Wonder Woman by JEWELSTAITEFAN

All indications are that this will be a record setter. On Fandango/Flixster it posted a 94% critics rating on Rotten Tomatoes. I would say that's pretty good.
I was impressed with Gadot's charisma in the awful Batman vs Superman fiasco.

I already have my ticket for Friday, and I'm like a little kid at Christmas.
I will stop here and wait patiently until June 2. Then I will let you guys know
how good this film is.

SGG

Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
The London release was apparently cancelled due to the Manchester bombing.

North America will need to take up the slack.

Next Friday.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0451279/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, June 1, 2017 6:51 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
The London release was apparently cancelled due to the Manchester bombing.

North America will need to take up the slack.

Next Friday.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0451279/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1

All indications are that this will be a record setter. On Fandango/Flixster it posted a 94% critics rating on Rotten Tomatoes. I would say that's pretty good.
I was impressed with Gadot's charisma in the awful Batman vs Superman fiasco.

I already have my ticket for Friday, and I'm like a little kid at Christmas.
I will stop here and wait patiently until June 2. Then I will let you guys know how good this film is.

SGG

Why not tonight? My smaller local cinema has at least one showing starting every hour from 7 to 11.
If I didn't need to go to work at 6am, I'd be there.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, June 2, 2017 5:40 PM

ZEEK

Slow. Clunky. CGI fest. Still the best DC movie since Zack Snyder took over.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, June 2, 2017 11:54 PM

Tonight was the night. First off, I don't agree with Zeek. It was not clunky, it actually took it's time setting up the story of the origin of Wonder Woman. I appreciated that 1) Zack Snyder did not write the screenplay and 2) that he did not direct.

Thank God for small wonders.

Yes, it had a deliberate pace, but it was not slow. It reminded me of the films from the 70s that actually told a story as it entertained. Directed by Patty Jenkins, remember that name, I'm not sure of other films she's directed because I'm still researching (for some reason I thought Snyder was directing), but from the little I did get she's been fighting to direct for the last 10 years. I think her time has come, so much so that she's got some thoughts about WW2.

Okay, I just found something on Patty Jenkins, for which I'm pleasantly surprised, and I quote:

Quote:
Jenkins made her feature directing debut with 2003's Monster, which won star Charlize Theron an Oscar for Best Actress. Since then, however, Jenkins hasn't made another feature film, turning instead to television, where she's directed episodes of Arrested Development, Entourage, and the acclaimed pilot episode of The Killing. (Buzzfeed)

She's scheduled to direct WW2....based on how well this movie was crafted, good choice.

Now, on to the movie's lead...Gal Gadot is a STAR, so talented, both her and Chris Pine had chemistry, this despite the presentation within the script, I thought it a tad incomplete. But make no mistake, this was 100% her vehicle and she knocked it out of the park. And to think they were considering offering the role to an American actress. By the way, as an aside, Lynda Carter was invited by Snyder to give her blessing (personally, I thought it a great touch by the movie's producers). Oh and she did, she was even given a credit at movie's end.

Gadot is not just a pretty face, this woman can act. That is not to say that Meryll Streep will be out of a job anytime soon, but she does have skill. This movie was fun, funny and entertaining in every sense of the word. The CGI was, to me, seamless and flowed well within the confines of the story. The action sequences were well thought out and sprinkled brilliantly throughout the film.
My only moment of slight disappointment was in the final scenes of Act 3, the grand finale with WW and the arch villain battle. Other than that I was thoroughly
entertained. This reminded me of the very first Iron Man in terms of storytelling and pace. I put it on even par with that film, and maybe give Wonder Woman a slight edge.

The entire cast did a marvelous job in telling this story and Gadot was firmly in the forefront as it's star. Especially Connie Nielsen, Robin Wright and Chris Pine.
Although appearing briefly Connie Nielsen was solid as Queen Hippolyta, both her and Robin Wright as Antiope, gave the movie it's gravitas. There are some obvious
commentaries regarding the senseless act of war and our involvement, or lack thereof. But don't worry, this doesn't turn into a political diatribe. This is strictly a superhero movie done absolutely right. I could see why Rotten Tomatoes gave it a 94% rating. I'm definitely getting the DVD/Blu-Ray.

SGG

Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Quote:
Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
The London release was apparently cancelled due to the Manchester bombing.

North America will need to take up the slack.

Next Friday.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0451279/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1

All indications are that this will be a record setter. On Fandango/Flixster it posted a 94% critics rating on Rotten Tomatoes. I would say that's pretty good.
I was impressed with Gadot's charisma in the awful Batman vs Superman fiasco.

I already have my ticket for Friday, and I'm like a little kid at Christmas.
I will stop here and wait patiently until June 2. Then I will let you guys know how good this film is.

SGG

Why not tonight? My smaller local cinema has at least one showing starting every hour from 7 to 11.
If I didn't need to go to work at 6am, I'd be there.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, June 3, 2017 5:01 PM

I'm glad I saw it last night. It wasn't as good as I had hoped, but DC Comics + No-Baffleck seems to be a better formula. I watched the 2D version.

The backstory displayed here seems different than my recollection of prior versions. I had not realized this fictional story takes place at the same time and some places as The Promise, which was about the Armenian Holocaust, with the decline and fall of the Ottoman Empire circa WWI. (hints: The War To End All Wars was what we call WWI. Kaiser Wilhelm was the German war King for WWI, for WWII it was Hitler. The Ottoman Empire did not exist by 1930. Biplanes were developed during WWI.)

