The first WW was great lol what’s controversial about that statement.Also, controversial opinion in this thread, but I liked the first Wonder Woman movie and thought that Gal was fine in it.
The second WW movie, though, was mediocre
Did you see pages 27 and 28? Some brehs were calling the first WW bad or mediocre
Idk anything about the script(s) that were scrapped, but it was unfathomable that they had so many Spiderman artifacts, even though this movie clearly tried to pivot into a direction without referencing the guy"When you take on the responsibility, great power will come."
I’m fine with them making her as mousy and closed in as they did, just from a subverting expectations standpoint. However, that would be something I would do in a serious movie that can DO something with that subversion.from elsewhere:
I was watching like "why would you make Sidney Sweeney so irrelevant and unsexy in every way" while watching. Just, even on a marketing standpoint it is maleficence.
they're having a baby shower guessing the name of the baby, they get to the point of saying "PETER" but never do
I didn’t even pick up on what the hangry part was referencing till I read your post
I thought it was just another corny attempt at a quip
This is what I've always wondered. The way the greenlight some of these guaranteed flops, you'd think there was no consequence at all. Somebody should be losing their job off this.
I mean every loss lowers net income which lowers tax burden. That's what a write off is. So...yes essentially.
First one is wackDid you see pages 27 and 28? Some brehs were calling the first WW bad or mediocre
That's why I said "in this thread" (key wording)
