[sum1]

Originally Posted by LightYears (View Post) She would make a great Kitty Pryde/Shadowcat.

That's a good suggestion.

I recently saw Debra Winger play Wonder Woman's sister Wonder Girl in season 1 of the '70s Wonder Woman show and I realized that in her day she would have made a great Kitty Pryde. She might have been too old for the role even back when Kitty Pryde first appeared, alas. But otherwise a perfect match. It goes without saying that she was the best thing in that lame show.

[PhoenixRising]

That's commendable of Margot Robbie, dragonfire, but what the hell does she know about comic books? I'm all for a female superhero team, but I prefer one that reflects the comics, not Robbie's own personal aesthetic. BOP are Batgirl, Huntress, and Black Canary, and Robbie's Hollywood-influenced contribution is not necessary. Keep the comic book adaptations to the people who know comics.

Hi, sum1! OMG, Debra Winger as Wonder Girl? Man, that takes me back. I remember seeing her opposite Lynda Carter on Wonder Woman back in the 70's when I was a kid. I don't know about her being Kitty Pryde, but she does make a good superhero nonetheless.

[sum1]

What do you mean you don't know about Debra Winger as KItty Pryde? She'd have been perfect for the role.

[PhoenixRising]

You think so? Like you said, she didn't really look young enough. But then, I only know Debra from her 80's stuff, so maybe I just can't picture it. Maybe when she was really young, okay.

[sum1]

That Wonder Woman show had some really sexist stuff in it. Like Wonder Woman had to wear a special belt or she'd lose her powers and it proved quite easy for enemies to snatch it off her, and she showed no special combat knowledge when powerless. That totally invalidates the character. It's like they couldn't really believe in a super strong woman.

Also, Lynda Carter was totally inappropriate for the role. She had no muscle on her and looked weak. Her acting in the first season was very stiff. It improved in the second season, but she never gave an impression of strength or came off like a warrior. And their low budget rendition of the costume looked ridiculous and didn't help how she came off.

Also, the Amazons were portrayed in a most pathetic way. Running around in their nightgowns with no weapons or armour. The Amazons of myth were by definition warriors, warlike, brutal, aggressive, obsessed with war and also interested in hunting (Wonder Woman being a vegetarian in the comics is beyond ridiculous). They worshipped Ares and were descended from him (so much for the movie version being an opponent of Ares). They seared off one breast so they could better use the bow, which was a symbolic statement of them prizing war over nurturing. One Amazon queen was said to have had her male servants crippled so as to make them better lovers. These weren't nicey-nicey, nurturing, compassionate women. The Wonder Woman comic book/tv/movie take on them is wrong and is an example of forcing women into sexist gender stereotypes. It's the whole traditional idea of woman being made of "sugar and spice and everything nice". The idea that women have to be nice and compassionate and peaceful and smiling is forcing gender codes of behavior on women. There's a criminal amount of that in the Wonder Woman story. DC needs to get away from that. The next time they reboot their comics they should portray the Amazons the way they were in myth.

Let's remember, the character's creator, William Moulton Marston, had pretty messed up ideas about women. Among the traits he felt women should aspire to was submissiveness. Some bloody feminist. Unless acted by a good actress (like Gal Gadot) or written by a good writer, Wonder Woman has the potential to be a monster of sexism and restrictive stereotyping.

[dragonfire]

Box Office: 'Aquaman' Has Become DC Films' Biggest Overseas Grosser

https://www.forbes.com/sites/scottme...rseas-grosser/

[sum1]

Glad to hear it's successful.

[PhoenixRising]

Thanks, dragonfire. Nice to see Arthur getting some respect for once.

Well, sum1, I disagree on some of your points. The "special belt" is something I barely remember from the 70's show, and I think that was only used during the first season, which was set in the 1940's during World War II. I don't remember that belt having anything to do with her powers in seasons 2 and 3, which were set in the present-day late 1970's, so I think they retconned that out of the show. And Diana actually did show combat knowledge during the contest where she had to compete to be the one to escort Steve Trevor off of the island and back to the mainland. She wore a mask at the time so that her mother wouldn't know that it was her, as she had forbidden Diana to compete for the honor.