Sometimes when watching a film you wonder if there was another writer's strike during production. Like one of the Transformers when everybody enters the front of the Smithsonian Air & Space Museum in downtown District of Columbia and leave by the back door, stepping into the Arizona desert, near Yuma. So if you pay attention to what is presented from the script, a WWI era plane (around 100 mph speed, maybe 7.5 hours for 750 mile range) flies from the Ottoman Empire to the isolated hidden Island of Amazon Women, it must be hidden in one of the Seas surrounding the Arabian Peninsula, or maybe the Mediterranean, for no Ocean is in range.
I got that feeling several times during Wonder Woman.
But some of the filming or action reminded me of 300, and maybe Transformers. It is possible that more editing could have benefited the film.

There seemed to be a bunch of feminazi dogma forced into the script - perhpas due to the female-heavy credit list (director, producers, etc).

I enjoyed most of the cast. I still prefer Connie Nielsen performances in Soldier and Gladiator, but her role seemed constrained here. Chris Pine sometimes sounds like Capt Kirk, so he is a hippie soldier perhaps hoping his hair will disguise his similar appearance to Capt Kirk. My favorite Elena Anaya performance since The Skin I Live In (2011), my fave Ewen Bremner performance since Blackhawk Down (2001), the first role for Lily Aspell - approached on the street specifically for this role. And I really enjoyed Gal Gadot's performance, although I still enjoyed her work in Fast Furious, and still consider Criminal to be my favorite work from her. The song by Sia does not even arrive until the End Credits are rolling in earnest.

If I were getting a DVD with Wonder Woman, I'd likely get the 70's Lynda Carter TV over this one, but this has enough stuff to fill the big screen, which would likely be lost on DVD.
I really hope for future installations of this character set.

i liked it better than Ghost in the Shell, but I think I was more entertained by Colossal. Far better than any Baffleck work.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 4, 2017 5:33 PM

America loves a winner!

Saw it today, generally liked it, but I'm glad I didn't have my hopes set too high.

Parts were cleverly written, other parts were.. not so much. Still, I'd have given it an A rating, over the first 3/4 of the film. The ending though... ugh. Too much CGI ( a trademark for DC films ) Why can't they come up w/ a satisfying , well set up finish to their movies ? It's why Marvel has been kicking their ass to date, and will likely do so until they change how they do things.

Geography does seem to be a sore spot. Leave 'somewhere 'in the Mediterranean sea , ( the Aegean Sea, at best ), in a small sail boat, and wake up the next morning , riding up the Thames ? Hello, London!

I hope the Amazon gals can move their island, because I'm thinking that the Med sea, in the 21st century, it won't be so easy to conceal an entire island from Google Maps. Just sayin'.

* Why do we have to wait until well over 1/2 through the movie to hear WW's theme music kick in? As she starts to finally kick ass , ... and why wasn't it set up earlier in the movie? Stuff like that, I dunno, just seems like it sort a just appears, out of no where, and now , when ever you see her in a trialer, that theme music cranks up...

Tired now. Nite.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 5, 2017 4:06 AM

For the most part, I agree with you Rappy. I admit I was a little pumped to see WW, but I tried to keep focused on the overall tone of the movie. I liked it a lot.
But I did have trouble with the final battle, it reminded me of the Man of Steel battle between Zod and Superman (although this one wasn't quite as long as in that movie).

Another pet peeve of mine is that they showed far too much in the trailers, I felt as though I saw much of the movie. Still though, I enjoyed it very much. As far as the geography was concerned - it's a story about a fictional character guys, and the Island was supposedly hidden from mankind. We're talking about a demigod (WW) brought to life by Zeus (another fictional character). The audience is supposed to suspend their belief and go along with the fantasy that a woman with superhuman strength and blessed with immortality ever existed. Remember Superman came to us from Krypton, Spider-Man was bitten by a radioactive spider, etc.

Well, as superhero movies go, Wonder Woman was actually well done. And they picked a good actress to portray the character - even her accent made it that much more
entertaining and true to the character. Gadot was an excellent choice. By the way, I saw the 3D version (except for a little darkness on screen, overall it was well done).

SGG

Quote:

posted by AURaptor:
Saw it today, generally liked it, but I'm glad I didn't have my hopes set too high.

Parts were cleverly written, other parts were.. not so much. Still, I'd have given it an A rating, over the first 3/4 of the film. The ending though... ugh. Too much CGI ( a trademark for DC films ) Why can't they come up w/ a satisfying , well set up finish to their movies ? It's why Marvel has been kicking their ass to date, and will likely do so until they change how they do things.

Geography does seem to be a sore spot. Leave 'somewhere 'in the Mediterranean sea , ( the Aegean Sea, at best ), in a small sail boat, and wake up the next morning , riding up the Thames ? Hello, London!

I hope the Amazon gals can move their island, because I'm thinking that the Med sea, in the 21st century, it won't be so easy to conceal an entire island from Google Maps. Just sayin'.

* Why do we have to wait until well over 1/2 through the movie to hear WW's theme music kick in? As she starts to finally kick ass , ... and why wasn't it set up earlier in the movie? Stuff like that, I dunno, just seems like it sort a just appears, out of no where, and now , when ever you see her in a trialer, that theme music cranks up...

Tired now. Nite.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 5, 2017 6:25 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Saw it today, generally liked it, but I'm glad I didn't have my hopes set too high.

