Re: Jennifer Love Hewitt obsessed with being Wonder Woman
KalElFan
Joss Whedon was once tapped to write and direct WW. There
was a web site that posted a detailed review of his script, and it
sounded like it would have been quite good. When he left the
project he "joked" according to some, about who he would've
wanted to cast. But his comments were at the end of a farewell
to the project kind of post. Though the post contained humor,
there was no indication that his choice, in context, was a joke.
In any case, he aced it at the time -- Cobie Smulders.
http://www.imdb.com/media/rm4137653248/nm1130627
http://www.imdb.com/media/rm1992334080/nm1130627
http://www.imdb.com/media/rm3137116160/nm1130627
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1130627/bio
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1130627/
Before How I Met Your Mother, she guest starred in an
early Smallville episode, playing a one-night stand of the
billionaire Lex Luthor. Her character ended up being the
villain, having set Lex up because she'd scorned him in
the past. There was a scene at the beginning, a formal
party, where she looked every bit a goddess and caught
Lex's eye.
Her bio has her 28 years old, 5'8", athletic, and the first
three photo links above also make the case for both WW
and Diana. She looks a bit like a young Lynda Carter,
and would be an outstanding choice if and when Warners
ever gets this project off the ground.
T987654321
BreadW...@fractious.net
> Wonder Woman would be a HUGE money maker, yet it never gets made.
Not necessarily. If it gets made and it gets made *badly*, it
not only loses money but becomes an embarassment and makes it
harder to make other things in the future. It's too high
profile and they can't afford to screw it up.
So if there's any fear of screwing it up, it won't get made.
Sometimes they really land it - Spiderman, for example.
Sometimes, you get Elektra.
Superman Returns, anyone?
Ang Lee's Hulk?
Meanwhile, this conversation started with Jennifer Love Hewitt
apparently hoping to be playing Wonder Woman. Seriously. If
that conversation can even be had, there's no hope for the movie
to be decent.
(then again, when I first heard that Michael Keaton was going to
play Batman, I laughed pretty hard. And then it turned out that
he was vastly better at it than the next several guys who tried)
--
Plain Bread alone for e-mail, thanks. The rest gets trashed.
lorinc...@yahoo.com
I think JLH might actually be a decent Wonder Woman. I certainly like
that she's a chesty brunette (which WW MUST be). However, being in
her 30's is a put off in modern day, youth obsessed Hollywood.
They're thinking multiple sequels which might put her in her (GASP!)
40's. I also don't think she's very tall, which is likely also goes
against her playing an amazon.
-beaumon
BreadW...@fractious.net
> > Meanwhile, this conversation started with Jennifer Love Hewitt
> > apparently hoping to be playing Wonder Woman. �Seriously. �If
> > that conversation can even be had, there's no hope for the movie
> > to be decent.
> I think JLH might actually be a decent Wonder Woman. I certainly like
> that she's a chesty brunette (which WW MUST be). However, being in
I don't agree that she needs to be chesty. Brunette, perhaps.
Tall might help if only for making her appear more authoritative,
though even that's not completely necessary if she's athletic
enough.
And in fact, this last - the "athletic enough" - likely means
NOT too chesty and knocks a good number of women out of the
possible running.
Frankly, I think Summer Glau would even be able to do a great
job at this, especially if it's a more modern, darker twist
on WW.
The last thing we need is to revisit the cheesy 70s. Lynda
Carter and the campiness of that would be a complete flop (and
I'd have no interest in it, for sure).
And we can do without the invisible airplane, too, while
we're at it. Ugh.
The wikipedia page has some interesting background on the
character which I wasn't aware of, as well as some notes
about the unfortunate path through Hollywood that she's
busy taking now. And it lists a bunch of additional women
who've apparently been considered for the role. Of the
women listed there, the only one which seemed interesting
to me was the easy choice, Lucy Lawless. The rest just
seemed like a joke, even Angelina.
Apparently Lawless expressed interest in doing it if the
character were portrayed as a "flawed hero". I'd hate to
see it as anything but that.
Ted Nolan <tednolan>
Lawless *has* played the role:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0902272/
--
------
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..
Wingnut
> Frankly, I think Summer Glau would even be able to do a great job at
> this, especially if it's a more modern, darker twist on WW.
Summer Glau? You have GOT to be kidding me. Smallish, for starters. Then
there's the minor matter of her destroying anything she stars in. TV
shows? Canceled within a season or two. Movies? Bomb. (Serenity. Domestic
gross $25.5 million, budget $39,000,000; two possible sequels never made.
You do the math.)
If you want a successful, multi-sequel multi-gigabux Wonder Woman
franchise, then please, for the love of God, do NOT cast Summer Glau in
it in *any* role, and double especially not in the starring one.
> Of the women listed there, the only one which seemed interesting to me
> was the easy choice, Lucy Lawless. The rest just seemed like a joke,
> even Angelina.
Lucy Lawless or whoever played Gabrielle (the latter with hair dye): more
good choices. Angelina, if by that you mean Jolie, er ... only if there's
such a thing as lip-reduction surgery and she still has the bod and
athletic physique she had for the Tomb Raider duology.
grinningdemon
>lorinc...@yahoo.com writes:
>> On Jun 11, 7:40�pm, BreadWithS...@fractious.net wrote:
>
>> > Meanwhile, this conversation started with Jennifer Love Hewitt
>> > apparently hoping to be playing Wonder Woman. �Seriously. �If
>> > that conversation can even be had, there's no hope for the movie
>> > to be decent.
>
>> I think JLH might actually be a decent Wonder Woman. I certainly like
>> that she's a chesty brunette (which WW MUST be). However, being in
>
>I don't agree that she needs to be chesty. Brunette, perhaps.
>Tall might help if only for making her appear more authoritative,
>though even that's not completely necessary if she's athletic
>enough.
On this, we're going to have to disagree...WW, in many ways, is
supposed to represent the ideal womanly physique...yes she needs to be
athletic but that needs to be balanced against voluptuousness...too
far either way and an actress just wouldn't be able to fit the role,
in my opinion...it's a hard balance to strike which makes casting
rather difficult here...JLH has the curves but I really can't see her
in any kind of action role...Summer Glau has the athletic presence but
she could never properly fill out the costume.
>And in fact, this last - the "athletic enough" - likely means
>NOT too chesty and knocks a good number of women out of the
>possible running.
>
>Frankly, I think Summer Glau would even be able to do a great
>job at this, especially if it's a more modern, darker twist
>on WW.
>
>The last thing we need is to revisit the cheesy 70s. Lynda
>Carter and the campiness of that would be a complete flop (and
>I'd have no interest in it, for sure).
The campiness of the 70s series had absolutely NOTHING to do with
Lynda Carter's appearance or performance...as far as I'm concerned,
that was perfect casting (same way I feel about Chris Reeve as
Superman)...I doubt they can top that.
>And we can do without the invisible airplane, too, while
>we're at it. Ugh.
Agreed...I've never liked that aspect and would like to see it dropped
from the comics as well (as it has been from time to
time)...unfortunately, DC is on a major Silver Age kick at the moment
(they've actually brought back a lot of the cheesier aspects of the
character that had been dropped in recent times) so I'm not likely to
get my wish.
>The wikipedia page has some interesting background on the
>character which I wasn't aware of, as well as some notes
>about the unfortunate path through Hollywood that she's
>busy taking now. And it lists a bunch of additional women
>who've apparently been considered for the role. Of the
>women listed there, the only one which seemed interesting
>to me was the easy choice, Lucy Lawless. The rest just
>seemed like a joke, even Angelina.
>
>Apparently Lawless expressed interest in doing it if the
>character were portrayed as a "flawed hero". I'd hate to
>see it as anything but that.
She voiced WW in one of the animated movies...and she might have been
a good choice 10 or 15 years ago but she's a bit long in the tooth for
the role at this point.
Of all the suggestions I've seen in this thread, the chick from "How I
Met Your Mother" seems like the best fit so far...she has the look and
seems athletic enough to pull it off...and she also isn't a huge star
or household name which is a plus when it comes to casting iconic
characters like this...it should be about Wonder Woman...not some big
star like Angelina Jolie in a WW costume (though I wouldn't mind
seeing some photos of that).
Thanatos
> And we can do without the invisible airplane, too, while
> we're at it.
I always wondered what the point of an invisible plane was when you
could see Wonder Woman inside it. Just look for the chick zipping
through the air and you've found the plane.
grinningdemon
Made even more pointless once she could fly on her own.
Greg Goss
Built around a General Products hull?
--
Tomorrow is today already.
Greg Goss, 1989-01-27
plausible prose man
> Wonder Woman would be a HUGE money maker,
Coincidentally enough, Jennifer Love Hewitt has a huge money maker.
> yet it never gets made.
You're on your own for that one, kid.
plausible prose man
wrote:
> On 11 Jun 2010 23:39:26 -0400, BreadWithS...@fractious.net wrote:
> >The last thing we need is to revisit the cheesy 70s. Lynda
> >Carter and the campiness of that would be a complete flop (and
> >I'd have no interest in it, for sure).
>
> The campiness of the 70s series had absolutely NOTHING to do with
> Lynda Carter's appearance or performance.
I don't totally agree with that, as Lynda Carter, while certainly
statuesque, didn't really convey athleticism. She has virtually no
visible muscle tone and runs like a girl.
>..as far as I'm concerned,
> that was perfect casting (same way I feel about Chris Reeve as
> Superman)...I doubt they can top that.
I'd like to see someone who is brunette and even sort of Greek
looking, at least 5'8, and looks like she could bench press a hundred
or so pounds, do twenty pushups without stopping, and run a mile in
under seven minutes. Giant knockers a plus.
> >And we can do without the invisible airplane, too, while
> >we're at it. Ugh.
I would like to see the Amazonian training outfits, the mask, and a
couple scenes of slow-motion horseback riding.
plausible prose man
> In article <yobd3vwly1d....@panix1.panix.com>,
>
> BreadWithS...@fractious.net wrote:
> > And we can do without the invisible airplane, too, while
> > we're at it.
>
> I always wondered what the point of an invisible plane was when you
> could see Wonder Woman inside it. Just look for the chick zipping
> through the air and you've found the plane.
And how does she find it when it's parked on the runway? Does she just
walk around until she bumps into it?
David Johnston
She's in telepathic communication with it through her headband or
something. I don't remember the details but I do know it would come
when she called it.
Obveeus
"David Johnston" <da...@block.net> wrote in message
news:8g3716hr4ut6hgll4...@4ax.com...
