each ad has so far embellished very slightly what we have already seen in the preceding ad, which definitely leaves us wanting to go and see the actual movie. Whereas in the case of Batman V Superman, pretty much every single scene was shown in trailer form, leaving the viewers with no surprises whatsoever, because they had used what they saw online to extrapolate the bits that weren't shown. When a movie costs two hundred million bucks, for there to be no sense of surprise for people who've paid good money to see it in the cinema, is unforgivable. For one thing, it'll simply encourage people to say, 'I'll get the Blu-Ray or wait til it's on Amazon'. About a month ago ( April 2017 ), fans were grumbling that Wonder Woman's lack of saturation-advertising indicated that DC were trying to bury the film ( in other words, that it, too, was deemed a dud ). In actuality, the campaign has been paced so that it is crescendo-ing now, a week before the film is released. Plus, as you can see here, even the posters exude the right amount of confidence, positivity, and forward-momentum.

2 ) WONDER WOMAN BEING SET DURING WORLD WAR ONE. This is a neat tweak of her actual origin ( her first appearance in comic-books was during World War Two, and Wonder Woman, like Captain America, has traditionally been seen as a WWII character ). It's neat in that the time-shift allows it to firstly avoid any cinematic comparison to Marvel's 'First Avenger', but secondly to retain that sense of playfulness and naivety that the story and the character ( as the archetypal woman-out-of-time ) requires. This is important, because as Future Rocker mentioned in our Wonder Woman movie article of October 2013, Marvel's main stable of heroes ( Spiderman, The Fantastic Four, The Silver Surfer, etc. ) were born during the Sixties counter-culture, and therefore had built-in snarky, anti-establishment sensibilities that today's audiences will more readily understand. Anything created before then starts to look and sound anachronistic - like a costume drama, in other words. So, while it may initially be thought of as a disadvantage to be set in the early 20th Century, good writing and period detail will force the production to bring an interesting and fun perspective. Wonder Woman / Diana is from ancient Greece, and will suddenly find herself in a time where men were forced to face technologically-advanced, mechanised war machines on the battlefield. Interesting parallels can be drawn.

3 ) PATTY JENKINS IS THE DIRECTOR. This in itself is heroic, and shows true balls on the part of the studio to take such a gamble. Jenkins is previously only known for one movie, that of the excellent Aileen Wuornos biopic, Monster ( 2003 ). To be handed a flagship, multi-million dollar movie, after making a small, arthouse piece fourteen years previously, is staggering. But, look at that movie. She coaxed an Oscar-winning and transformative performance out of Charlize Theron. Theron, at the time, had begun her ascent in Hollywood, and must have correctly calculated that playing against type would win her accolades that could take her to the next level, which it did ( the counter-intuitive notion being that a former model from South Africa, could play a mentally ill, prematurely-aged prostitute from Michigan did indeed help to get the film noticed ). So, getting a great performance from relative newcomer Gal Gadot ( also a former model ), seems like a good fit. Jenkins however, all but disappeared after her debut's success. Usually gaps in a female director's résumé means that time was taken to raise a family, or that the career-advancements traditionally afforded to successful male directors don't materialise for their female counterparts. Ultimately, it's Warners' gain because in interviews in 2016, Jenkins had remarked that Superman The Movie was a big influence on her Wonder Woman. This is another reason to feel confident that tonally this will be something audiences can finally warm to. 1977's Superman The Movie is still regarded as the great superhero movie, where the humour, pathos, and committed performances of its two leads ( Christopher Reeve and Margot Kidder ) still make it a fan favourite today, despite the now-dated FX. If Wonder Woman is a female counterpart of Superman The Movie, then it would be in stark contrast to the rather chilly themes and visuals of Zack Snyder's two preceding movies.

4 ) CONFIDENCE. This is not a production that exudes nervousness or insecurity. Since the film's principal shooting wrapped as far back as a year ago, Gal Gadot has admirably taken to her off-screen duties as film promoter, progressive commentator and women's advocate with an ambassadorial zeal. That, plus frequent fan-pleasing appearances alongside her Wonder Woman TV predecessor, the much-loved Lynda Carter, have enhanced the idea that an iconic mantle has been successfully passed on. Whenever the star and director appear together, there is no feeling that they are covering up a box office disaster. It has always been completely the opposite: Upbeat and anticipatory. Likewise, there have been no negative leaks from unnamed studio insiders, which also adds to the feeling that all is well. With the star's and director's social media output consistently on-message and conveying a sense of excited optimism, the signs are good.

5 ) Finally, GAL GADOT IS WONDER WOMAN. Some commentators have remarked on Gadot's untested acting abilities and her lack of experience. However, there is ample proof already that Gadot can carry a movie. Look at the visual clues in her seven minutes of screen time in Batman V Superman: Gadot's performance is note-perfect, from the playful Bond-esque intrigue of Lex's parties, to her recognition of Lois's grief as she hands-over Kal-El's body. It is widely held that she was the sole reason to see the movie, and her appearance in full battle armour during the finale, prompted grown men and women to cry with joyful relief into their long-empty popcorn buckets. Additionally, the trailers for the solo movie reveal Gadot to have great comic timing.

At the very least, if the movie is an uncomplicated action romp on a par with Captain America: First Avenger, it will have done its job, and given the studio a solid foundation to work with. It could also be the touchstone for a progressive new era of female-led action films, that can seriously generate box-office on a par with more traditional blockbusters. 

And, finally, director Patty Jenkins will be vindicated for what must have been the movie-pitch of a lifetime - getting Diana Prince to the big screen - on her own, once and for all. 