Parts were cleverly written, other parts were.. not so much. Still, I'd have given it an A rating, over the first 3/4 of the film. The ending though... ugh. Too much CGI ( a trademark for DC films ) Why can't they come up w/ a satisfying , well set up finish to their movies ? It's why Marvel has been kicking their ass to date, and will likely do so until they change how they do things.

highly agree so far.
Quote:

Geography does seem to be a sore spot. Leave 'somewhere 'in the Mediterranean sea, (the Aegean Sea, at best), in a small sail boat, and wake up the next morning, riding up the Thames? Hello, London!
maybe they just transported, you know? Kirk said Beam Us Up, WW was none the wiser.

Quote:

I hope the Amazon gals can move their island, because I'm thinking that the Med sea, in the 21st century, it won't be so easy to conceal an entire island from Google Maps. Just sayin'.

I guess I didn't elaborate enough in my review - implied that ALL of the bodies of water within range of Ottoman Empire were pretty well charted, even before WWI.

Does anybody find it odd, in a feminazi infused fiction, that women are certain that the solution to WAR is Violence, Killing, Combat and not Love?

I wasn't certain her accent added or detracted, but it did seem to fluctuate quite a bit. Maybe some scenes were shot out of sequence by months, and her accent was changing. Now I wonder, does the Israeli version have her dubbed by a British or English accent, to maintain the 'foreign' concept? (ala the spaghetti westerns)

Select to view spoiler:

Is the God status a spoiler? Or was that already present in prior backstory? I don't understand why she would be a Demi-God, instead of a Full God. Was Greek God Ares a Demi-God, the Greeks did not use such a term? Zeus created Diana, a God capable and specifically purposed to Kill Ares - how could she be a lesser God than Ares?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, June 6, 2017 11:19 AM

ZEEK

When I says "since Snyder took over" I don't mean to imply he wrote and directed Wonder Woman. I just mean DC movies since the Nolan Batman movies. Because if we include those then even the crummy Bane movie is better than Wonder Woman.

Select to view spoiler:

The reason Ares is not a demigod is because he's the child of Zeus and Hera. Both gods. Diana is a child of Zeus and Hypolita (sp?). One god one amazon. So, she's not full god. Though I will say if the movie is to be taken seriously then she's apparently invulnerable now. They said "it takes a god to kill a god" and if she was able to kill a god then she must be a god herself and supposedly the last one. So, unless she has offspring who are also gods then nothing should be able to kill her. It's lines like that which really drag a movie down IMO. It seems like it was flippantly thrown in to sound cool without taking into account what it actually means.

I want to reiterate that I don't think it was a bad movie, but to act like it was a masterpiece is silly to me. Even in the trailers we see the scene where she apparently can't understand that holding her shield flat will prevent her from passing through a narrow doorway. I get that she's a fish out of water, but why does that make her too stupid to understand that solid matter rarely passes through other solid matter? That's just shoddy writing because she's obviously not a stupid character in the rest of the film. It really seemed like the movie needed a script doctor to polish it. As is it's a bit dull.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, June 6, 2017 2:43 PM

6STRINGJOKER

Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
There seemed to be a bunch of feminazi dogma forced into the script - perhpas due to the female-heavy credit list (director, producers, etc).

Have you ever read about the origins of Wonder Woman? William Moulton Marston was a pretty brilliant guy with big time submissive tenancies when it came to his sexual tastes. He lived with his wife and another woman in a "poly-amorous" relationship. He wasn't just making things up when he wrote Wonder Woman and the other Amazons in the comics. He was living the life at home.

He also was partially responsible for the creation of the polygraph machine, which is probably tied in with WW's golden lasso.

I'm sure I'll get around to seeing this at some point, but DC movies just don't really do anything for me. The last one I saw was the 2nd Bale Batman. I don't know what DC's doing wrong... especially with Batman. Most of their other characters are just not as interesting as Marvel's characters, but how do you constantly screw up Batman?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, June 6, 2017 6:38 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by 6stringJoker:
Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
There seemed to be a bunch of feminazi dogma forced into the script - perhpas due to the female-heavy credit list (director, producers, etc).

Have you ever read about the origins of Wonder Woman? William Moulton Marston was a pretty brilliant guy with big time submissive tenancies when it came to his sexual tastes.

I thought I had, but it has been a long time. It's kinda fuzzy, but the story in the film didn't ring as many bells as I expected.

Quote:

I don't know what DC's doing wrong... especially with Batman. Most of their other characters are just not as interesting as Marvel's characters, but how do you constantly screw up Batman?

Start with Baffleck. Mission accomplished.

Quote:
Originally posted by Zeek:
Select to view spoiler:
The reason Ares is not a demigod is because he's the child of Zeus and Hera. Both gods. Diana is a child of Zeus and Hypolita (sp?). One god one amazon. So, she's not full god. Though I will say if the movie is to be taken seriously then she's apparently invulnerable now. They said "it takes a god to kill a god" and if she was able to kill a god then she must be a god herself and supposedly the last one. So, unless she has offspring who are also gods then nothing should be able to kill her. It's lines like that which really drag a movie down IMO. It seems like it was flippantly thrown in to sound cool without taking into account what it actually means.

Select to view spoiler:

Ares was the child of Zeus and Hera.
Diana was the creation of Zeus, the King of the Gods, IIRC. That would imply she was more powerful than Ares.
Not sure of the source you are using. The film clearly stated that Hippolyta was not Diana's mother. Diana was a gift from Zeus to the Amazon women (residing nowhere near the Amazon.) Diana was the Secret Weapon which Zeus created, to be safekept by Queen Hippolyta and the Amazon women, IIR the film's story correctly.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, June 6, 2017 7:24 PM

6STRINGJOKER

Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Start with Baffleck. Mission accomplished.