You are all making a good case for why Wonder Woman should NOT be made into
a movie.
trotsky
Thanny, did you spend 40-plus years on the planet figuring out that
comic books aren't real?
Merrick Baldelli
>T987654321 <qwrt...@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Wonder Woman would be a HUGE money maker, yet it never gets made.
>
>Not necessarily. If it gets made and it gets made *badly*, it
>not only loses money but becomes an embarassment and makes it
>harder to make other things in the future. It's too high
>profile and they can't afford to screw it up.
>
>So if there's any fear of screwing it up, it won't get made.
>
>Sometimes they really land it - Spiderman, for example.
>
>Sometimes, you get Elektra.
>Superman Returns, anyone?
>Ang Lee's Hulk?
The original Punisher with Dolph Lundgren?
Captain America?
... god...
DAREDEVIL!?
>Meanwhile, this conversation started with Jennifer Love Hewitt
>apparently hoping to be playing Wonder Woman. Seriously. If
>that conversation can even be had, there's no hope for the movie
>to be decent.
She could pull parts of it off without problem. I mean she's
got the hair... And maybe the right padding.. Thing is though, she's
too short. 5'2 1/2"? Please. That would be Wonder Dwarf.
--
-=-=-/ )=*=-='=-.-'-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
_( (_ , '_ * . Merrick Baldelli
(((\ \> /_1 `
(\\\\ \_/ /
-=-\ /-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
\ _/ Who are these folks and why have they
/ / stopped taking their medication?
- Captain Infinity
Merrick Baldelli
<George...@aol.com> wrote:
> I don't totally agree with that, as Lynda Carter, while certainly
>statuesque, didn't really convey athleticism. She has virtually no
>visible muscle tone and runs like a girl.
As a gay man, I'm not having any problem with this. If I
wanted my women to run like men, I'd look at a man running instead.
>>..as far as I'm concerned,
>> that was perfect casting (same way I feel about Chris Reeve as
>> Superman)...I doubt they can top that.
>
> I'd like to see someone who is brunette and even sort of Greek
>looking, at least 5'8, and looks like she could bench press a hundred
>or so pounds, do twenty pushups without stopping, and run a mile in
>under seven minutes. Giant knockers a plus.
You mean like one of those grotesque female body builders? No
thank you. Again, gay man.. if I want that sort of pretty, I'll
watch Hercules (and no, not Sorbocles either).
David Johnston
The invisible plane was retired from the comics over 20 years ago. It
would not be in a new Wonder Woman movie.
Obveeus
"David Johnston" <da...@block.net> wrote:
Will they still have the magic rope?
Side note: if someone is going to make Wonder Woman into a movie, they
should ask themselves: 'what are the successful female super hero movies?'
Kill Bill? Lara Croft? Underworld? None of those are classic 'female
superhero' stuff, but they are maybe the only successful big screen attempts
at female leads in 'macho' roles.
KalElFan
news:ur3616ln868kofg97...@4ax.com...
> The campiness of the 70s series had absolutely NOTHING to do with
> Lynda Carter's appearance or performance...as far as I'm concerned,
> that was perfect casting (same way I feel about Chris Reeve as
> Superman)...I doubt they can top that.
I agree that's their ideal look, but the campy stuff has to be
avoided like the plague with this movie. Reeve was great
playing it straight the first two movies, though it was a bit
tenuous keeping his part of the story insulated from Lex
and his henchpersons and evil plan for example. But then
in the third movie it was sayonara from the get-go, with the
opening having Superman as a prop for the chain reaction
slapstick and flaming penguins and the like, and then as if
to top that Richard Pryor.
None of that negates Reeve's look and playing of the role
being as close to ideal as it gets though. Those problems
or tenuous moments were script issues.
With Lynda Carter, I'll concede the point made elsewhere
about her apparent lack of athleticism, the way she moved
or ran and so on not being ideal. Smulders started out as
a model. There are some IMDb shots there that make her
look more athletic than Lynda Carter probably ever did.
She played several sports in school it says in her bio (her
sister made some legitimate soccer team), and when you
add that to the fact it's a movie and not a TV series from
35 years ago WW's movements are going to look a lot
better on screen.
KalElFan
news:76ca08f1-b4dd-4645...@y18g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
> Wonder Woman would be a HUGE money maker, yet it never gets made.
It's potentially a billion-dollar grossing film worldwide, but only if
they nailed it just right and that's a tall order. The script and the
casting of the lead are the two biggest keys, in that order with the
first being more important than the second. If Warners gets both
of those they can easily get a competent director to handle it.
Spider-Man is a good paradigm to look towards, and perhaps
Green Lantern if the detailed script review I read fairly reflects
how it'll play on screen. It can have some humor and visual gags
and so on, but it has to be played straight-ahead, no camp, and
ideally have a broad, even epic scope to it. By that I mean the
origin story and on through has a big stakes kind of feel about
it, especially for the hero personally such that the audience is
rooting for him/her. But also for the city/country/world, which
means decent threat(s) and/or villain(s). Not too far over the
top ones but "real" enough, within the context of the genre and
the story, again so the audience is engaged and interested in
what's going on.
It has to have a Silver Age basis -- none of the modern comic
crap -- but only pay a bit of homage to the silliness of that era.
This is doable. You take the original hero, rather than some
modern bastardization where he/she goes psycho and destroys
the world, or has the equivalent of Hitler as her father in the
backstory, or whatever other utter bullshit that's selling 20K
copies a month and/or spawns mega-duds at the box office.
But you don't have GL five minutes in uttering the line "Oh,
no! Yellow! My only weakness! Drat!"
Maybe at some point in the movie the villain uses a yellow
laser of some sort, as one part of the superweapon in his
plan to neutralize GL's ring or whatnot. And in WW maybe
there is a plane that's transporting Diana in the origin story,
and it activates a cloaking device at some point. It can
become a joke or a ten-second nod to something Silver-
Age iconic, but then things move right along and the movie
doesn't get buried in the camp of it.
The first part of Green Lantern, the origin story, looks like it
will play great on screen and immediately have the audience
hooked. Alien GL and super-threat do battle that ends on
Earth. The alien GL dies in battle, apparently defeating the
threat, but not before passing on the GL ring and its related
responsibilities to Earth test pilot Hal Jordan. And the threat
lingers...
WW needs an opening like that conceptually, though the
details of her origin story and whatever threat(s)/villain(s)
will obviously vary. The audience has to be hooked in the
first ten minutes though, and eager to continue the ride as
the first half hour progresses. Something like Catwoman
had no chance of meeting this or the other criteria, nor
Elektra and many other comic book heroes. But GL
and WW both do I think.
Mac Breck
> On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 05:55:20 -0700 (PDT), plausible prose man
> <George...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>> I don't totally agree with that, as Lynda Carter, while certainly
>> statuesque, didn't really convey athleticism. She has virtually no
>> visible muscle tone and runs like a girl.
>
> As a gay man, I'm not having any problem with this. If I
> wanted my women to run like men, I'd look at a man running instead.
>
>>> ..as far as I'm concerned,
>>> that was perfect casting (same way I feel about Chris Reeve as
>>> Superman)...I doubt they can top that.
>>
>> I'd like to see someone who is brunette and even sort of Greek
>> looking, at least 5'8, and looks like she could bench press a hundred
>> or so pounds, do twenty pushups without stopping, and run a mile in
>> under seven minutes. Giant knockers a plus.
>
> You mean like one of those grotesque female body builders? No
> thank you. Again, gay man.. if I want that sort of pretty, I'll
> watch Hercules (and no, not Sorbocles either).
No, somebody like Gabby Reece, only more of a brunette. An amazon
should be tall & athletic, but not a body builder type, musculature more
for practical use as a female warrior, not exaggerated for show. What
we have with Wonder Woman is more of a morph between an amazon and a
Betty Page pin-up model. Giant knockers on an amazon is kind of
ridiculous. See:
http://people.uncw.edu/deagona/amaz/breast1.htm
--
Mac Breck (KoshN)
-------------------------------
"Babylon 5: Crusade" (1999) - "War Zone"
Galen (to Gideon): "I've been penalized before for helping other
people. I've been trying to decide whether or not I should risk it
again."
grinningdemon
Ridiculous or not...that's the character...and that's why she's so
hard to cast well.
grinningdemon
wrote:
The invisible plane is back as of the current comics series (along
with the idiotic spin to change into her costume)...so don't be so
sure it wouldn't be in the movie.
Ted Nolan <tednolan>
Anim8rFSK
grinningdemon <grinni...@austin.rr.com> wrote:
> The invisible plane is back as of the current comics series (along
> with the idiotic spin to change into her costume)
She's doing that in the comics??? I thought that was strictly a Lynda
Carter thing.
--
TOM SWIFT 100th Anniversary convention! July 16-18 2010, San Diego, CA
TS100 Convention site: http://www.TomSwiftEnterprises.com
TS100 Store: http://www.CafePress.com/TS100
TOM SWIFT INFO: http://www.tomswift.info
rwgibson13
> >>You are all making a good case for why Wonder Woman should NOT be made
> >>into
> >>a movie.
>
> > The invisible plane was retired from the comics over 20 years ago. It
> > would not be in a new Wonder Woman movie.
>
> Will they still have the magic rope?
>
> Side note: if someone is going to make Wonder Woman into a movie, they
> should ask themselves: 'what are the successful female super hero movies?'
>
> Kill Bill? Lara Croft? Underworld? None of those are classic 'female
> superhero' stuff, but they are maybe the only successful big screen attempts
> at female leads in 'macho' roles.
You know why? Bottom line, they all appealed to men. And the makers
of WW will have to find a way to do the same.
RWG (that's always been a sore spot with past "superhero" films
spotlighting female heroes IMO)
Unknown
"Anim8rFSK" <ANIM...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:ANIM8Rfsk-790B9...@news.dc1.easynews.com...
> In article <hcg716t3tvvvqkc1d...@4ax.com>,
> grinningdemon <grinni...@austin.rr.com> wrote:
>
>> The invisible plane is back as of the current comics series (along
>> with the idiotic spin to change into her costume)
>
> She's doing that in the comics??? I thought that was strictly a Lynda
> Carter thing.
No, the writers had her doing it in the comics when the show was on. It has
been done off and on in the comics ever since.
Dimensional Traveler
> On 11 Jun 2010 20:40:32 -0400, BreadW...@fractious.net wrote:
>
>> T987654321<qwrt...@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> Wonder Woman would be a HUGE money maker, yet it never gets made.
