Wonder Woman Movie

Probably some right-wing asshole that doesn't think that the movie is good solely because it's about a woman.

I saw the post he didnt strike me as troll, at best he said he didnt like wonder woman that much

Think that means they got banned, or re-banned? Might not have been for something they said here.

They got banned yup

I just heard that this movie might be on the track for Best Picture.

Severely doubtful.

At absolute most it'll get to be next year's 'fun nomination'.

Male Gaze is not necessarily about gratuitous shots of women's behinds and breasts. Yes, they are a part of it, but only a small part of it. It goes into everything on how a woman is portrayed on screen, and focusing on the gratuitous shots makes one miss at least half, if not more.

Things that matter are where the picture is centered, and if it differs for men and women; the poses struck by the persons; how the camera moves over different people.

This sounds like some serious goal post shifting.

I'd argue that's more general sexism versus male gaze; male gaze is more lingering shots of a woman's calf and high heels, or of her walking with a close up of her backless dress as the focal point of the shot.

Again I saw none of this in the trailer. I really do not get what you guys are talking about. The camera doesn't treat her (or any woman) any different from the men

edited 28th Jul '17 1:59:17 PM by windleopard

My impression is rather that male gaze is the expression of that type of general sexism. It's easier to see in the more estreme examples that are usually used to illustrate it, but that doesn't mean you can find more subdued examples.

One particular one regarding Wonder Woman is this poster◊. Note how her pose emphasises her bust and the way her face is way out of focus.

I sorta see what you mean, but not really?

This Black Widow poster, on the other hand...

https://www.google.com/amp/www.nydailynews.com/amp/entertainment/tv-movies/battle-captain-america-posters-won-scarlett-johansson-article-1.1598262

edited 28th Jul '17 3:59:18 PM by wisewillow

As a lady, I didn't notice anything other than awesome superheroes being awesome. And bank robbers stand no chance against Wonder Woman! They wouldn't stand a chance against any protagonist in a Superhero story.

My feelings have always been that unless the point is to show someone as unattractive, the default is to present their characters in a flattering light. Male Gaze and Female Gaze both exist, and regardless of certain opposition there are different standards of beauty between genders. Patty Jenkins was asked about the heels on Wonder Woman's costume and she talked about how these characters are power fantasies and sexual fantasies, how you want to see your idealized self in these heroes, and her hero has really long legs (she also related disappointment, in a humorous way, when watching dailies and seeing such beautiful actors on camera and she comes into frame to give more direction). Superman and Batman are masculine ideals.

There is fundamentally little difference between how Snyder framed Diana in BVS and JL and how Jenkins did it in WW. There is a Panty Shot here and there because of the intensity of the action mixed with short leather skirts, but the focus is on the action more than any sort of Wardrobe Malfunction. Both movies have a ground level shot of Diana doing a leg sweep, but in fact the one in WW is more notable because she was sliding on her shield, making her more parallel with the floor.

Now don't get me wrong, there are plenty of issues when it comes to Male Gaze and otherwise putting an emphasis on sex appeal rather than it be a intuitive part of the story and characters. Boobs-and-Butt Pose comes to mind. Black Widow has a number of examples there. But Wonder Woman found a great balance between showing their characters as attractive without resorting to something that blatant.

Y'know, male gaze and male power fantasies aren't the same as female ones.

There's a great Tumblr post the discusses it; it has two magazine covers featuring Hugh Jackman. One is on a men's magazine, one is on a woman's magazine. On the men's magazine, he was shirtless, flexing his muscles, and snarling wolverine style. On the women's magazine, he's in a v-neck sweater, smiling and looking ready to take home to mom.

If anyone is interested, here's the post discussing male versus female power fantasies and male versus female gaze.

http://craftbrewedjam.tumblr.com/post/161738008548/aglassroseneverfades-pmastamonkmonk

And here's an article discussing the female gaze in Thor.

http://www.stellarfour.com/2011/05/what-shirtless-thor-means-for-female.html?m=1

edited 28th Jul '17 9:41:56 PM by wisewillow

Either way there was none of that going on in the trailer.

Well there are some misnomers in that premise, as comparing a fitness magazine and a housekeeping magazine is not an example of differences between genders. There are plenty of woman-centric magazines that objectify men on their covers. Obviously when viewed as a whole there is an imbalance, but sweeping statements that they are completely different isn't really true.

Some months ago there was a blog posted that attacked one of the Wonder Woman posters, this one, as a Boobs-and-Butt Pose. You actually pay attention and its not that kind of pose, it resembles it only in being a slight profile shot but she's otherwise holding a sword and shield in a powerful way. That's sort of where the problem lies, a given image has different implications when you view it through a single, specific filter.

Hah. Amazon.com

There's also the fundamental difference in the motivation for poses.

Men are often posed primarily to make them look "strong" or "powerful" or "awesome." The make the viewer admire their formidable nature, and sex appeal is secondary.

Females, on the other hand, are often posed in a way that's primarily about sex appeal, to turn the viewer on. And if they look "powerful," it's an afterthought.

It's an important distinction to note.

That's what I mean by an imbalance, too often women are in a passive stance and men aggressive. But talking about the depiction of Wonder Woman in the DCEU compared to the guys she is every bit as strong and fierce. Compared to the typical "we have an Action Girl" type of advertising it's avoided most of the cliche's.

I wonder just how diluted the term must be for that WW poster to count as boob and butts pose.

It's not really a result of terminology decay a la Mary Sue. Most of the comments were pointing out the original flaw. It was just more of an example of being primed to expect certain things and remaining blind to your own preconceptions. THEN writing an entire article based on a mistake.

On the topic of advertising missteps, Japan's choice of theme music has come under fire for, what else? Being sexist.

Basically Japan can't market this movie to save their lives, and people are mad.

edited 3rd Aug '17 11:55:26 AM by Beatman1

What's interesting to me is that another story had, contrary to what one might expect, japanese people complaining about how the marketing was dogshit and a complete misrepresentation of th character in order to appeal to trends...while westerners were the ones talking about "bla bla bla cultural reasons, japan, etc".

The difference in responses kinda makes sense if you think about it. The non-Japanese are going "Well, Japan isn't the most feminist country in the world, so this was kinda expected", while the Japanese are going "Dammit marketers, Stop Being Stereotypical!"

edited 4th Aug '17 10:39:03 PM by Servbot