I think it started with Joel Schumacker and Val Kilmer/George Clooney. I'm pretty sure if they let him do a 3rd Batman movie it was going to star Nathan Lane as the caped Crusader.

My brother and I joked about that one night and came up with a whole plot for it. Nathan Lane as Batman and Robin Williams as Robin. It was going to be called The BatCage.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, June 6, 2017 8:14 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by 6stringJoker:
Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Start with Baffleck. Mission accomplished.

I think it started with Joel Schumacker and Val Kilmer/George Clooney. I'm pretty sure if they let him do a 3rd Batman movie it was going to star Nathan Lane as the caped Crusader.

My brother and I joked about that one night and came up with a whole plot for it. Nathan Lane as Batman and Robin Williams as Robin. It was going to be called The BatCage.

The Nolan/Bale films have since been. I felt they raised the bar significantly.

You misspelled in your post. It's spelled ButtCage.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, June 6, 2017 8:39 PM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
There seemed to be a bunch of feminazi dogma forced into the script - perhpas due to the female-heavy credit list (director, producers, etc).

Feminazi. I have to say, most folks misuse that word. It actually does NOT mean anything pro-woman or even feminist. It's more directed towards those perpetually angry types who go beyond praising women, but to the point of denigrating men, at every turn.

Did you SEE what those women warriors could do ? They were truly legit. Kinda like old school slayers, all of 'em. And Diana, well... super bad ass.

But the criticism of the movie actually has come from those who didn't think there was enough 'feminazi' dogma, so I guess you can't please everyone.

There are men who need to 'check themselves ' as in what they think a woman's proper role should be , just as there are women who need to do the same. In the real world, trans - women are routinely winning HS athletic competition against other females. There's a reason for that. Just sayin'.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, June 7, 2017 12:28 AM

6STRINGJOKER

Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
You misspelled in your post. It's spelled ButtCage.

lol... Nah, it's like that movie the Birdcage, but with Batman

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, June 7, 2017 4:41 AM

It is well established that Snyder uses way too much CGI (and uses it badly in both Superman v. Batman and here in WW), and it's also well established that he's not good at script writing despite the success of 300 and The Watchmen which were based on graphic novels written by Frank Miller and Lynn Varley; while the Watchmen was written by Alan Moore. Both films written by someone else and adapted by Michael B. Gordan, Kurt Johnstad, Zack Snyder.

Snyder and company should stick to materials written by other people which they could adapt (I'm thinking of the bomb Sucker Punch which Snyder created and wrote as an example of bad writing; imaginative, but bad). In the case of WW, she was brought to life by DC comics and William Marston. Were there some awkward scenes in WW, sure. I could almost point out which ones were written by Snyder (not really),
but that is not his strong suit. Neither is CGI FX. I dare say that his partners were more involved in the screenplay than Snyder, but the film did have it's moments. Although there were some scenes that just fell flat:

Select to view spoiler:

like when our heroes reach London and go shopping for clothes

But I just recently found out (by watching an interview on ET) that Patty Jenkins was directing I felt somewhat relieved. Whatever Snyder's talent is, it's not in the above-mentioned areas. Well, enough of that.

Select to view spoiler:

Ares is a God, as is Zeus. According to the legend within the film; Zeus, worried that Ares is out to destroy man - Zeus' creation - he imbues the clay form
he directed Hippolyta to shape into a female with certain God-like powers. It was she, Diana, that was called the Godkiller. So, like Hercules of Greek Myth, she was given super powers to kill Ares should he resurface to threaten mankind. She was a Demi-God, but with the strength, wisdom and drive to kill Ares.

I want to respond to your comment:

Quote:
I want to reiterate that I don't think it was a bad movie, but to act like it was a masterpiece is silly to me.

At no point in my post did I ever say that WW was a masterpiece. I only reserve that for movies that deliver an impact or that are inspiring; Wonder Woman is not one of those films. I said that it was "well done," that's a far site from "masterpiece."

SGG

Quote:
Originally posted by Zeek:
When I says "since Snyder took over" I don't mean to imply he wrote and directed Wonder Woman. I just mean DC movies since the Nolan Batman movies. Because if we include those then even the crummy Bane movie is better than Wonder Woman.

Select to view spoiler:
The reason Ares is not a demigod is because he's the child of Zeus and Hera. Both gods. Diana is a child of Zeus and Hypolita (sp?). One god one amazon. So, she's not full god. Though I will say if the movie is to be taken seriously then she's apparently invulnerable now. They said "it takes a god to kill a god" and if she was able to kill a god then she must be a god herself and supposedly the last one. So, unless she has offspring who are also gods then nothing should be able to kill her. It's lines like that which really drag a movie down IMO. It seems like it was flippantly thrown in to sound cool without taking into account what it actually means.

I want to reiterate that I don't think it was a bad movie, but to act like it was a masterpiece is silly to me. Even in the trailers we see the scene where she apparently can't understand that holding her shield flat will prevent her from passing through a narrow doorway. I get that she's a fish out of water, but why does that make her too stupid to understand that solid matter rarely passes through other solid matter? That's just shoddy writing because she's obviously not a stupid character in the rest of the film. It really seemed like the movie needed a script doctor to polish it. As is it's a bit dull.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, June 7, 2017 10:52 AM

ZEEK

Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Select to view spoiler:
Ares was the child of Zeus and Hera.
Diana was the creation of Zeus, the King of the Gods, IIRC. That would imply she was more powerful than Ares.
Not sure of the source you are using. The film clearly stated that Hippolyta was not Diana's mother. Diana was a gift from Zeus to the Amazon women (residing nowhere near the Amazon.) Diana was the Secret Weapon which Zeus created, to be safekept by Queen Hippolyta and the Amazon women, IIR the film's story correctly.