>>
>> Not necessarily. If it gets made and it gets made *badly*, it
>> not only loses money but becomes an embarassment and makes it
>> harder to make other things in the future. It's too high
>> profile and they can't afford to screw it up.
>>
>> So if there's any fear of screwing it up, it won't get made.
>>
>> Sometimes they really land it - Spiderman, for example.
>>
>> Sometimes, you get Elektra.
>> Superman Returns, anyone?
>> Ang Lee's Hulk?
>
> The original Punisher with Dolph Lundgren?
> Captain America?
>
> ... god...
>
> DAREDEVIL!?
>
>> Meanwhile, this conversation started with Jennifer Love Hewitt
>> apparently hoping to be playing Wonder Woman. Seriously. If
>> that conversation can even be had, there's no hope for the movie
>> to be decent.
>
> She could pull parts of it off without problem. I mean she's
> got the hair... And maybe the right padding.. Thing is though, she's
> too short. 5'2 1/2"? Please. That would be Wonder Dwarf.
>
to pull off being the lead in an action movie. Better to claim you're
hiring JLH, hiring a stuntwoman to double for JLH and then just make the
stuntwoman the lead.
--
"There's something that doesn't make sense. Let's go and poke it with a
stick."
plausible prose man
> Merrick Baldelli wrote:
> > On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 05:55:20 -0700 (PDT), plausible prose man
> > <Georgefha...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >> I don't totally agree with that, as Lynda Carter, while certainly
> >> statuesque, didn't really convey athleticism. She has virtually no
> >> visible muscle tone and runs like a girl.
>
> > As a gay man, I'm not having any problem with this. If I
> > wanted my women to run like men, I'd look at a man running instead.
>
> >>> ..as far as I'm concerned,
> >>> that was perfect casting (same way I feel about Chris Reeve as
> >>> Superman)...I doubt they can top that.
>
> >> I'd like to see someone who is brunette and even sort of Greek
> >> looking, at least 5'8, and looks like she could bench press a hundred
> >> or so pounds, do twenty pushups without stopping, and run a mile in
> >> under seven minutes. Giant knockers a plus.
>
> > You mean like one of those grotesque female body builders? No
> > thank you. Again, gay man.. if I want that sort of pretty, I'll
> > watch Hercules (and no, not Sorbocles either).
>
> No, somebody like Gabby Reece, only more of a brunette.
Right, with giant knockers. Maybe Rachel Macleish, only not as old,
or Lisa Lyon, only not as old and a lot taller.
> An amazon
> should be tall & athletic, but not a body builder type, musculature more
> for practical use as a female warrior, not exaggerated for show.
Or at least not so manly-looking.
> What
> we have with Wonder Woman is more of a morph between an amazon and a
> Betty Page pin-up model.
In other words, the perfect woman.
> Giant knockers on an amazon is kind of
> ridiculous.
So are bulletproof bracelets and clay statues come to life and magic
lassos that compell you to tell the truth.
> See:
>
> http://people.uncw.edu/deagona/amaz/breast1.htm
>
> --
> Mac Breck (KoshN)
> -------------------------------
> "Babylon 5: Crusade" (1999) - "War Zone"
> Galen (to Gideon): "I've been penalized before for helping other
> people. I've been trying to decide whether or not I should risk it
> again."- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Lilith
But can she actually fly or is she still just gliding on air currents?
Not a great talent for getting from here to Paradise Island (or even
DisneyWorld) at a reasonable pace.
--
Lilith
plausible prose man
Also, there should be a lot of bondage and spanking, like in the
comics. Seriously, I have this treasury sized "secret origins of
supervillains" comic, and the WW story has the Cheetah in it. It
starts with Wonder Woman escaping from a tank full of water as part of
a charity exhibition, she's wrapped in chains and a leather hood is
placed over her head, then they lower her into the tank. Except that
scamp, Priscilla Rich, tied Diana's ankles with her magic lasso, so
she has to bend practically double at the waist, bringing her feet up
to her ears, and flex her muscles to escape. When she sees Diana is
safe, Ms. Rich embraces her and kisses her. Later, as Cheetah has
framed an innocent man, Wonder Woman surrenders to the police and says
"oh, I'd love to wear handcuffs."
grinningdemon
wrote:
>In article <hcg716t3tvvvqkc1d...@4ax.com>,
> grinningdemon <grinni...@austin.rr.com> wrote:
>
>> The invisible plane is back as of the current comics series (along
>> with the idiotic spin to change into her costume)
>
>She's doing that in the comics??? I thought that was strictly a Lynda
>Carter thing.
The current thinking at DCseems to be any dumb ass, cheesy thing from
the Silver Age that was abandoned decades ago should be brought back
to prominence.
grinningdemon
wrote:
>On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 02:22:06 -0500, grinningdemon
><grinni...@austin.rr.com> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 02:51:06 -0400, Thanatos <atr...@mac.com> wrote:
>>
>>>In article <yobd3vw...@panix1.panix.com>,
>>> BreadW...@fractious.net wrote:
>>>
>>>> And we can do without the invisible airplane, too, while
>>>> we're at it.
>>>
>>>I always wondered what the point of an invisible plane was when you
>>>could see Wonder Woman inside it. Just look for the chick zipping
>>>through the air and you've found the plane.
>>
>>Made even more pointless once she could fly on her own.
>
>But can she actually fly or is she still just gliding on air currents?
>Not a great talent for getting from here to Paradise Island (or even
>DisneyWorld) at a reasonable pace.
I'm pretty sure standard flight since the reboot in the 80s.
Lilith
<grinni...@austin.rr.com> wrote:
>On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 14:54:33 -0500, Lilith <lili...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 02:22:06 -0500, grinningdemon
>><grinni...@austin.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 02:51:06 -0400, Thanatos <atr...@mac.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>In article <yobd3vw...@panix1.panix.com>,
>>>> BreadW...@fractious.net wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> And we can do without the invisible airplane, too, while
>>>>> we're at it.
>>>>
>>>>I always wondered what the point of an invisible plane was when you
>>>>could see Wonder Woman inside it. Just look for the chick zipping
>>>>through the air and you've found the plane.
>>>
>>>Made even more pointless once she could fly on her own.
>>
>>But can she actually fly or is she still just gliding on air currents?
>>Not a great talent for getting from here to Paradise Island (or even
>>DisneyWorld) at a reasonable pace.
>
>I'm pretty sure standard flight since the reboot in the 80s.
One of the gifts from the gods I presume?
--
Lilith
Duggy
> Frankly, I think Summer Glau would even be able to do a great
> job at this, especially if it's a more modern, darker twist
> on WW.
Can she play a character that's not not-completely-there. That's all
I've seen her play - and quite well - but that's not Wonder Woman.
People see hung up on look and not whether they can play the part.
===
= DUG.
===
rwa2play, The Northern Lariat
>
> I agree that's their ideal look, but the campy stuff has to be
> avoided like the plague with this movie. Reeve was great
> playing it straight the first two movies, though it was a bit
> tenuous keeping his part of the story insulated from Lex
> and his henchpersons and evil plan for example. But then
> in the third movie it was sayonara from the get-go, with the
> opening having Superman as a prop for the chain reaction
> slapstick and flaming penguins and the like, and then as if
> to top that Richard Pryor.
Not to get to far from the topic, but that's why I couldn't understand
why they put Brandon Routh in that costume. With Chris Reeve, it looked
a natural. The way they designed the costume for Routh, it looked like
he was wearing a Halloween outfit.
--
rwa2play, The Northern Lariat
Barely functional, partially reasonable and totally lazy.
The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its
limits. -- Albert Einstein
Madness is rare in individuals -- but in groups, parties, nations, and
ages it is the rule. -- Nietzsche
grinningdemon
wrote:
>On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 15:45:18 -0500, grinningdemon
><grinni...@austin.rr.com> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 14:54:33 -0500, Lilith <lili...@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 02:22:06 -0500, grinningdemon
>>><grinni...@austin.rr.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 02:51:06 -0400, Thanatos <atr...@mac.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>In article <yobd3vw...@panix1.panix.com>,
>>>>> BreadW...@fractious.net wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> And we can do without the invisible airplane, too, while
>>>>>> we're at it.
>>>>>
>>>>>I always wondered what the point of an invisible plane was when you
>>>>>could see Wonder Woman inside it. Just look for the chick zipping
>>>>>through the air and you've found the plane.
>>>>
>>>>Made even more pointless once she could fly on her own.
>>>
>>>But can she actually fly or is she still just gliding on air currents?
>>>Not a great talent for getting from here to Paradise Island (or even
>>>DisneyWorld) at a reasonable pace.
>>
>>I'm pretty sure standard flight since the reboot in the 80s.
>
>One of the gifts from the gods I presume?
Just like all her powers...but don't ask me which god it came from.
Greg Goss
>On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 14:54:33 -0500, Lilith <lili...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 02:22:06 -0500, grinningdemon
>><grinni...@austin.rr.com> wrote:
>>>Made even more pointless once she could fly on her own.
>>
>>But can she actually fly or is she still just gliding on air currents?
>>Not a great talent for getting from here to Paradise Island (or even
>>DisneyWorld) at a reasonable pace.
>
>I'm pretty sure standard flight since the reboot in the 80s.
Why would they add flight to WW? I've been away from a lot of comics
since the "silver age", but turning Wonder Woman into Superman doesn't
make a lot of sense.
--
Tomorrow is today already.
Greg Goss, 1989-01-27
Steven L.
"lorinc...@yahoo.com" <lorinc...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:7b2502b1-f9fd-4c46...@d37g2000yqm.googlegroups.com:
> On Jun 11, 7:40 pm, BreadWithS...@fractious.net wrote:
> > T987654321 <qwrtz...@gmail.com> writes:
> > > Wonder Woman would be a HUGE money maker, yet it never gets made.
> >
> > Not necessarily. If it gets made and it gets made *badly*, it
> > not only loses money but becomes an embarassment and makes it
> > harder to make other things in the future. It's too high
> > profile and they can't afford to screw it up.
> >
> > So if there's any fear of screwing it up, it won't get made.
> >
> > Sometimes they really land it - Spiderman, for example.
> >
> > Sometimes, you get Elektra.
> > Superman Returns, anyone?
> > Ang Lee's Hulk?
> >
> > Meanwhile, this conversation started with Jennifer Love Hewitt
> > apparently hoping to be playing Wonder Woman. Seriously. If
> > that conversation can even be had, there's no hope for the movie
> > to be decent.
