Somehow I missed the previous 1,982 sequels. Will I still be able to follow the story?
I mean, that is pretty dumb. Completely aside from the fact that that jet was sitting ready to fly somewhere an antiquities expert’s badge worked. Or that the range of an F-111 is 4200 miles and the distance from DC to Egypt is like 6000 miles. Or that they somehow got back. Or that their reason for stealing a plane was that Steve didn’t have a passport. Like they didn’t even check to see if the well-to-do 40-something engineer in DC, who’s face Steve was wearing, happened to have one.
They should have gotten to Egypt by just drawing a line, like Indiana Jones.
That’s a little unfair. I disagree that this is a legit criticism. GDave is all “agree to disagree,” and that’s cool; we can do that. But as long as folks are insisting that this isn’t really a genre trope, or that it’s not how the genre trope works, or that genre tropes are bad things that you have to compensate for with other good things, then there’s a discussion to be had.
There’s plenty of other stuff to talk about with the movie, to be sure. If folks all adopt the “agree to disagree” option, I’m good with that. If folks want to delve into how genre tropes work using this movie as an example, I’m good with that, too.
Not much to delve into: there is no genre trope that any amount of stupid, especially stupid that is inconsistent with the rules built for the world, whatever they are, is able to be hand-waved away “because comic book movie.” We can agree to disagree about how much stupid and how much within built world inconsistency is par and what goes beyond the pale, but a claim that there are no lines past which more and more viewers cannot maintain the willing suspension of disbelief, or at least find the effort to do so to be way more work than the movie is worth, rather that something that happens without any effort at all, is a foolish mistaken one.
That said stupid things like this being complained about are in general more of a symptom of the movie being a clunker than the reason it is a clunker. It contributes to the suckitude but few would comment on it if the movie was otherwise even decent. It’s not the major reason of why the movie was crap and would not be being discussed much if the movie was not otherwise crap. Your claims of orthogonalality noted and dismissed as mistaken. 
I mean, that’s not even in the same thread as what I’m talking about, but cool.
No, but it was more or less acsenray’s argument.
That woulda been great. Except I really liked the scene of flying above the clouds with the fireworks bursting below; that was a lovely image I’d never seen before.
See, that was another scene that I thought was dumb. But the whole Steve thing was to me dumb and kind of screwy. Her wish, wished the poor engineer out of his own body or at least out of control of his body.
But I’m going to drop out of the thread now. I don’t want to talk about this movie any longer. I realized it is just irritating me and why bother.
I’m already on the record as really not liking this movie. I don’t want to go back and rewatch this scene in particular to confirm, but I’ll say that the first time I saw someone refer to the jet as being an F-111, my immediate reaction was, “No way.”
Wikipedia claims it’s a modified Panavia Tornado, as do a bunch of other links I don’t care to collect. The Hot Wheels toy also uses the Tornado as it’s base model, although I know that’s hardly canonical.
Whatever it is, I’m pretty damned sure it’s not an F-111.
Good enough for me. Like I said, I just turned up a bunch of links discussing Wonder Woman’s invisible jet, so I bow to your superior web research skills. If it’s actually supposed to be a Tornado in the movie, the scene is even sillier, but since it’s never identified in dialogue, and the cockpit seems to clearly be another aircraft (the Tornado is a fore-and-aft cockpit, and its fuselage doesn’t seem wide enough to me to even fit the side-by-side cockpit depicted in the movie), I think it’s probably safe to just call it a fictional fighter-bomber.
As gdave said, it falls into the category of lazy writing. Diana Prince is supposed to be the epitome of “capable, self empowered woman”. She could have taken some time off from her dull 9 to 5 museum job and 60 years of no social life to get a pilot license. Maybe even buy and modify her own “invisible jet” instead of stealing one of the fueled and ready ones the Smithsonian apparently keeps lying around and then “wishing it invisible” so it could be flown by a more capable man who is rated on aircraft over half a century old. There could have been some funny moments of Steve looking stupidly for a non-existent propeller to crank or crapping his pants the first time they break the sound barrier.
I mean, congratulations on having bad taste in movies I guess
It didn’t appear to have sweep wings; the F-111 is a sweep-wing aircraft.
See posts #190 and 191.
Here’s an interesting article by Matt Singer that talks about how setting the movie in 1984 limited Diana’s ability to develop, and also created some timeline conundrums.
Meant to say earlier–I really like this headcanon. The stone as a MacGuffin has a lot of potential, but they didn’t ever decide what to do with it; lacking direction, it lacked the emotional oomph it could have had. Giving it a “world enters a waking dream” structure would’ve been really cool.
Yeah, I discussed some of these issues in my first post (see, I care about more than jets!).
Even that Amazon Olympics scene at the beginning creates continuity issues. The first movie established that when she was that age, Child Diana was sneaking out of her tutoring sessions to watch the Amazons train and compete, and her mother was furious about it. She forbade Diana from even watching, much less participating. She was significantly older and played by a different actress when her mother caught Teen Diana secretly training with Antiope, and finally, reluctantly, acquiesced to Diana training and competing with the other Amazons. Finally, when she’s fully grown and played by Gal Godot, Adult Diana stops holding herself back and she, and the other Amazons, realize with a shock that she’s significantly strong, faster, and more powerful than they are.
Yet WW84 portrays Child Diana as openly competing in the Amazons’ most grueling and dangerous competition, while her mother watches, and doesn’t say or do anything other than look a bit worried. And Child Diana not only competes, she’s beating the Amazons’ greatest athletes when she gets knocked off of her horse by an errant tree branch. If it weren’t for that, she apparently would have won the competition by a mile (almost literally). It just doesn’t match up at all with the way she was depicted in Wonder Woman.
And all of that is just to set up the “lesson” that she tells us in voice-over she didn’t fully understand until later. A lesson about taking a short-cut and cheating and how Truth is the most valuable thing a Hero has. Which seems like it’s going to tie into the plot of the movie, but then…the movie just kind of forgets about it. I mean, yeah, that lesson does seem relevant to the situation with Steve Trevor, but neither the movie nor the character actually reference it. At all. The entire continuity-violating bloated CGI sequence doesn’t actually add much of anything to her character or the plot.
And, of course, also the bit about her being cut off from the world for a century (except she was foiling robberies in costume the whole time), about how she’s a complete mystery and the only trace Lex Luthor or Batman can find of her is a single World War I photograph (except she was foiling robberies in costume the whole time), that photo is her only connection to humanity (except she has an apartment full of photos of her friends and rich, full life, including multiple other photos of Steve Trevor), she manifests powers and abilities in 1984 that she didn’t seem to have in 2017, and…look, the whole continuity is just a nonsensical mess.
Plus the jet.
I didn’t see a jet…
I think you’ve officially won this thread.
Since the jet’s been beaten to death, how about this for the MacGuffin. So, it’s been to the Indus Valley four millennia ago, the Kush (not sure if they mean the Hindu Kush or the Kingdom of Kush in Egypt and Sudan) two millennia ago, the end of the Western Roman Empire in AD 476, and somehow made it across the Atlantic to the Mayans. All of which, we are told, are civilizations that suddenly and mysteriously collapsed.
At which point I said: I’m pretty damn sure we know exactly when and how and why the Western Roman Empire collapsed. And even besides that, we’re pretty damn sure that climate change and various anthropogenic activities were a contributing factor to the reason all those other civilizations collapsed.