Select to view spoiler:

hmmm maybe I wasn't paying super close attention to the exact detials in the movie because in the comics "No longer a clay figure brought to life by the magic of the gods, she is, instead, a demi-goddess and the natural-born daughter of Hippolyta and Zeus." - wikipedia. When they said Zeus was her father I figured they were going with the current comic origin of Wonder Woman. Were they explicit about how Zeus "gave" the amazons Diana? I know they said it was one of his last acts, but I thought they sorta glossed over the details.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, June 7, 2017 11:01 AM

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

Wonder Woman’s dueling origin stories are explained at:
www.vox.com/culture/2017/6/7/15740202/wonder-woman-origin-story-amazon
s-marston-explained

In 2011, DC Comics instituted a relaunch of 52 of its titles called the “The New 52,” which essentially undid those titles’ previous storylines and “reset” them at a new starting point; it was characterized at the time as a way to make the comics more accessible to new readers. In writer Brian Azzarello and artist Cliff Chiang’s New 52 run, Wonder Woman’s origin is changed.

The movie gives BOTH origin stories, the old and the new. The movie leaves the final interpretation of Diana’s origin to its audience, and in doing so reflects a debate over Diana’s origin that’s been going on in Wonder Woman comic books over the past several years.

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, June 7, 2017 6:06 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Zeek:
Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Select to view spoiler:
Ares was the child of Zeus and Hera.
Diana was the creation of Zeus, the King of the Gods, IIRC. That would imply she was more powerful than Ares.
Not sure of the source you are using. The film clearly stated that Hippolyta was not Diana's mother. Diana was a gift from Zeus to the Amazon women (residing nowhere near the Amazon.) Diana was the Secret Weapon which Zeus created, to be safekept by Queen Hippolyta and the Amazon women, IIR the film's story correctly.

Select to view spoiler:
hmmm maybe I wasn't paying super close attention to the exact detials in the movie because in the comics "No longer a clay figure brought to life by the magic of the gods, she is, instead, a demi-goddess and the natural-born daughter of Hippolyta and Zeus." - wikipedia. When they said Zeus was her father I figured they were going with the current comic origin of Wonder Woman. Were they explicit about how Zeus "gave" the amazons Diana? I know they said it was one of his last acts, but I thought they sorta glossed over the details.

Wikipedia? When was the last time they got something right?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, June 7, 2017 6:07 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by second:
Wonder Woman’s dueling origin stories are explained at:
www.vox.com/culture/2017/6/7/15740202/wonder-woman-origin-story-amazon
s-marston-explained

In 2011, DC Comics instituted a relaunch of 52 of its titles called the “The New 52,” which essentially undid those titles’ previous storylines and “reset” them at a new starting point; it was characterized at the time as a way to make the comics more accessible to new readers. In writer Brian Azzarello and artist Cliff Chiang’s New 52 run, Wonder Woman’s origin is changed.

The movie gives BOTH origin stories, the old and the new. The movie leaves the final interpretation of Diana’s origin to its audience, and in doing so reflects a debate over Diana’s origin that’s been going on in Wonder Woman comic books over the past several years.

What are the 2 different ones?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, June 7, 2017 10:03 PM

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Quote:
Originally posted by second:
Wonder Woman’s dueling origin stories are explained at:
www.vox.com/culture/2017/6/7/15740202/wonder-woman-origin-story-amazon
s-marston-explained

In 2011, DC Comics instituted a relaunch of 52 of its titles called the “The New 52,” which essentially undid those titles’ previous storylines and “reset” them at a new starting point; it was characterized at the time as a way to make the comics more accessible to new readers. In writer Brian Azzarello and artist Cliff Chiang’s New 52 run, Wonder Woman’s origin is changed.

The movie gives BOTH origin stories, the old and the new. The movie leaves the final interpretation of Diana’s origin to its audience, and in doing so reflects a debate over Diana’s origin that’s been going on in Wonder Woman comic books over the past several years.
What are the 2 different ones?

Diana believed what her mother had told her — that

Select to view spoiler:

she was made out of clay and Zeus had given her life by magic. It is immaculate conception squared with no biological mother or father.

That is the old origin story from before 2011. The new origin story after 2011 is that

Select to view spoiler:

Zeus had sex with her mother, Hippolyta, and created a child.

And if that’s the case, then it’s not clear what else the Amazons lied about to Diana in the movie.

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, June 8, 2017 5:16 AM

To reply to you reposting JSF's spoiler below:

Select to view spoiler:

As I correctly stated in my spoiler, only using different words, Diana was created from clay and Zeus breathed life into her as a gift to mankind, specifically to combat Ares. She was given to Queen Hippolyta and the Amazons, according to the film's legend, for safekeeping until the time would come for Diana to face Ares. Queen Hippolyta raised her as her own daughter and she never told Diana the full story of her origin and why she was created. As an aside, the funny thing about the myth of the Amazons is that the Amazon region of South America got it's name from the legend of the Warrior Women of Greek origins. They come from -

In Greek mythology, the Amazons (Greek: ?µa???e?, Amazónes, singular ?µa???, Amazon) were a race of woman warriors. Herodotus reported that they were related to the Scythians (an Iranian people) and placed them in a region bordering Scythia in Sarmatia (modern territory of Ukraine).