> >
> > (then again, when I first heard that Michael Keaton was going to
> > play Batman, I laughed pretty hard. And then it turned out that
> > he was vastly better at it than the next several guys who tried)
> >
> > --
> > Plain Bread alone for e-mail, thanks. The rest gets trashed.
>
> I think JLH might actually be a decent Wonder Woman. I certainly like
> that she's a chesty brunette (which WW MUST be).
The actress doesn't have to be busty.
A padded bra is a relatively inexpensive special effect.
Angelina Jolie wore a tremendous amount of bust padding to play Lara
Croft.
If the height difference between WW and the actress playing her isn't
that great, it can be corrected with lifts too.
-- Steven L.
grinningdemon
"Riding wind currents" essentially let her fly anyway so what
difference does it make? It's a hell of a lot better than a
ridiculous invisable jet.
Wingnut
> I'd like to see someone who is brunette and even sort of Greek
> looking, at least 5'8, and looks like she could bench press a hundred
> or so pounds, do twenty pushups without stopping, and run a mile in
> under seven minutes. Giant knockers a plus.
Melina Kanakaredes.
Unknown
"Lilith" <lili...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:i8081653bnfjomfeu...@4ax.com...
Yeah, George Perez. (I think it was Mercury in the comic.)
BreadW...@fractious.net
> On Jun 12, 1:39 pm, BreadWithS...@fractious.net wrote:
> > Frankly, I think Summer Glau would even be able to do a great
> > job at this, especially if it's a more modern, darker twist
> > on WW.
>
> Can she play a character that's not not-completely-there. That's all
> I've seen her play - and quite well - but that's not Wonder Woman.
Actually, I was picturing a really dark, not-completely-there version
of Wonder Woman. Expelled from her insular island and thrust, young
and inexperienced but super-powered into the modern world. Maybe
more than a bit freaked out about it, but trying to make sense and
do the right thing.
> People see hung up on look and not whether they can play the part.
My suggestion of Summer Glau was just as much on her playing the
part as on her appearance. She's graceful, athletic, and can
act in my post-modern vision of WW just fine. Doesn't seem much
more of a stretch than Heath Ledger's Joker.
plausible prose man
>
> >>On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 14:54:33 -0500, Lilith <lilith...@gmail.com>
> >>wrote:
>
> >>>On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 02:22:06 -0500, grinningdemon
> >>><grinningde...@austin.rr.com> wrote:
> >>>>Made even more pointless once she could fly on her own.
>
> >>>But can she actually fly or is she still just gliding on air currents?
> >>>Not a great talent for getting from here to Paradise Island (or even
> >>>DisneyWorld) at a reasonable pace.
>
> >>I'm pretty sure standard flight since the reboot in the 80s.
>
> >Why would they add flight to WW? I've been away from a lot of comics
> >since the "silver age", but turning Wonder Woman into Superman doesn't
> >make a lot of sense.
>
> "Riding wind currents" essentially let her fly anyway so what
> difference does it make? It's a hell of a lot better than a
What if it shoots missles? That would be pretty cool.
plausible prose man
> On Jun 12, 1:39 pm, BreadWithS...@fractious.net wrote:
>
> > Frankly, I think Summer Glau would even be able to do a great
> > job at this, especially if it's a more modern, darker twist
> > on WW.
>
> Can she play a character that's not not-completely-there. That's all
> I've seen her play - and quite well - but that's not Wonder Woman.
I don't really have a firm grasp on Wonder Woman's personality (and I
bet in this I differ little from any five DC writers or editors) such
that I can tell you what kind of characterization an actress would
have to bring to the part to sell WW to the audience.
> People see hung up on look
If you look the part, you're most of the way there. I mean, it's a
Wonder Woman movie, not Lady MacBeth.
>and not whether they can play the part.
I'm not sure how much "acting" as we usually use the term Wonder
Woman really calls for, and I think someone too much from the
Stanislavsky-Method thing would really be lost in a part that's going
to be hard to internalize, compared to the stagy, scenery chewing hams
who modulate their voices, read their lines, and stand on their marks.
Dimensional Traveler
Too old. Looks good, yes, but still too old for this.
Anthony Buckland
"Wingnut" <wingnu...@hotmail.invalid> wrote in message
news:hv1ld0$a2e$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
Angelina Jolie performed credibly as the mother of
Alexander the Great; "sort of Greek looking" enough?
Duggy
> On Jun 12, 7:29 pm, Duggy <Paul.Dug...@jcu.edu.au> wrote:
>
> > On Jun 12, 1:39 pm, BreadWithS...@fractious.net wrote:
>
> > > Frankly, I think Summer Glau would even be able to do a great
> > > job at this, especially if it's a more modern, darker twist
> > > on WW.
> > Can she play a character that's not not-completely-there. That's all
> > I've seen her play - and quite well - but that's not Wonder Woman.
> I don't really have a firm grasp on Wonder Woman's personality (and I
> bet in this I differ little from any five DC writers or editors) such
> that I can tell you what kind of characterization an actress would
> have to bring to the part to sell WW to the audience.
Sure, but River Tamm, Cameron the Terminator & the girl with mental
problems in The 4400 are all very similar and all very not Wonder
Woman. Maybe Summer Glau can do something else, but I haven;t seen it
yet.
> > People see hung up on look
> If you look the part, you're most of the way there. I mean, it's a
> Wonder Woman movie, not Lady MacBeth.
That sort of thinking is how that cast - what's his name - in Superman
Returns.
Some acting ability is important. As is the ability to get the
character right.
> >and not whether they can play the part.
> I'm not sure how much "acting" as we usually use the term Wonder
> Woman really calls for, and I think someone too much from the
> Stanislavsky-Method thing would really be lost in a part that's going
> to be hard to internalize, compared to the stagy, scenery chewing hams
> who modulate their voices, read their lines, and stand on their marks.
Strawmen are great actors.
===
= DUG.
===
Duggy
> Actually, I was picturing a really dark, not-completely-there version
> of Wonder Woman.
I don't want to see your Wonder Woman film.
> Expelled from her insular island and thrust, young
> and inexperienced but super-powered into the modern world.
That's still not Summer Glau's characters.
> > People see hung up on look and not whether they can play the part.
> My suggestion of Summer Glau was just as much on her playing the
> part as on her appearance. She's graceful, athletic, and can
> act in my post-modern vision of WW just fine. Doesn't seem much
> more of a stretch than Heath Ledger's Joker.
Heath Ledger has played a wide range of roles.
Summer Glau has played kooky. Wonder Woman isn't kooky.
===
= DUG.
===
Duggy
<rwa2p...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 6/12/2010 11:22 AM, KalElFan wrote:
>
>
>
> > I agree that's their ideal look, but the campy stuff has to be
> > avoided like the plague with this movie. Reeve was great
> > playing it straight the first two movies, though it was a bit
> > tenuous keeping his part of the story insulated from Lex
> > and his henchpersons and evil plan for example. But then
> > in the third movie it was sayonara from the get-go, with the
> > opening having Superman as a prop for the chain reaction
> > slapstick and flaming penguins and the like, and then as if
> > to top that Richard Pryor.
>
> Not to get to far from the topic, but that's why I couldn't understand
> why they put Brandon Routh in that costume. With Chris Reeve, it looked
> a natural. The way they designed the costume for Routh, it looked like
> he was wearing a Halloween outfit.
Because he couldn't act. He was a guy posing in a Superman costume.
(Something he'd been paid for before.)
Reeve could act so it worked.
Heck, Dean Cain will never get an Academy Award but he can play the
part he was given.
There are still people stupid enough to think you don't need to be
able to act to play a Superhero.
===
= DUG.
===
BreadW...@fractious.net
> On Jun 13, 2:34 pm, BreadWithS...@fractious.net wrote:
> > Actually, I was picturing a really dark, not-completely-there version
> > of Wonder Woman.
>
> I don't want to see your Wonder Woman film.
That's okay. I don't want to see one which is anything like
the Lynda Carter stuff.
> > > People see hung up on look and not whether they can play the part.
> > My suggestion of Summer Glau was just as much on her playing the
> > part as on her appearance. She's graceful, athletic, and can
> > act in my post-modern vision of WW just fine. Doesn't seem much
> > more of a stretch than Heath Ledger's Joker.
>
> Heath Ledger has played a wide range of roles.
>
> Summer Glau has played kooky. Wonder Woman isn't kooky.
Did you see her on The Unit? I think she's more capable
than you're giving her credit for. Okay, she's no Heath Ledger.
But neither was The Joker anything like anything else he'd
ever done that I know of, either.
YKW
a961fd...@r5g2000prf.googlegroups.com:
> Sure, but River Tamm, Cameron the Terminator & the girl with mental
> problems in The 4400 are all very similar and all very not Wonder
> Woman. Maybe Summer Glau can do something else, but I haven;t seen it
> yet.
Even if she has the thesp chops to stretch, her build is disqualifying.
She's a waif. If they're looking for someone to play Jan Van Dyne in the
ANT-MAN and AVENGERS films, sign her up; if they're looking for someone
to convincingly toss cars (and people) around, keep looking.
--
------------------- ------------------------------------------------
|| E-mail: ykw2006 ||"The mystery of government is not how Washington||
|| -at-gmail-dot-com ||works but how to make it stop." -- P.J. O'Rourke||
|| ----------- || ------------------------------------ ||
||Replace "-at-" with|| Keeping Usenet Trouble-Free ||
|| "@" to respond. || Since 1998 ||
------------------- ------------------------------------------------
"It's not that I want to punish your success. [...]I think
when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody."
-- The One, 14 Oct 08
plausible prose man
> On Jun 13, 4:57 pm, plausible prose man <Georgefha...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jun 12, 7:29 pm, Duggy <Paul.Dug...@jcu.edu.au> wrote:
>
> > > On Jun 12, 1:39 pm, BreadWithS...@fractious.net wrote:
>
> > > > Frankly, I think Summer Glau would even be able to do a great
> > > > job at this, especially if it's a more modern, darker twist
> > > > on WW.
> > > Can she play a character that's not not-completely-there. That's all
> > > I've seen her play - and quite well - but that's not Wonder Woman.
> > I don't really have a firm grasp on Wonder Woman's personality (and I
> > bet in this I differ little from any five DC writers or editors) such
> > that I can tell you what kind of characterization an actress would
> > have to bring to the part to sell WW to the audience.