As for Lynda Carter being inappropriate for the role, I don't see how that was true. She was very tall and athletic, and I don't remember her being any less fit than Gal Gadot. Sure, Gal served in the Israeli military, but she doesn't look like a female body builder. As for the costume, well, it was the 70's. Christopher Reeve's Superman outfit also looks primitive by comparison to the ones worn by Brandon Routh and Henry Cavill. In Wonder Woman's second and third seasons, Diana seemed a much more dynamic and strong character, as those seasons seemed to be taking their cues more from The Bionic Woman and Charlie's Angels than the comics.

As for how the Amazons were portrayed, well... this was the 1970's, sum1. You have to remember where American entertainment and pop culture at that time in the post-Vietnam, post-Watergate era. Anything martial or militant wasn't encouraged at the time. Even G.I. Joe dolls(Action Man in the UK) went from being soldier dolls dressed in military uniforms and equipped with rifles and handguns, to action-adventure dolls dressed in survival gear and extreme weather and harsh environment gear. And of course, the Kung-Fu grip. The "nightgowns" were typical of post-60's hippie mentality. Do you remember the Justice League cartoon from the 1960's? That show had Superman, Hawkman, Green Lantern, The Flash, and the Atom(Batman and Wonder Woman couldn't be used because Warner Bros. hadn't bought DC yet and the rights belonged to other studios). But the 70's Justice League cartoon wasn't even called "Justice League," it was called "Superfriends," and it was far more kid-friendly and had Superman, Batman, Robin, Wonder Woman, Aquaman, and a couple of normal teenagers with no powers who were "honorary" superheroes, along with their dog. They were later replaced by the "Wonder Twins." It wasn't until the 80's that the Superfriends show started looking more like the Justice League.

My point is, this was the American culture in the 70's, where pro-military sentiment was out of style after Vietnam. The Amazons were portrayed as Greek-influenced, but not warriors. Shows like The Bionic Woman and Charlie's Angels also showed women who were strong, brave, and tough, while still being glamorous and sexy, but not too tough. Even male action heroes in the 70's weren't quite on the same level as the John Wayne, Clint Eastwood, and Steve McQueen types of the previous decades. You had The Six Million Dollar Man, but not much else. Starsky & Hutch and other characters were played more for humor.

And William Marston... well, remember who he based Wonder Woman on. His wife, and their female lover, and from what I heard, his wife was the dominant and their girlfriend was the submissive, and he was somewhere in the middle.

[sum1]

Originally Posted by PhoenixRising (View Post) Thanks, dragonfire. Nice to see Arthur getting some respect for once. Well, sum1, I disagree on some of your points. The "special belt" is something I barely remember from the 70's show, and I think that was only used during the first season, which was set in the 1940's during World War II. I don't remember that belt having anything to do with her powers in seasons 2 and 3, which were set in the present-day late 1970's, so I think they retconned that out of the show.

They didn't. It was used past season 1 and still shown to be necessary for her to keep her powers outside of Paradise Island.

And Diana actually did show combat knowledge during the contest where she had to compete to be the one to escort Steve Trevor off of the island and back to the mainland. She wore a mask at the time so that her mother wouldn't know that it was her, as she had forbidden Diana to compete for the honor.

I really wish you'd read my posts before answering them. I said "and she showed no special combat knowledge when powerless." The incident you describe took place on her home island, Paradise Island, and as such she had her powers then. So that's hardly an example of her showing combat skill WHEN POWERLESS.

As for Lynda Carter being inappropriate for the role, I don't see how that was true. She was very tall and athletic, and I don't remember her being any less fit than Gal Gadot. Sure, Gal served in the Israeli military, but she doesn't look like a female body builder.

You need to dig up pics of the two of them in their roles and compare, like I did. Gal Gadot shows a LOT more muscle. Lynda shows no special muscle at all. She certainly doesn't look especially athletic. In fact, even Debra Winger as Wonder Girl looked significantly more muscular.

5 pics of Gal Gadot's musculature and 2 of fragile Lynda Carter as Wonder Woman, plus 1 of Debra:

Gal:

http://sciencefiction.com/2014/02/18...er-woman-role/

http://batman.wikia.com/wiki/Wonder_Woman_(Gal_Gadot)

https://www.slashfilm.com/gal-gadot-...oman-pregnant/

https://www.nme.com/features/gal-gad...n-2017-2082497

https://www.flickr.com/photos/24260060@N08/27841175044/

Lynda:

http://wonder-woman.wikia.com/wiki/W...(Lynda_Carter)

https://www.etsy.com/ie/listing/1549...season-2-lynda

Debra:

https://www.pinterest.ie/pin/305048574736767557/

As for the costume, well, it was the 70's. Christopher Reeve's Superman outfit also looks primitive by comparison to the ones worn by Brandon Routh and Henry Cavill.