Article by Alexi K.

WONDER WOMAN ON FILM: HOW DO YOU 'REBOOT' A POP-CULTURE ICON? - a talk with director Jesse V. Johnson

''She is intense, focused, and physically powerful''

This was written in 2013, well before Wonder Woman's awesome big screen debut in 2016's Batman V Superman. In this article, FUTURE-ROCKER discusses the obvious groundswell of support for a Wonder Woman movie in the pre-Gal Gadot era. June 2017 was when Warners finally brought her to the big screen, completing DC Comics' cinematic trinity.

Illustration by Alexi K, 2012/13.

It seems that Wonder Woman fan trailers are like buses: You wait ages for one, and then suddenly two come along at the same time. Evidently film-makers are getting impatient with big studio stasis, and are taking matters into their own hands. Action movie director Jesse V. Johnson puts it succinctly: ‘I just felt Wonder Woman was a terrific character who had been seriously maligned by her on-screen depictions.’

Jesse’s was the first of two completely separate clips to become big internet hits this year. What made him pick the distinctly ‘alt-rock’ looking Nina Bergman to play the iconic character? ‘Nina is an actress-singer I have known for some time. She is intense, focused, and physically powerful, attributes I felt were perfect for Wonder Woman.’

Below: Wonder Woman 2013 ( dir. Jesse V. Johnson ), as played by actress and singer Nina Bergman.

So why are Warner Bros - the studio that owns the entire DC Comics pantheon - so reticent to push ahead with a big-budget movie adaptation of such a well-known character?

The reasons are manifold, but the main one is probably the age of the character herself. Wonder Woman, like Superman and Captain America, is essentially a 1940’s creation, and represents a first-generation of superheroes who became default mascots of World War II America and its ideals, and therefore proves difficult to re-tool in our era of cynicism and suspicion of traditional values and authority. Johnson explains: ‘DC is rightfully protective of its characters - meaning it can be difficult to get a feature going, but that protective attitude leaves a vacuum for a well thought out fan film to make an impact.’

They have good reason to be cautious: As other studio adaptations of vintage comic heroes such as The Phantom, Dick Tracy, and The Shadow have shown, no matter how lavish your period styling and art deco set designs, a movie can easily be regarded as no more than a curiosity to all but the most hardcore genre fans. More saliently, female-fronted action films have also historically performed badly at the box office ( Aeon Flux, Elektra, Catwoman ), and even worse at the hands of the critics ( Tomb Raider ).

So now there are two interpretations: Johnson’s, with its kinetic and punky vibe, and Sam Balcomb's ‘300’-style interpretation, going for that mythical Greek look. Both examples show that with the right vision, it is still possible to portray the character in a credible way.

For the budding film-maker, if the studio is so protective of its property - and you want to make your own trailer - what are the legal ramifications? According to Johnson, ‘I made it with no permission from anyone, and posted it to Vimeo which is non-profit. I made my Wonder Woman with no view to making any kind of financial profit from it, internet profit doesn’t interest me. It wasn’t - and cannot be - the reason for me to make these shorts. I made Wonder Woman to show that I had an artistic vision for the character, that could, with a little imagination, be seen to initiate a successful feature film premise.’

The final result is spectacular. What did the studio make of it?

‘The WW trailer brought me a wonderful series of meetings with execs at Warner Brothers, it would be a dream come true to work with them, but I believe I am going to have to deliver a more solid reason for them to bank on me as a director of a studio picture.’ He then adds cryptically, ‘I am working on that aspect as we speak.’

Interestingly, it transpires that the actress playing Jesse's Wonder Woman was a good choice, too. ‘Nina is repped by Warners Records, they saw our short was doing well and put it on their Youtube channel.’ 

Below: Great profile shot of Nina Bergman as Wonder Woman.

Indeed, Nina confirmed to FUTURE-ROCKER that ‘it was an incredible opportunity to work on Wonder Woman with Jesse.’ ( Scroll down to the end of this edition for more info on Nina ).

Sounds like a nice bit of synergy for all concerned. What does Jesse think of Sam Balcomb's Wonder Woman, played by Rileah Vanderbilt?  ( see clip, below ).

‘I like it, the visuals are beautiful, ’ he enthuses.

Below: The second Wonder Woman fan clip of 2013 ( dir. Sam Balcomb )

Below: Wonder Woman 2013, as played by Rileah Vanderbilt ( dir. Sam Balcombe ).

How lucky for Warner Brothers. While they dither in a creative limbo, energetic and talented film-makers are producing movie prototypes for them, creating huge viral publicity in the process - and all completely for free! Warners should fire their publicity departments.

DC is now ten years behind Marvel in terms of getting characters successfully to the screen. One of the reasons could be that Marvel’s characters more readily translate for a modern sensibility, birthed, as they were, during the 1960’s counter-culture. The earliest geeks and hipsters found themselves amused by Stan Lee’s smart-mouthed dialogue, dazzled by the psychedelic visuals of master artists like Ditko, Kirby and Steranko, and thus the characters’ spirit has remained intact ever since.

Unfortunately, the longer Warners/DC wait, the more pressure there is to deliver a massive hit. No executive wants to go down in history as the guy that killed the Wonder Woman franchise, so you can see why the studio doesn’t want to put itself through the pain of another Superman-style reboot. Maybe to play safe, they should introduce her in a team-up context, as with Ben Affleck’s Batman, in the Man of Steel sequel.

Ultimately, like their super-strong heroine, Warner Brothers need to man-up - and show Marvel how it’s done.