>
> Sure, but River Tamm, Cameron the Terminator & the girl with mental
> problems in The 4400 are all very similar and all very not Wonder
> Woman. Maybe Summer Glau can do something else, but I haven;t seen it
> yet.
Yeah, I will here admit I don't have much experience with Ms. Glau's
work, but I can certainly think of workable characterizations of
Wonder Woman that have a little crazy in them, or otherwise a dark
side. Maybe a little of the Zarda from the Max incarnation of Squadron
Supreme...and even the Wonder Woman from the Superfriends, voiced by
Shannon Farnon, always seemed mean and angry to me. (it was probably
the make up) That ancient Greek thing Wonder Woman comes from, that
involves a lot of codes of honor and oaths of fealty and divine
retribution and hubris and tragedy and vengence, compared to making
her Christopher Reeves' unassuming mid-western farmboy in a star-
spangled bathing suit.
> > > People see hung up on look
> > If you look the part, you're most of the way there. I mean, it's a
> > Wonder Woman movie, not Lady MacBeth.
>
> That sort of thinking is how that cast - what's his name - in Superman
> Returns.
See, no. Indeed, just the opposite is true here. Brandon Routh is a
pretty good actor, he really nails the part; it's Christopher Reeves
come back to life for you. The problem, for me at least, was he was
just physically all wrong for the part (and his rubber costume didn't
help any) He was built like a swimmer or underwear model, rather than
an NFL quarterback. So no matter how good a job he does with saying
"statistically speaking, it's still the safest way to travel," the eye
just rejects him as Superman.
> Some acting ability is important.
Perhaps, but only some, and even then of a rather specific sort.
Meryl Streep's a pretty good actress, I can't imagine her getting
"Hera help me!" out of her mouth with a straight face.
> As is the ability to get the
> character right.
Camera work and editing and a good script will take care of most of
that.
> > >and not whether they can play the part.
> > I'm not sure how much "acting" as we usually use the term Wonder
> > Woman really calls for, and I think someone too much from the
> > Stanislavsky-Method thing would really be lost in a part that's going
> > to be hard to internalize, compared to the stagy, scenery chewing hams
> > who modulate their voices, read their lines, and stand on their marks.
>
> Strawmen are great actors.
Where's the straw man, Duggy?
Anim8rFSK
<c11719da-9f44-4c61...@y4g2000yqy.googlegroups.com>,
plausible prose man <George...@aol.com> wrote:
> See, no. Indeed, just the opposite is true here. Brandon Routh is a
> pretty good actor
? He's an actor?
--
TOM SWIFT 100th Anniversary convention! July 16-18 2010, San Diego, CA
TS100 Convention site: http://www.TomSwiftEnterprises.com
TS100 Store: http://www.CafePress.com/TS100
TOM SWIFT INFO: http://www.tomswift.info
Ian J. Ball
> In article
> <c11719da-9f44-4c61-8e93-ef5577437...@y4g2000yqy.googlegroups.com>,
> plausible prose man <Georgefha...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > See, no. Indeed, just the opposite is true here. Brandon Routh is a
> > pretty good actor
>
> ? He's an actor?
You think he's bad now - you should have seem him when he got his
start on "One Life To Live"! He couldn't get through a *single* line
without flubbing it back then!!
Ian B
> On 11 Jun 2010 23:39:26 -0400, BreadW...@fractious.net wrote:
>
> The campiness of the 70s series had absolutely NOTHING to do with
> Lynda Carter's appearance or performance...as far as I'm concerned,
> that was perfect casting (same way I feel about Chris Reeve as
> Superman)...I doubt they can top that.
>
Absolutely. It's tragic that Carter never got to play it straight in the
kind of serious blockbuster that superhero movies are these days. But back
in the 70s, it couldn't be done any other way. She had the looks, the
presence, and the acting ability, but two decades too early.
Ian
YKW
news:4c15516e$0$2540$da0f...@news.zen.co.uk:
She certainly played it straight up for most of the ABC season; WW only
went camp after the network and situation switch.
Ron
> http://movies.msn.com/movies/article.aspx?news=504860>1=28101&&sile...
>
> Hewitt 'obsessed' with landing Wonder Woman role
>
> Jennifer Love Hewitt is fighting "hard" to land the coveted role of
> Wonder Woman on the big screen, confessing she is "obsessed" with
> playing the TV heroine.
>
> Hollywood stars Megan Fox, Eliza Dushku, Sandra Bullock and Beyonce
> Knowles have all been tipped to take over the role Lynda Carter made
> famous in the 1970s for Joss Whedon's big screen remake.
Can't believe they are *still* talking about making this movie.
The following is from 10-3-07
One week you're in and the next week you're out. Less than seven days
ago, fanboys were salivating at the thought of sexy Jessica Biel
harnessing the golden lasso and wearing the bulletproof bracelets of
iconic superhero Wonder Woman in the new action-adventure pic "Justice
League." Sadly, it ain't happening. Entertainment Weekly reported on
Friday that the former "7th Heaven" star, whose budding film career
has included roles in "The Illusionist" (wow, she can act!), "Stealth"
and "I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry," has declined the invitation
to step into Lynda Carter's boots.
For comic-book geeks who see "League" as the ultimate superhero
flick,there is good news and bad news about this. The good news is
that,unlike J.J. Abrams' new "Star Trek" movie, which seems to be
casting the cheapest actors possible (see the recent announcement of
Zoe Saldana as Uhura), Warner Bros. and director George Miller are
actually approaching some bankable names for "League." The bad news is
that Biel, who isn't necessarily on a "Meryl Streep" career path,
didn't think it was enough of a slam dunk to say "yes." No word on who
Miller is going after next, but in this columnist's opinion, Michelle
Monaghan (the upcoming October double bill of "The Heartbreak Kid"
and" Gone Baby Gone"), Kate Beckinsale (who repeatedly denies any
interest) and Evangeline Lilly ("Lost") are the best remaining
candidates.
Anim8rFSK
<994a2124-8101-4d3d...@q36g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
That's probably why they gave him so little to say on Chuck.
Ian B
> On Jun 13, 2:34 pm, BreadWithS...@fractious.net wrote:
>> Actually, I was picturing a really dark, not-completely-there version
>> of Wonder Woman.
>
> I don't want to see your Wonder Woman film.
>
>> Expelled from her insular island and thrust, young
>> and inexperienced but super-powered into the modern world.
>
That doesn't sound much like Wonder Woman. It might make an interesting
some-other-character movie, but not Wonder Woman. I want to see something
quite dark, and very epic, and strongly grounded in her mythological
backstory, with a self-assured, Amazonian heroine.
And then in the sequel, she fights Egg Fu.
Ian
Steven L.
"t...@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan" <tednolan> wrote in message
news:87i12d...@mid.individual.net:
> In article <hv07sq$tou$1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> Obveeus <Obv...@aol.com> wrote:
> >
> >"David Johnston" <da...@block.net> wrote:
> >
> >> On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 09:48:35 -0400, "Obveeus" <Obv...@aol.com> wrote:
> >>>You are all making a good case for why Wonder Woman should NOT be made
> >>>into
> >>>a movie.
> >>
> >> The invisible plane was retired from the comics over 20 years ago. It
> >> would not be in a new Wonder Woman movie.
> >
> >Will they still have the magic rope?
> >
> >Side note: if someone is going to make Wonder Woman into a movie, they
> >should ask themselves: 'what are the successful female super hero movies?'
> >
> >Kill Bill? Lara Croft? Underworld? None of those are classic 'female
> >superhero' stuff, but they are maybe the only successful big screen attempts
> >at female leads in 'macho' roles.
> >
> >
>
> Aliens
> Terminator 2
Ripley wasn't a superhero, just a heroine. She had no superpowers.
Same for Sarah Connor.
-- Steven L.
Steven L.
"Obveeus" <Obv...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:hv07sq$tou$1...@news.eternal-september.org:
> "David Johnston" <da...@block.net> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 09:48:35 -0400, "Obveeus" <Obv...@aol.com> wrote:
> >>You are all making a good case for why Wonder Woman should NOT be made
> >>into
> >>a movie.
> >
> > The invisible plane was retired from the comics over 20 years ago. It
> > would not be in a new Wonder Woman movie.
>
> Will they still have the magic rope?
The TV show, starring Lynda Carter, did.
Wonder Woman's magic rope and magic bracelets are iconic parts of her
uniform.
>
> Side note: if someone is going to make Wonder Woman into a movie, they
> should ask themselves: 'what are the successful female super hero movies?'
Perhaps the most recent popular female superhero was Elastigirl in "The
Incredibles."
But there can't have been many successful female superhero movies,
because there just aren't that many adult female superheroes. (I'm
leaving aside the teen girl superheroes in Legion of Super-Heroes and in
Power Rangers.)
-- Steven L.
Nollaig MacKenzie
On 2010.06.13 00:39:35,
the amazing <sdli...@earthlink.net> declared:
>
>
> "lorinc...@yahoo.com" <lorinc...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:7b2502b1-f9fd-4c46...@d37g2000yqm.googlegroups.com:
>
>> On Jun 11, 7:40ï¿œpm, BreadWithS...@fractious.net wrote:
<snip!>
>>
>> I think JLH might actually be a decent Wonder Woman. I certainly like
>> that she's a chesty brunette (which WW MUST be).
>
> The actress doesn't have to be busty.
>
> A padded bra is a relatively inexpensive special effect.
<snip!>
This won't work in the secret identity wet bikini scenes.
--
Nollaig MacKenzie
http://www.yorku.ca/nollaig
Greg Goss
>
>
>On 2010.06.13 00:39:35,
>the amazing <sdli...@earthlink.net> declared:
>
>>
>>
>> "lorinc...@yahoo.com" <lorinc...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:7b2502b1-f9fd-4c46...@d37g2000yqm.googlegroups.com:
>>
>>> On Jun 11, 7:40 pm, BreadWithS...@fractious.net wrote:
>
> <snip!>
>>>
>>> I think JLH might actually be a decent Wonder Woman. I certainly like
>>> that she's a chesty brunette (which WW MUST be).
>>
>> The actress doesn't have to be busty.
>>
>> A padded bra is a relatively inexpensive special effect.
>
> <snip!>
>
>This won't work in the secret identity wet bikini scenes.
It would still be RELATIVELY inexpensive, though perhaps shockingly
expensive to people not used to movie budgets.
--
Tomorrow is today already.