Lynda's costume was notably more primitive and ridiculous-looking than Christopher Reeve's.

As for how the Amazons were portrayed, well... this was the 1970's, sum1. You have to remember where American entertainment and pop culture at that time in the post-Vietnam, post-Watergate era. Anything martial or militant wasn't encouraged at the time. Even G.I. Joe dolls(Action Man in the UK) went from being soldier dolls dressed in military uniforms and equipped with rifles and handguns, to action-adventure dolls dressed in survival gear and extreme weather and harsh environment gear. And of course, the Kung-Fu grip. The "nightgowns" were typical of post-60's hippie mentality. Do you remember the Justice League cartoon from the 1960's? That show had Superman, Hawkman, Green Lantern, The Flash, and the Atom(Batman and Wonder Woman couldn't be used because Warner Bros. hadn't bought DC yet and the rights belonged to other studios). But the 70's Justice League cartoon wasn't even called "Justice League," it was called "Superfriends," and it was far more kid-friendly and had Superman, Batman, Robin, Wonder Woman, Aquaman, and a couple of normal teenagers with no powers who were "honorary" superheroes, along with their dog. They were later replaced by the "Wonder Twins." It wasn't until the 80's that the Superfriends show started looking more like the Justice League. My point is, this was the American culture in the 70's, where pro-military sentiment was out of style after Vietnam. The Amazons were portrayed as Greek-influenced, but not warriors. Shows like The Bionic Woman and Charlie's Angels also showed women who were strong, brave, and tough, while still being glamorous and sexy, but not too tough. Even male action heroes in the 70's weren't quite on the same level as the John Wayne, Clint Eastwood, and Steve McQueen types of the previous decades. You had The Six Million Dollar Man, but not much else. Starsky & Hutch and other characters were played more for humor.

All that would work as an argument, except the portrayal of the Amazons in the show had its roots in the Marston's bull about women from decades before. Anyway, no amount of decade-specific nonsense justifies such warping of myths in such a sexist way.

And may I remind you that Clint Eastwod was in fact very much in fashion in the '70s? Most of the Dirty Harry movies date from then, as did Death Wish and numerous other aggressive flms. So I disagree with you about the trends of the '70s being so peaceful.

And William Marston... well, remember who he based Wonder Woman on. His wife, and their female lover, and from what I heard, his wife was the dominant and their girlfriend was the submissive, and he was somewhere in the middle.

He based Wonder Woman on his own ideas, a large part of which were bull.

[PhoenixRising]

Originally Posted by sum1 (View Post) It wasn't. It was used past season 1 and still shown to be necessary for her to keep her powers outside of Paradise Island. I really wish you'd read my posts before answering them. I said "and she showed no special combat knowledge when powerless." The incident you describe took place on her home island, Paradise Island, and as such she had her powers then. So that's hardly an example of her showing combat skill WHEN POWERLESS.

Okay, I'm sorry. I haven't seen that show in a long time. As for the differences in the physiques between Lynda and Gal, I guess they have different body types, but I still don't see Lynda as being frail.

Originally Posted by sum1 (View Post) Lynda's costume was notably more primitive and ridiculous-looking than Christopher Reeve's.

Obviously, since the show had a much smaller budget.

Originally Posted by sum1 (View Post) And may I remind you that Clint Eastwod was in fact very much in fashion in the '70s? Most of the Dirty Harry movis date from then, as did Death Wish and numerous other aggressive flms. So I disagree with you about the trends of the '70s being so peaceful. He based Wonder Woman on his own ideas, a large part of which were bull.

Yes, that's true, and both of those movies were extremely controversial and took a lot of criticism for their content. Dirty Harry was practically called fascist by movie critics. TV shows in the 70's tended to steer away from that stuff. And from what I heard a lot of Wonder Woman was also inspired by his wife's suggestions, along with their girlfriend. But I guess it's a moot point since Wonder Woman has evolved a lot since then.

[sum1]

Originally Posted by PhoenixRising (View Post) Okay, I'm sorry. I haven't seen that show in a long time. As for the differences in the physiques between Lynda and Gal, I guess they have different body types, but I still don't see Lynda as being frail.

