Wonder Woman 1984
kuribo-04 wrote:Is it really that bad? lol I've heard all sorts of things.
I thought the first one was...OK.
is a terrible movie but it's actually kind've fascinating too. I thought the original Wonder Woman
was pretty good & was one of the better recent superhero movies & because the film was such a huge smash success - it did over $400 million in the US which I think was the biggest domestic gross for a superhero leading their first film until Black Panther
broke records the following year - and because of that director Patty Jenkins was trusted & given carte blanche to do whatever
she wanted in the sequel.
And what she wanted to do in my opinion was bad.
Like I support the idea of letting filmmakers take full control of these silly superhero things & can get behind that. I much prefer that option to the mundanity (in my opinion of course) to the Marvel model but one of the few benefits of the Marvel Assembly Line is everything is so regimented, manufactured & quality controlled that while they never (again in my opinion) make a really great film they also never make a really terrible film. If you let the filmmakers be in charge you can sometimes get a The Dark Knight or a Spider-Man 2... you can also get this.
Like the MacGuffin of the movie is literally just the Monkey's Paw made up as an Infinity Stone. It grants anyone who holds it one wish then twists the wish to take as much as it gives. The badguy's big evil plan is he wishes to BE the Magic Stone and then wants to grant everyone in the world their wishes at the same time once for ..... evil reasons I guess? I don't know. It sounds like a nice thing but the movie keeps painting it as pure evil. So he does get on the air through some magic technology given to him by the US President who I guess is supposed to be Ronald Reagan but is played by an actor who looks nothing like Ronald Reagan and has red hair... I don't know ... and then everyone on Earth do make their wishes at the same time and everyone goes to hell because they all just wish for money, fame or nuclear weapons to kill each other. It's 1984, the Cold War is on, AIDS has started, etc and not one person wishes for the War to end peacefully or for AIDS to be cured... they all just wish for money or to be famous.... and then Wonder Woman makes a bad speech - it might be a good speech but Gal Gadot is a terribly flat actor so I don't know - and everyone just takes back their wish? Is the film a commentary saying "everyone is awful"? I don't know. It's sloppy filmmaking.
Regarding the spoiler things silvermoonlight asked:
"Is it true that Barbara beats up a guy who could have sexually assaulted even raped her and the movie dares to frame her as the villain for doing this?"
Yeah. And it's so tone deaf. She starts beating him up and "scary music" starts playing and Kristen Wiig is framed as going truly evil BUT it's not like this guy is just some dude who said an out of line come on or something. He is clearly a straight up serial rapist who earlier in the film, about two days prior, attacked Kristen Wiig in the park before she got her powers and would've raped her if Wonder Woman didn't intervene. Frankly I wanted Wiig to kill the guy. He earned it. It blows my mind no one on the film said "Let's make it so he DOESN'T deserve this and then this sells Wiig going evil."
"Along with the stereotype gay/bisexual people are villains since WW bisexual comic roots are utterly erased from this film painting her it as heterosexual vs gay since Steve is back just to push this further, don't get me wrong I loved him in the first film but I was not happy when I saw he was returning as it feels so rinse and lazy repeat.
Plus the crap I'm hearing that WW has been celibate for decades since his death just rubs me the wrong way on so many levels since she has lots if female/male lovers in the comics.
I don't remember any offensive stereotyping of gay or bi people in the film, though Wiig's character clearly has some kind've crush on Wonder Woman but it's never portrayed as gay panic or anything, but the Diana in this film is definitely straight. Bigger issue is the stereotypes thrown at people from the Middle East like how they refer to an Egyptian oil magnate as an "Emir" even though that's not a term used in Egypt but Saudi Arabia. Or how in the third act when there is chaos all over the world the final beat to sell that THINGS ARE CRAZY the film has a white woman tell her husband "There's a riot at the Saudi Arabian embassy!" .... there's riots everywhere.
And I don't want to go in to the trump like villain as he feels like every boring rich villain I've seen before in film.
The weird thing here is while Pedro Pascal's character is obviously modeled on Donald Trump because he's made up to kinda look like 80s era Trump & he's a secretly failed businessman known mostly as a TV personality there isn't anything else even Trumpian about him. He even genuinely loves his child. It's odd and sloppy cause it's like they started out writing the character to BE Donald Trump, made him up to look like Trump and then just created a whole new character without having act like Trump. It's so So Odd.
The strangest & most uncomfortable thing in the movie is:
They bring Chris Pine back. Since he was the best thing in the first film and Chris Pine has the charisma of a thousand men this is not a bad idea in itself but rather HOW they bring him back and how they handle it that is uncomfortable. When Wonder Woman is holding the stone someone asks her if she knows what she would wish for and she does one of those "I do know" but doesn't say it. Her wish is to bring back Chris Pine, the - admittedly VERY HOT - guy she hung out with for a week in 1916 and is still in love with almost 70 years later. Later that night a guy approaches her and then says some line from the first movie and she realizes this guy is Chris Pine. See, instead of having Chris Pine reappear into the world which would be the smart thing they have his soul TAKE OVER the body of some random guy she's never met. To everyone else he's "Gary" but Wonder Woman only sees Chris Pine.
Okay.... well there's A LOT of intersting things to do here from a storytelling perspective right? As a superhero she should try to find out what happened to Gary, right?
Nope. Chris Pine lays out that he woke up in this random guy's apartment, in this random guy's bed, in this random guy's body and that he doesn't know what happened to the dude. She, ostensibly the hero of this series, has Chris Pine take her back to this guy's apartment where she straight up fucks this random dude's body in his bed because Chris Pine's soul is inside him. Again, the movie makes painfully clear these two "good" people are aware & KNOW the soul of the body is missing but these two "good" people never stop to question, worry or ever show concern for what happened to him. They instead use his body as a vessel for their, I would assume unprotected, fucking. They use his unwilling body for sex. You could call that Rape.... cause it is.
It's just frankly shocking to see a team of PAID filmmakers who have been given free reign be so inept that even though they set up an absolutely perfect moral crisis for not just our "hero" but ANYONE - would you accept responsibility for the death of a complete stranger you'll never meet if it means you can have the deceased love of you life back - and then not only not do anything with it but also not be aware of the moral complications that come with it.
I'm not a big superhero movie fan, I like the ones I think are great and find the rest to be dull & uninterested, but I can appreciate that the genre just isn't for me and as a filmmaker I can see why & how these films work for the intended audience. What's astonishing about Wonder Woman 1984
is seeing a $180 million movie in this genre that you literally can't miss in - there's a like a playbook to make these movies at least mediocre success
- fail so spectacularly for such blatantly obvious reasons.
If you got an HBO Max account you have until the end of January to watch it. But make a game out of it if you do.