Greg Goss, 1989-01-27
rwa2play (Lost mode on)
> On Jun 13, 10:02 am, "rwa2play, The Northern Lariat"
>
>
>
> <rwa2p...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 6/12/2010 11:22 AM, KalElFan wrote:
>
> > > I agree that's their ideal look, but the campy stuff has to be
> > > avoided like the plague with this movie. Reeve was great
> > > playing it straight the first two movies, though it was a bit
> > > tenuous keeping his part of the story insulated from Lex
> > > and his henchpersons and evil plan for example. But then
> > > in the third movie it was sayonara from the get-go, with the
> > > opening having Superman as a prop for the chain reaction
> > > slapstick and flaming penguins and the like, and then as if
> > > to top that Richard Pryor.
>
> > Not to get to far from the topic, but that's why I couldn't understand
> > why they put Brandon Routh in that costume. With Chris Reeve, it looked
> > a natural. The way they designed the costume for Routh, it looked like
> > he was wearing a Halloween outfit.
>
> Because he couldn't act. He was a guy posing in a Superman costume.
> (Something he'd been paid for before.)
I probably misspoke there. I meant to say how whatever-they-call-the-
costume-dept. in WB screwed up a completely easy design and made it
look like it came out of a Halloween costume shop.
rwa2play (Lost mode on)
wrote:
Let's just say that this movie will probably never be made because
Hollywood tends to FUBAR a good idea in one form or another in the
name of stroking of their ego.
Anim8rFSK
<6f854246-3052-4224...@c33g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>,
Don't blame the WB. Singer had an idiot working for him that screwed up
the costume; you can even hear him arguing with her in the 'making of'
stuff.
TBerk
> On Jun 12, 7:29 pm, Duggy <Paul.Dug...@jcu.edu.au> wrote:
>
> > On Jun 12, 1:39 pm, BreadWithS...@fractious.net wrote:
>
> > > Frankly, I think Summer Glau would even be able to do a great
> > > job at this, especially if it's a more modern, darker twist
> > > on WW.
>
> > Can she play a character that's not not-completely-there. That's all
> > I've seen her play - and quite well - but that's not Wonder Woman.
>
> I don't really have a firm grasp on Wonder Woman's personality (and I
> bet in this I differ little from any five DC writers or editors) such
> that I can tell you what kind of characterization an actress would
> have to bring to the part to sell WW to the audience.
>
Then you'd have to go back and actually inform yourself as to origins
and motivations.
It's not Rocket Science (although we're going to have to go back to
using 'Brain Surgery' as most anybody these days can be a Rocket
Scientist. And that's a good thing...)
Our lady Diana has a very complicated set to deal with; Mother Issues,
Amazon in a 'Man's World' stuff, fish out of water in a big way, and
weight of the world while keeping it secret thing.
Something that easily gets lost is that Wonder Woman has every reason
to be 'Biggedy' or took look down her nose at us mere mortals.
Besides; War is a man's thing, in fact all the troubles of modern
society can be traced to a Patriarchal setup. In her humble opinion.
So, the actor who gets tasked with this will need some hubris, some
cool detachment, some wisdom of the ages while still fighting to
overcome an outsider's orientation.
And don't forget the "I hate Men but I'm in love with _this_ man"
angle.
It has the potential to make for some very good story telling, but I
doubt the 'blow stuff up real good' half of the creative process
(which will, of course take a back seat to the 'I want to see her
jiggely bits' faction) is going to work well with the 'this is Art!,
Dammit!' segment.
TBerk
I want artfully done jiggely bits. And explosions, don't forget the
explosions...
Duggy
> That's okay. I don't want to see one which is anything like
> the Lynda Carter stuff.
There are more than 2 options, you know.
> > Summer Glau has played kooky. Wonder Woman isn't kooky.
> Did you see her on The Unit? I think she's more capable
> than you're giving her credit for. Okay, she's no Heath Ledger.
> But neither was The Joker anything like anything else he'd
> ever done that I know of, either.
But he'd play a wide range of roles. Not just Kooky and something
else on The Unit.
===
= DUG.
===
Duggy
> See, no. Indeed, just the opposite is true here. Brandon Routh is a
> pretty good actor,
OK, on that we have to disagree. To me he wondered around with a
morbid stunned look and nothing else for the entire film.
> > Some acting ability is important.
> Perhaps, but only some,
Exactly.
> > As is the ability to get the
> > character right.
> Camera work and editing and a good script will take care of most of
> that.
Script, Camera, Acting and Editing work together to create a whole.
Sometimes 3 can work together when 1 is lacking, but not always. And
starting with one not working puts pressure on the other 3.
> > Strawmen are great actors.
> Where's the straw man,Duggy?
I've said they need to be able to act. You're pretending I'm claiming
it can only be played by the greatest actors ever to appear on screen.
===
= DUG.
===
TBerk
> On 11 Jun 2010 20:40:32 -0400, BreadWithS...@fractious.net wrote:
>
>
>
> >T987654321 <qwrtz...@gmail.com> writes:
>
> >> Wonder Woman would be a HUGE money maker, yet it never gets made.
>
> >Not necessarily. If it gets made and it gets made *badly*, it
> >not only loses money but becomes an embarassment and makes it
> >harder to make other things in the future. It's too high
> >profile and they can't afford to screw it up.
>
> >So if there's any fear of screwing it up, it won't get made.
>
> >Sometimes they really land it - Spiderman, for example.
>
> >Sometimes, you get Elektra.
> >Superman Returns, anyone?
> >Ang Lee's Hulk?
>
> The original Punisher with Dolph Lundgren?
> Captain America?
>
> ... god...
>
> DAREDEVIL!?
>
> >Meanwhile, this conversation started with Jennifer Love Hewitt
> >apparently hoping to be playing Wonder Woman. Seriously. If
> >that conversation can even be had, there's no hope for the movie
> >to be decent.
>
> She could pull parts of it off without problem. I mean she's
> got the hair... And maybe the right padding.. Thing is though, she's
> too short. 5'2 1/2"? Please. That would be Wonder Dwarf.
>
I don't know. I'd like to see her in the costume. I agree with the
miscasting for obvious reasons. I still want to see it though.
Maybe she can cameo as an Amazon, they must have had some 'runty'
ones. Might make her overcompensate when compared to the volley-
baller/ Xena type physiques she lives amongst.
(I'm not half trying and I seem to be doing better than those guys who
do 'treatments'...) <--- My big headedness has me thinking I should
get paid for this...
TBerk
M.O.R
> T987654321 <qwrtz...@gmail.com> writes:
> > Wonder Woman would be a HUGE money maker, yet it never gets made.
>
> Not necessarily. If it gets made and it gets made *badly*, it
> not only loses money but becomes an embarassment and makes it
> harder to make other things in the future. It's too high
> profile and they can't afford to screw it up.
>
> So if there's any fear of screwing it up, it won't get made.
>
> Sometimes they really land it - Spiderman, for example.
>
> Sometimes, you get Elektra.
> Superman Returns, anyone?
> Ang Lee's Hulk?
>
> apparently hoping to be playing Wonder Woman. Seriously. If
> that conversation can even be had, there's no hope for the movie
> to be decent.
>
> play Batman, I laughed pretty hard. And then it turned out that
> he was vastly better at it than the next several guys who tried)
>
> --
> Plain Bread alone for e-mail, thanks. The rest gets trashed.
Does not mean he was good tho. The only guy to 'get' the character
for nearly two decades was Kevin Conroy.
J Love Hewitt, and Mischa Barton are the only two, I can think of, who
were seriously considered, which is just a wrong idea. Barton has
been out of work, and the public eye, for quite a number of years
now. There have been quite a few actresses campaigning for the part,
such as Anna Friel, and Lindsay Lohan, but there has not been any real
stand outs for the lead.
WB worked and pushed for Superman Returns, and pushed tons of money
into both the film, the advertising and the merchandise. Sad thing
was, that the entire end product on all counts was terrible. The film
was too dark for the character, Superman was really a side character,
and the entire film should not have been made. Bryan Singer should
never be allowed near a comic book film ever again, since he does not
read comics, and liked the Superman film so much, he remade it with
Superman Returns. And, disappointingly, it is a remake.
I can understand why the WB are taking their time with the film
project. Outside of the Batman movies, their new films have flopped,
or underperformed. Whether it is V for Vendetta, Constantine (Whoops,
we cast Keanu Reeves to play a blonde, British character with a
resemblance to Sting. Let's make him American and a Paranormal
investigator and exorcist), Watchmen would probably have made its
money back, and been a financial success, if not for Fox pulling a
devious stunt, where they knew that they held the rights to the
property, and allowed Warner Brothers to make the film, illegally,
then filed a lawsuit claiming the WB would have to share half of their
gross with Fox. It was sneaky, and devious, but they were well within
their legal rights to do so. The film was thus rendered a flop. LoEG
died at the box office, and was the reason Alan Moore had nothing more
to do with the films, even taking his name off of the project.
Catwoman....well, we all know how bad that was. I would class it as
the worst of DC's efforts, but that film was a C.I.N.O, and a
hollywood studio thinking it could better the source material. They
never learn.
So DC have not had luck with their properties, and I feel, sadly, that
Jonah Hex will join that list also.
Warners want to take their time, because they only get one shot. If
it fails, then all the work is wasted, and they have to wait about 10
years before even trying again. They have to get it as close and as
strong as the source material, or else the whole piece will fall to
pieces. Alot rests on it, in terms of bank for the studio, bank for
the toymakers, and possible bank for the game developers, even though
hit films like The Dark Knight did not have a video game, outside of
Lego Batman.
M.O.R
> >>You are all making a good case for why Wonder Woman should NOT be made
> >>into
> >>a movie.
>
> > The invisible plane was retired from the comics over 20 years ago. It
> > would not be in a new Wonder Woman movie.
>
> Will they still have the magic rope?
>
> should ask themselves: 'what are the successful female super hero movies?'
>
> superhero' stuff, but they are maybe the only successful big screen attempts
> at female leads in 'macho' roles.
Alien and Aliens. Those were two roles where the woman was macho. On
TV you will find alot more. Buffy the Vampire Slayer in both
mediums. Charlies' Angels claimed to be. There are alot of examples
in animation though.
Duggy
> WB worked and pushed for Superman Returns, and pushed tons of money
> into both the film, the advertising and the merchandise. Sad thing
> was, that the entire end product on all counts was terrible. The film
> was too dark for the character, Superman was really a side character,
> and the entire film should not have been made. Bryan Singer should
> never be allowed near a comic book film ever again, since he does not
> read comics, and liked the Superman film so much, he remade it with
> Superman Returns. And, disappointingly, it is a remake.