The region now known as the Amazon in South America, was so named because of a little known Spanish Conquistador named Francisco de Orellana, when he:

reached the Amazon River (Amazonas in Spanish), naming it after a tribe of warlike women he claimed to have encountered and fought on the Nhamundá River, a tributary of the Amazon.

Select to view spoiler:

In the movie they do show Queen Hippolyta holding a lump of clay and it forming into a baby's shape, and I assume this was true within the film's legend.
And she did mention that she was built or imbued with "gifts" to defeat Ares, but within the film's story she told Diana that the "Godkiller" was the sword

SGG

Quote:
Originally posted by Zeek:
Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Select to view spoiler:
Ares was the child of Zeus and Hera.
Diana was the creation of Zeus, the King of the Gods, IIRC. That would imply she was more powerful than Ares.
Not sure of the source you are using. The film clearly stated that Hippolyta was not Diana's mother. Diana was a gift from Zeus to the Amazon women (residing nowhere near the Amazon.) Diana was the Secret Weapon which Zeus created, to be safekept by Queen Hippolyta and the Amazon women, IIR the film's story correctly.

Select to view spoiler:
hmmm maybe I wasn't paying super close attention to the exact detials in the movie because in the comics "No longer a clay figure brought to life by the magic of the gods, she is, instead, a demi-goddess and the natural-born daughter of Hippolyta and Zeus." - wikipedia. When they said Zeus was her father I figured they were going with the current comic origin of Wonder Woman. Were they explicit about how Zeus "gave" the amazons Diana? I know they said it was one of his last acts, but I thought they sorta glossed over the details.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, June 8, 2017 5:31 AM

I imagine that in the film they went with the current story so as to make it more family friendly, and thereby get more butts into the movie theater. I saw a family with two young girls enter the theater minutes before it's start.

At a certain point in the movie, showing a PG-13 moment, the girls squealed in reaction. I wasn't sure what that meant, but my first thought was embarrassment.
You really didn't see anything but it was somewhat suggestive. I wondered if the male with them explained about the scene, but I was too busy watching the movie to notice.

SGG

Quote:
Originally posted by second:
Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Quote:
Originally posted by second:
Wonder Woman’s dueling origin stories are explained at:
www.vox.com/culture/2017/6/7/15740202/wonder-woman-origin-story-amazon
s-marston-explained

In 2011, DC Comics instituted a relaunch of 52 of its titles called the “The New 52,” which essentially undid those titles’ previous storylines and “reset” them at a new starting point; it was characterized at the time as a way to make the comics more accessible to new readers. In writer Brian Azzarello and artist Cliff Chiang’s New 52 run, Wonder Woman’s origin is changed.

The movie gives BOTH origin stories, the old and the new. The movie leaves the final interpretation of Diana’s origin to its audience, and in doing so reflects a debate over Diana’s origin that’s been going on in Wonder Woman comic books over the past several years.
What are the 2 different ones?
Diana believed what her mother had told her — that
Select to view spoiler:
she was made out of clay and Zeus had given her life by magic. It is immaculate conception squared with no biological mother or father.
That is the old origin story from before 2011. The new origin story after 2011 is that
Select to view spoiler:
Zeus had sex with her mother, Hippolyta, and created a child.
And if that’s the case, then it’s not clear what else the Amazons lied about to Diana in the movie.

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, June 8, 2017 8:20 AM

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

Diana said it in her opening dialog: "What one does when faced with the Truth is more difficult than you think. I learned this the hard way, long, long time ago." That is open to interpretation and vague enough for a comic book movie. To its credit, Wonder Woman slyly doesn’t pick one view of Diana’s origin, and what it means for the character, over the other.

Quote:
Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
I imagine that in the film they went with the current story so as to make it more family friendly, and thereby get more butts into the movie theater. I saw a family with two young girls enter the theater minutes before it's start.

At a certain point in the movie, showing a PG-13 moment, the girls squealed in reaction. I wasn't sure what that meant, but my first thought was embarrassment.
You really didn't see anything but it was somewhat suggestive. I wondered if the male with them explained about the scene, but I was too busy watching the movie to notice.

SGG

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, June 8, 2017 7:18 PM

Enjoyable reading - thanks everybody.

I am also Wondering about the timeline. It may be all mythology, and happened around the beginning of time.
However, let's consider Diana may have been late teens or 20's in the film when Trevor's plane interlopes, circa 1917. Played by 32 year old Gal Gadot. (She won Miss Israel 2004, then served in Israeli Defense Force 2005-2007. I did not know she started modeling after her 2007 Maxim shoot for "Women of the Israeli Army." BTW, her page at Wikipedia could not be located until I reloaded a fourth time - must be busy. I liked her exchange with Snyder regarding the shoot in BvS where she smirked and he asked why.)

Anyhow, does this mean that her clay was formed around 1885-1899? If Ares fighting Zeus was represented to humans as a great war, which war during that time period do we think was Ares' doing?
Or does nobody care?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, June 8, 2017 8:40 PM

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Enjoyable reading - thanks everybody.

Anyhow, does this mean that her clay was formed around 1885-1899? If Ares fighting Zeus was represented to humans as a great war, which war during that time period do we think was Ares' doing?

Or does nobody care?