She's certainly frail by the standards of what Wonder Woman should be.

Obviously, since the show had a much smaller budget.

It looks like a lot less effort was put in, too.

Yes, that's true, and both of those movies were extremely controversial and took a lot of criticism for their content. Dirty Harry was practically called fascist by movie critics.

That would have happened in any decade. In the '80s Conan the Barbarian (the movie) was called fascist by the critics. Harry Brown, a British vigilante movie starring Michael Caine, was highly controversial about a decade back, like Death Wish was in the '70s. The truth is the movies were a lot more free with that kind of stuff in the '70s than later.

TV shows in the 70's tended to steer away from that stuff. And from what I heard a lot of Wonder Woman was also inspired by his wife's suggestions, along with their girlfriend. But I guess it's a moot point since Wonder Woman has evolved a lot since then.

Wonder Woman has evolved a lot since the show. Saying the show was inferior because it was of its time hardly changes the fact that it was inferior.

[PhoenixRising]

Originally Posted by sum1 (View Post) She's certainly frail by the standards of what Wonder Woman should be. It looks like a lot less effort was put in, too.

Meh, I don't know. They look pretty comparable to me. Their outfits differ greatly. But a lot of TV superhero outfits looked bad. Remember John Wesley-Shipp's outfit in The Flash in 1990? Lynda was tall and curvy. Also, it was the 70's and a lot of women action heroes were like that. Lindsey Wagner on The Bionic Woman didn't have a muscular physique, nor did the cast of Charlie's Angels.

Originally Posted by sum1 (View Post) That would have happened in any decade. In the '80s Conan the Barbarian (the movie) was called fascist by the critics. Harry Brown, a British vigilante movie starring Michael Caine, was highly controversial about a decade back, like Death Wish was in the '70s. The truth is the movies were a lot more free with that kind of stuff in the '70s than later.

Well, Conan The Barbarian in the 80's was criticized for its violence, but again, this was the 80's and it was a different time from the 70's, sum1. It was the Rambo decade, the decade of Indiana Jones and Snake Plissken, of Lethal Weapon and Die Hard. Even TV had stuff like The A-Team and Miami Vice. And did you see what Bronson was able to get away with in the Death Wish sequels in the 80's? Hollywood movies weren't as skittish about going full-on alpha male in the Reagan era. And of course, Sigourney Weaver in Aliens.

As for Wonder Woman evolving, well... DC itself did a lot of evolving due to competition from Marvel. There was a time in the 60's where they actually de-powered Wonder Woman, and the only reason they gave her powers back was because of the success of the 70's TV show.

[sum1]

Originally Posted by PhoenixRising (View Post) Meh, I don't know. They look pretty comparable to me.

Then you need to look closer. The pictures I gave you above demonstrate the diffence far better than the small picture you posted. Gal Gadot looks badass. Lynda Carter looked weak. And it wasn't just a difference of physique, there was a difference in facial expression too -in facial expression Gal's Wonder Woman looks badass while Lynda's looks stiff and bland.

For physique, contrast:

Gal:

http://sciencefiction.com/2014/02/18...er-woman-role/

http://batman.wikia.com/wiki/Wonder_Woman_(Gal_Gadot)

https://www.slashfilm.com/gal-gadot-...oman-pregnant/

https://www.nme.com/features/gal-gad...n-2017-2082497

https://www.flickr.com/photos/24260060@N08/27841175044/

Lynda:

http://wonder-woman.wikia.com/wiki/W...(Lynda_Carter)

https://www.etsy.com/ie/listing/1549...season-2-lynda

Their outfits differ greatly. But a lot of TV superhero outfits looked bad. Remember John Wesley-Shipp's outfit in The Flash in 1990?

That's no excuse. You're just admitting it was all crap.

Lynda was tall and curvy. Also, it was the 70's and a lot of women action heroes were like that. Lindsey Wagner on The Bionic Woman didn't have a muscular physique, nor did the cast of Charlie's Angels.

And that was a result of the sexism of the era. Saying that the show was faulted because shows like that often were back then does not in any way detract from the fact that the show was faulted. Saying the '70s were sexist doesn't change the fact that '70s were sexist.