There was a lot wrong with SR and you've listed some of the things.
> Whether it is V for Vendetta,
See later...
> Constantine (Whoops,
> we cast Keanu Reeves to play a blonde, British character with a
> resemblance to Sting. Let's make him American and a Paranormal
> investigator and exorcist),
Is any of that what caused the film to flop?
> LoEG
> died at the box office, and was the reason Alan Moore had nothing more
> to do with the films, even taking his name off of the project.
I thought Moore said "As long as I could distance myself by not seeing
them" he didn't care. His problem with LoEG was that Fox stopped
fighting the claim that he stold the idea from someone else.
It wasn't until the makers of V for Vendetta started claiming that he
was happy with his ideas for it that he broke away entirely.
> Catwoman....well, we all know how bad that was. I would class it as
> the worst of DC's efforts, but that film was a C.I.N.O, and a
> hollywood studio thinking it could better the source material.
I don't think it was them thinking that they could better the source
material... I think it was inertia. It started as a spin-off of
Batman Returns, and when that connection was broken they remade that
origin and tried expand on that.
In the film industry, if you say, "We've spent a lot of money on this
so far, but we're going get rid of all that and need money to start
again." You're told (or risk being told) "You know what, forget the
whole thing."
> They never learn.
WB owns everything so were exploiting what they own. Since all of
that they have created a DC comic development division... giving DC
comics a Marvel Studios type group to run things. Whether that works
time will tell, but I don't think it's "never learn".
> Warners want to take their time, because they only get one shot.
> If it fails, then all the work is wasted, and they have to wait about 10
> years before even trying again.
The Incredible Hulk disagrees.
> They have to get it as close and as
> strong as the source material, or else the whole piece will fall to
> pieces.
Ah, yes but what is the source material?
Even in these thread people disagree on what Wonder Woman is.
Joss Whedon couldn't find it. (Then again when a guy who claims to
like Wondy, but doesn't like her comics or TV show you have to ask
whether the guy knows what he is talking about).
Fish-out-of-Water stuff will have mainstream appeal, but too much will
weaken the film.
You need an actress who doesn't look fluffy or people won't be able to
suspend disbelief, but not too buff or you've missed the point.
You need a big action story but it must be connectable on a human
level (Superman Returns sacrifised big action for human action... big
mistake).
> Alot rests on it, in terms of bank for the studio, bank for
> the toymakers,
Do Toymakers still think that female Action Figures don't sell? If
so, this isn't a selling point for the film.
> and possible bank for the game developers, even though
> hit films like The Dark Knight did not have a video game, outside of
> Lego Batman.
Video games take too long to make these days. When the Bond games
were at their height the game makers were unable to get a game out for
one of the films in time. And a game maker tried to sue Paramount
because by the time they released Star Trek computer games they
weren't making Star Trek shows anymore..
===
= DUG.
===
Duggy
We're discussing Wonder Woman. The TV example that most people snap
to for Wonder Woman is Xena.
Of all the above examples Kill Bill is the only one I can think of
that doesn't also rely on the actresses' sex appeal. (Not to say that
Uma doesn't have any, but I don't recall her in her underwear, skin-
tight or skimpy clothes. (Maybe sword training in KB2...)
===
= DUG.
===
plausible prose man
> On Jun 14, 4:06 am, plausible prose man <Georgefha...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > See, no. Indeed, just the opposite is true here. Brandon Routh is a
> > pretty good actor,
>
> OK, on that we have to disagree.
Yeah, actually I thought he had more credits than he did, so maybe
I'm overstating that, but...anyway, I feel pretty safe comparing him
to Christopher Reeves as an actor, and would even go so far as to say
he'd do pretty well with the other parts I know Reeves (Reeve?) from,
Somewhere in Time and Deathtrap.
> To me he wondered around with a
> morbid stunned look and nothing else for the entire film.
I remember thinking how wrong he was from the publicity stills.
> > > Some acting ability is important.
> > Perhaps, but only some,
and of a specific, narrow sort.
> Exactly.
I wish you'd make up your mind here.
> > > As is the ability to get the
> > > character right.
> > Camera work and editing and a good script will take care of most of
> > that.
>
> Script, Camera, Acting and Editing work together to create a whole.
Sure.
> Sometimes 3 can work together when 1 is lacking, but not always.
In all likelyhood, the script will be pretty bad; they usually are
for superhero movies. It's a first movie, so that means "origin
story," and that means we're going to see a lot of stuff that isn't
really Wonder Woman before they show us "The Part we Came to See."
> And
> starting with one not working puts pressure on the other 3.
See, I think if you cast it right in the first place you don't have
to worry about "acting" so much. An actor playing a superhero needs a
certain physical presence, but they can have a pretty limited range as
far as the emotions and what all they project, and superhero movies
are rarely dialogue heavy, so getting the lines out convincingly isn't
all that big a deal.
> > > Strawmen are great actors.
> > Where's the straw man,Duggy?
>
> I've said they need to be able to act. You're pretending I'm claiming
> it can only be played by the greatest actors ever to appear on screen.
I just think you're over-emphasizing acting ability compared to
"looking the part" in the first place.
plausible prose man
> On Jun 12, 1:40 am, BreadWithS...@fractious.net wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > T987654321 <qwrtz...@gmail.com> writes:
> > > Wonder Woman would be a HUGE money maker, yet it never gets made.
>
> > Not necessarily. If it gets made and it gets made *badly*, it
> > not only loses money but becomes an embarassment and makes it
> > harder to make other things in the future. It's too high
> > profile and they can't afford to screw it up.
>
> > So if there's any fear of screwing it up, it won't get made.
>
> > Sometimes they really land it - Spiderman, for example.
>
> > Sometimes, you get Elektra.
> > Superman Returns, anyone?
> > Ang Lee's Hulk?
>
> > Meanwhile, this conversation started with Jennifer Love Hewitt
> > apparently hoping to be playing Wonder Woman. Seriously. If
> > that conversation can even be had, there's no hope for the movie
> > to be decent.
>
> > (then again, when I first heard that Michael Keaton was going to
> > play Batman, I laughed pretty hard. And then it turned out that
> > he was vastly better at it than the next several guys who tried)
>
> > --
> > Plain Bread alone for e-mail, thanks. The rest gets trashed.
>
> Does not mean he was good tho.
I'm not really sure he was better at it than Val Kilmer or George
Clooney, although its hard to separate their performances from how
awful those movies were getting by then. Still, since you don't really
cast Batman so much as you cast Bruce Wayne, well...George Clooney
with a director who could convince him to take the part as seriously
as his other roles could've been a really good Batman after all.
> The only guy to 'get' the character
> for nearly two decades was Kevin Conroy.
> J Love Hewitt, and Mischa Barton are the only two, I can think of, who
> were seriously considered, which is just a wrong idea. Barton has
> been out of work, and the public eye, for quite a number of years
> now.
Mischa Barton's not a dwarf, exactly, at 5'9", but she doesn't really
come across as "amazon."
> There have been quite a few actresses campaigning for the part,
> such as Anna Friel, and Lindsay Lohan, but there has not been any real
> stand outs for the lead.
> WB worked and pushed for Superman Returns, and pushed tons of money
> into both the film, the advertising and the merchandise. Sad thing
> was, that the entire end product on all counts was terrible. The film
> was too dark for the character,
See, I thought it was too goofy for the character, continuing all of
the whimsy of the first movie which we've all moved beyond by now.
> Superman was really a side character,
> and the entire film should not have been made.
If there had to be a Superman movie, and the other choice was the one
where Lois gives birth to Superman's baby, and they both die, and then
superbaby grows to manhood in a couple days, well...
> Bryan Singer should
> never be allowed near a comic book film ever again, since he does not
> read comics,
Yeah, I don't know...he made those X-men movies, which were big steps
forward from Tim Burton et al's Batman movies and the Superman movies.
They could've used more work as far as plot and dialogue, but they
weren't horribly miscast or campy in a contemptuous way and there
weren't a lot of arbitrary changes or dilutions from the familiar
versions of the characters.
> and liked the Superman film so much, he remade it with
> Superman Returns. And, disappointingly, it is a remake.
"remake" implies more creativity than was really on display there, I
think "rehash" is a better word for how half-assed everything was.
And everyone was terribly mis-cast. Except possibly Kevin Spacey, but
even there the script pushed him too far towards the Gene Hackman
version of the villain, who I always thought came across more as W. C.
Fields than anything.
> I can understand why the WB are taking their time with the film
> project. Outside of the Batman movies, their new films have flopped,
> or underperformed. Whether it is V for Vendetta, Constantine (Whoops,
> we cast Keanu Reeves to play a blonde, British character with a
> resemblance to Sting. Let's make him American and a Paranormal
> investigator and exorcist),
I think that movie was relatively successful. There's some talk of a
sequel.
> Watchmen would probably have made its
> money back, and been a financial success, if not for Fox pulling a
> devious stunt, where they knew that they held the rights to the
> property, and allowed Warner Brothers to make the film, illegally,
> then filed a lawsuit claiming the WB would have to share half of their
> gross with Fox. It was sneaky, and devious, but they were well within
> their legal rights to do so. The film was thus rendered a flop. LoEG
> died at the box office, and was the reason Alan Moore had nothing more
> to do with the films, even taking his name off of the project.
I think Alan had distanced himself from the movies before the box-
office came in, and its some combination of shabby (at least in his
opinion) treatment from DC as just a basic idea that adapting a work
of art into a new medium is, uh...wrong headed.
> Catwoman....well, we all know how bad that was. I would class it as
> the worst of DC's efforts, but that film was a C.I.N.O, and a
> hollywood studio thinking it could better the source material.
How difficult would that be, really?
> They
> never learn.
> So DC have not had luck with their properties, and I feel, sadly, that
> Jonah Hex will join that list also.
It looks bad, doesn't it?
> Warners want to take their time, because they only get one shot. If
> it fails,
I also have some idea a Superman movie can only ever sort of fail,
once you've sold the toys and the happy meals and the overseas box
office and the DVDs and all that.
> then all the work is wasted, and they have to wait about 10
> years before even trying again. They have to get it as close and as
> strong as the source material,
This statement overlooks how terrible the vast majority of Superman
comics have been.