Wonder Woman was introduced in All Star Comics #8 (December 1941). Really her first war was WWII. For some Hollywood reason, the suits bumped the movie story backwards in time to WWI. Maybe they thought the earlier war was more picturesque? Or maybe it is just arbitrary and capricious meddling? In another part of the movie, some movie executive's whim was to cut an important scene. The director insisted the scene not be cut for very good reasons: www.vox.com/culture/2017/6/8/15742716/wonder-woman-script-second-act

Some of these Hollywood executives, believing they are as creative as writers and directors, will make bad changes to good stories. It is the hazard of “Too many cooks spoil the broth.” Remember Firefly and the rush to write a replacement for first episode because FOX didn't want to start where the story should have started?

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, June 10, 2017 2:39 AM

Agreed. A big part of the "Hollywood" problem are the suits, the studios test everything to death and want only what they think brings in the cashy money.

Now, grant you, there are some 'creative' types that screw the pooch every so often
when it comes to storytelling, that the execs feel that they can "improve" a film.
Still though there are those that command a large amount of respect - artistically speaking. I remember Kubrick getting a whole lot of respect, although he was oft criticized, he still was given a wide berth.

I wonder how Joss is getting along these days?

In the case of WW, I'm glad Jenkins won out regarding that scene it is utterly iconic and will give Jenkins a new found respect, at least, I would think so.
Brilliantly shot and directed. Good on you Patty Jenkins (as a film aficionado, I love that scene). In the theater I was in (6:00 p.m. show) the 3/4 filled room cheered and applauded, it was inspiring. There have been a handful of times in my life where I have been in a theater where folks applauded - I remember 3 of them -
The original Star Wars (Episode IV), Dreamgirls, and Wonder Woman. The first two were at the end of the movie, but WW was in the middle during the No Man's Land battle scene...

Select to view spoiler:

when we first see Diana as Wonder Woman in full costume/battlegear

It was Awesome!

That's one for the artists!

SGG

Quote:
Originally posted by second:
Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Enjoyable reading - thanks everybody.

Anyhow, does this mean that her clay was formed around 1885-1899? If Ares fighting Zeus was represented to humans as a great war, which war during that time period do we think was Ares' doing?

Or does nobody care?
Wonder Woman was introduced in All Star Comics #8 (December 1941). Really her first war was WWII. For some Hollywood reason, the suits bumped the movie story backwards in time to WWI. Maybe they thought the earlier war was more picturesque? Or maybe it is just arbitrary and capricious meddling? In another part of the movie, some movie executive's whim was to cut an important scene. The director insisted the scene not be cut for very good reasons: www.vox.com/culture/2017/6/8/15742716/wonder-woman-script-second-act

Some of these Hollywood executives, believing they are as creative as writers and directors, will make bad changes to good stories. It is the hazard of “Too many cooks spoil the broth.” Remember Firefly and the rush to write a replacement for first episode because FOX didn't want to start where the story should have started?

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, June 10, 2017 3:36 AM

Wonder Woman review by Kevin Smith - Hilarious and good

SPOILER ALERT - SPOILER ALERT - SPOILER ALERT - SPOILER ALERT

At 11:15 they discuss the scene Second referred to in her post, the No Man's Land scene. Listen as they break it down.

At 19:30 they get into a very good discussion about character development, in particular villains, and how it's important to the struggle of the main character/hero and to the overall story/film.

These stuck out to me in this review.

SGG

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, June 10, 2017 10:44 AM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:

* Why do we have to wait until well over 1/2 through the movie to hear WW's theme music kick in? As she starts to finally kick ass , ... and why wasn't it set up earlier in the movie? Stuff like that, I dunno, just seems like it sort a just appears, out of no where, and now , when ever you see her in a trialer, that theme music cranks up...

Tired now. Nite.

Man, sometimes I feel like I'm the only one who sees things a certain way, or ask odd ball questions, and then this happens !

It makes perfect sense ! Her theme music is even more awesome than I knew ! Man, I really dig learning about stuff like this !!

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 12, 2017 3:38 AM

Agreed Rappy. I love to hear about this stuff, once I've seen the movie.
I could appreciate the behind the scenes stuff, Bravo!

SGG

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:

* Why do we have to wait until well over 1/2 through the movie to hear WW's theme music kick in? As she starts to finally kick ass , ... and why wasn't it set up earlier in the movie? Stuff like that, I dunno, just seems like it sort a just appears, out of no where, and now , when ever you see her in a trialer, that theme music cranks up...

Tired now. Nite.

Man, sometimes I feel like I'm the only one who sees things a certain way, or ask odd ball questions, and then this happens !

It makes perfect sense ! Her theme music is even more awesome than I knew ! Man, I really dig learning about stuff like this !!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 12, 2017 6:24 AM

America loves a winner!

Oooops...was my post too spoilery ?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, June 13, 2017 5:15 AM

Maybe just a tad spoilery.....but not to worry, at this stage of the posts people should know that there will be some spoilers.

Still though, awesome post Rappy.

SGG

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Oooops...was my post too spoilery ?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, July 24, 2017 6:10 AM

Thanks Second, that's what I remember as well from the movie; it gave both origins of WW and left it up to the audience...just as you said. In Greek mythology, Zeus was in the habit of having sex with mortals and producing offspring that were considered demi-gods (much like Perseus and Hercules).