Well, Conan The Barbarian in the 80's was criticized for its violence, but again, this was the 80's and it was a different time from the 70's, sum1. It was the Rambo decade, the decade of Indiana Jones and Snake Plissken, of Lethal Weapon and Die Hard. Even TV had stuff like The A-Team and Miami Vice. And did you see what Bronson was able to get away with in the Death Wish sequels in the 80's? Hollywood movies weren't as skittish about going full-on alpha male in the Reagan era. And of course, Sigourney Weaver in Aliens.

Actually Conan the Barbarian was expressly called fascist, just as Dirty Harry was a decade earlier. Two different decades, same reaction. Not such a big difference.

As for Wonder Woman evolving, well... DC itself did a lot of evolving due to competition from Marvel. There was a time in the 60's where they actually de-powered Wonder Woman, and the only reason they gave her powers back was because of the success of the 70's TV show.

They would have given her powers back in time anyway. Depowered characters always get repowered eventually. Like Superman, Hercules and Storm.

[PhoenixRising]

Originally Posted by sum1 (View Post) Actually Conan the Barbarian was expressly called fascist, just as Dirty Harry was a decade earlier. Two different decades, same reaction. Not such a big difference.

Yeah, but the political climate in the 80's was different, sum1. In the 80's you had First Blood, Rambo, Predator, Die Hard, Lethal Weapon, The Terminator, Aliens, Robocop, Commando, Escape From New York, Raiders of the Lost Ark... it was action movie heaven back then. The journalists who criticized the films didn't have nearly as much influence as they did in the 70's. In the 80's no one cared, they just loved the action.

Well, Gal and Lynda just play it differently. I guess it's a matter of taste. And of course all the costumes were bad back then. TV didn't start doing superhero shows better until just recently when it comes to production.

And it doesn't mean that it was sexism. Not every actress wanted to look like Ms. Olympia back in those days. Just being a strong role model was good enough, but not everyone was willing to work out like they do now. Even the male superheroes weren't as buff as they are now. Look at Christopher Reeve compared to Henry Cavill. Reeve looks like a stick figure next to Henry. Same thing with Michael Keaton compared to Christian Bale.

[sum1]

Originally Posted by PhoenixRising (View Post) Yeah, but the political climate in the 80's was different, sum1. In the 80's you had First Blood, Rambo, Predator, Die Hard, Lethal Weapon, The Terminator, Aliens, Robocop, Commando, Escape From New York, Raiders of the Lost Ark... it was action movie heaven back then. The journalists who criticized the films didn't have nearly as much influence as they did in the 70's. In the 80's no one cared, they just loved the action.

Except, as I showed, many of the criticisms were the same. And there were far more harsh films during the '70s than you seem to realize. High Plains Drifter, anyone?

And anyway, this part of the discussion was all about you saying there was prejudice against doing an action show properly back in the '70s (not your words but the same meaning). Saying that stupid attitudes in the '70s prevented them from doing the show right doesn't change the fact that they didn't do the show right. You can blame it in on the era if you like, but it's still crap and the portrayal of the amazons was still sexist. Sexism was rampant in the '70s.

Well, Gal and Lynda just play it differently. I guess it's a matter of taste.

No it's not. There's a right way and a wrong way to play a strong warrior. Hayden Christensen got it wrong in the Star Wars Prequels, Lynda Carter got it wrong on tv. Gal Gadot got it right.

And of course all the costumes were bad back then. TV didn't start doing superhero shows better until just recently when it comes to production.

That's no excuse. Saying they did it wrong doesn't amount to an argument that they didn't do it wrong.

And it doesn't mean that it was sexism. Not every actress wanted to look like Ms. Olympia back in those days. Just being a strong role model was good enough, but not everyone was willing to work out like they do now. Even the male superheroes weren't as buff as they are now. Look at Christopher Reeve compared to Henry Cavill. Reeve looks like a stick figure next to Henry. Same thing with Michael Keaton compared to Christian Bale.

It was sexism. People just weren't prepared to accept muscular women back then. They wanted to pretend they believed in kickass action heroines, but they didn't really believe and weren't prepared to endorse the real thing onscreen.

And no, Christophr Reeve didn't look like a stick figure, even compared to Henry Cavill. He looked muscular, significantly less so than Henry Cavill, but respectably muscular nonetheless. Whereas Lynda Carter looked fragile.

As for Michael Keaton, he wore an outfit that accentuated his muscles.