>or else the whole piece will fall to
> pieces. Alot rests on it, in terms of bank for the studio, bank for
> the toymakers, and possible bank for the game developers, even though
> hit films like The Dark Knight did not have a video game,
I think The Dark Knight was sandwiched between Batman video games
which, if not exactly direct tie-ins, certainly benefited from and are
associated with the film in the minds of the public,.
>outside of
> Lego Batman.- Hide quoted text -
Wingnut
> On 6/12/2010 9:04 PM, Wingnut wrote:
>> On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 05:55:20 -0700, plausible prose man wrote:
>>
>>> I'd like to see someone who is brunette and even sort of Greek
>>> looking, at least 5'8, and looks like she could bench press a hundred
>>> or so pounds, do twenty pushups without stopping, and run a mile in
>>> under seven minutes. Giant knockers a plus.
>>
>> Melina Kanakaredes.
>
> Too old. Looks good, yes, but still too old for this.
I disagree. Lynda Carter looked older in at least some old TV episodes I
saw. And a top-notch blockbuster-movie makeup department can work
miracles. I'm sure Melina can be made to look just perfect for the role,
and with a lot *less* work than would be needed with JLH or Summer Glau.
Lucy Lawless would be another candidate.
ClassCastException
> Of all the above examples Kill Bill is the only one I can think of
> that doesn't also rely on the actresses' sex appeal. (Not to say that
> Uma doesn't have any, but I don't recall her in her underwear, skin-
> tight or skimpy clothes. (Maybe sword training in KB2...)
That's funny, in at least one of them I'm sure she was wearing this very
tight, form-fitting canary-yellow jumpsuit-like outfit pretty much the
whole time (and filling it out very nicely).
(Silent followup-to ignored. Shame on you!)
plausible prose man
> On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 05:55:20 -0700, plausible prose man wrote:
> > I'd like to see someone who is brunette and even sort of Greek
> > looking, at least 5'8, and looks like she could bench press a hundred
> > or so pounds, do twenty pushups without stopping, and run a mile in
> > under seven minutes. Giant knockers a plus.
>
> Melina Kanakaredes.
You're getting there, yeah. Probably a little too old, and I have no
idea as to her physicality, but she is brunette and Greek looking.
TBerk
wrote:
"Filling it out"? Tomboy the whole way.
Notthattheresanythingwrongwiththat....
TBerk
my wife was an Amazon actually, well almost...
Dano
I'll put in my vote for Rhona Mitra. Saffron Burrows would be good
too...though she's a bit slim.
Duggy
> tight, form-fitting canary-yellow jumpsuit-like outfit pretty much the
> whole time (and filling it out very nicely).
You think the yellow jumpsuit was form fitting?
Heck, it was more form fitting when Bruce Lee wore it.
===
= DUG.
===
Duggy
> Yeah, actually I thought he had more credits than he did, so maybe
> I'm overstating that, but...
Well, yeah, it doesn't have many credits and has hasn't since Superman
Returns... which is strange because you'd expect a lot of cash-in
casting.
But no matter what else he has done he was crap in SR.
> > To me he wondered around with a
> > morbid stunned look and nothing else for the entire film.
> I remember thinking how wrong he was from the publicity stills.
True... and it's that stunned look. Once again, can't act.
> > > > As is the ability to get the
> > > > character right.
> > > Camera work and editing and a good script will take care of most of
> > > that.
> > Script, Camera, Acting and Editing work together to create a whole.
> Sure.
> > Sometimes 3 can work together when 1 is lacking, but not always.
> In all likelyhood, the script will be pretty bad; they usually are
> for superhero movies. It's a first movie, so that means "origin
> story," and that means we're going to see a lot of stuff that isn't
> really Wonder Woman before they show us "The Part we Came to See."
True, which means we need the good acting, good camera work and good
editing.
> > And
> > starting with one not working puts pressure on the other 3.
>
> See, I think if you cast it right in the first place you don't have
> to worry about "acting" so much.
Casting right means good acting. If the person looks right but can't
pull off the role then it's bad acting.
> An actor playing a superhero needs a
> certain physical presence, but they can have a pretty limited range as
> far as the emotions and what all they project, and superhero movies
> are rarely dialogue heavy, so getting the lines out convincingly isn't
> all that big a deal.
True, but they can't look like a piece of wood. They have to be able
to pull of the role, however limited.
> > > > Strawmen are great actors.
> > > Where's the straw man,Duggy?
> > I've said they need to be able to act. You're pretending I'm claiming
> > it can only be played by the greatest actors ever to appear on screen.
> I just think you're over-emphasizing acting ability compared to
> "looking the part" in the first place.
They could look exactly like Wonder Woman but if they can't act like
Wonder Woman they're wrong for the role. You're a moron if you think
otherwise.
===
= DUG.
===
Merrick Baldelli
<macthe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>No, somebody like Gabby Reece, only more of a brunette. An amazon
>should be tall & athletic, but not a body builder type, musculature more
>for practical use as a female warrior, not exaggerated for show. What
>we have with Wonder Woman is more of a morph between an amazon and a
>Betty Page pin-up model. Giant knockers on an amazon is kind of
>ridiculous. See:
>
>http://people.uncw.edu/deagona/amaz/breast1.htm
you're giving me a dissertation on the tradition on Amazons
removing their breast so they can fire a bow?
Yes, that will go over well in Hollywood, I'm sure.
--
-=-=-/ )=*=-='=-.-'-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
_( (_ , '_ * . Merrick Baldelli
(((\ \> /_1 `
(\\\\ \_/ /
-=-\ /-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
\ _/ Who are these folks and why have they
/ / stopped taking their medication?
- Captain Infinity
Merrick Baldelli
>Kill Bill? Lara Croft? Underworld? None of those are classic 'female
>superhero' stuff, but they are maybe the only successful big screen attempts
>at female leads in 'macho' roles.
Indeed, and we have Hollywood to thank for this because they
think that action oriented women don't like their femininity and need
to rely on tough gal coldness and threats of violence to make her
"action", because as one of my favorite reviewers once said,
"...everyone knows action-oriented, independent women all munch more
carpet than a malfunctioning vacuum cleaner...."
Mac Breck
> On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 13:02:42 -0400, "Mac Breck"
> <macthe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> No, somebody like Gabby Reece, only more of a brunette. An amazon
>> should be tall & athletic, but not a body builder type, musculature
>> more for practical use as a female warrior, not exaggerated for
>> show. What we have with Wonder Woman is more of a morph between an
>> amazon and a Betty Page pin-up model. Giant knockers on an amazon
>> is kind of ridiculous. See:
>>
>> http://people.uncw.edu/deagona/amaz/breast1.htm
>
> you're giving me a dissertation on the tradition on Amazons
> removing their breast so they can fire a bow?
>
> Yes, that will go over well in Hollywood, I'm sure.
Yes, I know that Hollywood won't go there. Hell, there would probably
be some nutjobs in the viewing audience who'd mutilate themselves over
it if Hollywood *did* go there, and nobody wants that kind of attention
for their movie. I'm just saying that the idea of Wonder Woman
(supposedly an Amazon) having HUGE knockers is going in the wrong
direction, storywise. Small~medium knockers would make more sense.
--
Mac Breck (KoshN)
-------------------------------
"Babylon 5: Crusade" (1999) - "War Zone"
Galen (to Gideon): "I've been penalized before for helping other
people. I've been trying to decide whether or not I should risk it
again."
Bill Steele
<a7be7af6-a06a-4ee7...@e35g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>,
plausible prose man <George...@aol.com> wrote:
> In all likelyhood, the script will be pretty bad; they usually are
> for superhero movies. It's a first movie, so that means "origin
> story," and that means we're going to see a lot of stuff that isn't
> really Wonder Woman before they show us "The Part we Came to See."
I think Paradise Island is very much a part of what really is Wonder
Woman. Anyway, the comic book got through that in about three pages.
trag
> On Jun 16, 11:31 am, plausible prose man <Georgefha...@aol.com> wrote:
> > An actor playing a superhero needs a
> > certain physical presence, but they can have a pretty limited range as
> > far as the emotions and what all they project, and superhero movies
> > are rarely dialogue heavy, so getting the lines out convincingly isn't
> > all that big a deal.
>
> True, but they can't look like a piece of wood. They have to be able
> to pull of the role, however limited.
> They could look exactly like Wonder Woman but if they can't act like
> Wonder Woman they're wrong for the role. You're a moron if you think
> otherwise.
How about Claudia Christian?
plausible prose man
> Merrick Baldelli wrote:
> > On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 13:02:42 -0400, "Mac Breck"
> > <macthevor...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >> No, somebody like Gabby Reece, only more of a brunette. An amazon
> >> should be tall & athletic, but not a body builder type, musculature
> >> more for practical use as a female warrior, not exaggerated for
> >> show. What we have with Wonder Woman is more of a morph between an
> >> amazon and a Betty Page pin-up model. Giant knockers on an amazon
> >> is kind of ridiculous. See:
>
> >>http://people.uncw.edu/deagona/amaz/breast1.htm
>
> > you're giving me a dissertation on the tradition on Amazons
> > removing their breast so they can fire a bow?
>
> > Yes, that will go over well in Hollywood, I'm sure.
>
> Yes, I know that Hollywood won't go there. Hell, there would probably
> be some nutjobs in the viewing audience who'd mutilate themselves over
> it if Hollywood *did* go there, and nobody wants that kind of attention
> for their movie. I'm just saying that the idea of Wonder Woman
> (supposedly an Amazon) having HUGE knockers is going in the wrong
> direction, storywise.
If huge knockers is wrong, I don't want to be right.
plausible prose man
> In article
> <a7be7af6-a06a-4ee7-bd39-2f8907664...@e35g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>,
> plausible prose man <Georgefha...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > In all likelyhood, the script will be pretty bad; they usually are
> > for superhero movies. It's a first movie, so that means "origin
> > story," and that means we're going to see a lot of stuff that isn't
> > really Wonder Woman before they show us "The Part we Came to See."
>
> I think Paradise Island is very much a part of what really is Wonder
> Woman. Anyway, the comic book got through that in about three pages.
Batman Begins and the first Superman movie made you sit there, for
like an hour, before you see Batman and Superman.
plausible prose man
If my choice is a relatively weak actor who looks like a part, and a
relatively strong actor who doesn't, well...its a lot easier to hide
how someone talks than what they look like.
Mac Breck
ROFL!
Wingnut
Old: I don't think so, not for Hollywood makeup artists. Physicality: did
you see the Greek-artifact-forgery arc in CSI:NY last year? This year she
had a few chase scenes too.