SGG

Quote:
Originally posted by second:
Wonder Woman’s dueling origin stories are explained at:
www.vox.com/culture/2017/6/7/15740202/wonder-woman-origin-story-amazon
s-marston-explained

In 2011, DC Comics instituted a relaunch of 52 of its titles called the “The New 52,” which essentially undid those titles’ previous storylines and “reset” them at a new starting point; it was characterized at the time as a way to make the comics more accessible to new readers. In writer Brian Azzarello and artist Cliff Chiang’s New 52 run, Wonder Woman’s origin is changed.

The movie gives BOTH origin stories, the old and the new. The movie leaves the final interpretation of Diana’s origin to its audience, and in doing so reflects a debate over Diana’s origin that’s been going on in Wonder Woman comic books over the past several years.

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, August 6, 2017 7:37 PM

I'm revisiting this post because this weekend I was given a free ticket by my local theater (I went to a screening several months ago and there were some issues with the film, so they gave us free tickets to go see anything we wanted to make up for it).

I chose to re-watch WW. Now, yes I could have picked Dunkirk, but I was not in the mood. I immediately picked WW, and I was quite surprised to see, at this time of the year (it was released June 2) that it still has "legs" some 2 months later.
As of August 6 the worldwide take for this movie has been rather strong $793 Million; and it's about even both domestically and the foreign box office.
$399M domestic and $393M foreign markets and counting. According to Box Office Mojo, where I got these numbers, the film cost $149M to make (I'm not sure if that includes advertising).

My local theater, a multiplex, was near capacity (about 90% full); there few empty seats and the crowd was enthusiastic as the movie started. While I was waiting on line to enter the theater several people commented that it may be sold out. This on a Saturday night at 7:00 p.m. And there were all kinds of people there; couples, family with kids (some I thought were too young for the war theme) white, black, Asian, etc. It ran across the board, all kinds of people. And everyone seemed to enjoy themselves throughout the movie. WW set a record for a female directed feature:

Quote:
...exceeded all expectations this weekend, delivering an impressive $100 million opening, the largest opening for a female-directed feature, vastly out-performing the previous record holder Fifty Shades of Grey, which debuted with $85.1 million back in 2015.

I was pleasantly surprised to see that, not so much about making money, but that it has exceeded my initial thought as too the success of both the movie and it's star Gal Gadot. Her performance in Batman v. Superman got me excited and now it is more than what I thought at the time. It's more than just a hit movie, it is officially a phenomenon.

Just thought I'd share.

SGG

Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
The London release was apparently cancelled due to the Manchester bombing.

North America will need to take up the slack.

Next Friday.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0451279/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, August 6, 2017 8:18 PM

America loves a winner!

That's a solid showing for a 2 month movie on a Saturday night.

Anecdotal though it may be.

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, August 7, 2017 6:11 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
The London release was apparently cancelled due to the Manchester bombing.

North America will need to take up the slack.

Next Friday.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0451279/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1
I chose to re-watch WW. Now, yes I could have picked Dunkirk, but I was not in the mood. I immediately picked WW, and I was quite surprised to see, at this time of the year (it was released June 2) that it still has "legs" some 2 months later.
As of August 6 the worldwide take for this movie has been rather strong $793 Million; and it's about even both domestically and the foreign box office.
$399M domestic and $393M foreign markets and counting. According to Box Office Mojo, where I got these numbers, the film cost $149M to make (I'm not sure if that includes advertising).

My local theater, a multiplex, was near capacity (about 90% full); there few empty seats and the crowd was enthusiastic as the movie started. While I was waiting on line to enter the theater several people commented that it may be sold out. This on a Saturday night at 7:00 p.m. And there were all kinds of people there; couples, family with kids (some I thought were too young for the war theme) white, black, Asian, etc. It ran across the board, all kinds of people. And everyone seemed to enjoy themselves throughout the movie. WW set a record for a female directed feature:
Quote:
...exceeded all expectations this weekend, delivering an impressive $100 million opening, the largest opening for a female-directed feature, vastly out-performing the previous record holder Fifty Shades of Grey, which debuted with $85.1 million back in 2015.
I was pleasantly surprised to see that, not so much about making money, but that it has exceeded my initial thought as too the success of both the movie and it's star Gal Gadot. Her performance in Batman v. Superman got me excited and now it is more than what I thought at the time. It's more than just a hit movie, it is officially a phenomenon.

Just thought I'd share.

SGG

You are adding a bunch after the post I saw initially. Looks like you are learning after getting burned on making posts and then they don't show up.

I am glad it made some money, so that better scripts will follow. Despite the opener not being as satisfactory as, say, Superman with Chris Reeves.

I had also intended to mention that I was looking forward to more from Gal Gadot. But I do feel she was better served with Keeping Up With The Jones' from last fall. Wittier script and story, good surrounding cast, better showcase for her talents, good display of her facets. Her tension and humor for sure. I'm thinking she wasn't pregnant for Keeping, so perhaps that made a difference. So, Keeping gave her a better story, better display, more to work with, and I think was more memorable for her fans - but WW gave her more exposure, and will help launch the franchise.
I had also recommended Criminal before, and I liked her work in that film as well, which I saw partly because she was in the credits. I think both Criminal and Keeping were better to see her in than F&F or WW.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, August 8, 2017 6:48 AM

You're right, I was totally caught by surprise not expecting many folk inside the theater, and it sounded like they enjoyed themselves. And these were first-time audience/viewers because the majority stayed to see if there were any codas (what I call Extras) at the end.

Only a handful left right away (maybe 10 out of the whole theater).

SGG

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:

That's a solid showing for a 2 month movie on a Saturday night.

Anecdotal though it may be.

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, August 29, 2017 1:30 AM