Wonder Woman 1984 Couldn’t Save the Story
I’ve been looking forward to the sequel to 2017’s Wonder Woman since the film ended with Wonder Woman herself leaping from the top of a building and soaring into the credits. So when it was announced that Wonder Woman 1984 was going to be available on HBO Max Christmas Day, I went to bed each night with visions of indestructible bracelets dancing in my head.
Then it finally arrived. Christmas. WW84.
My wife and I settled into the couch with a bucket of Cherry Coke, a cornucopia of candy, and two obnoxious bowls of fresh popped popcorn soaked in butter. It was the movie-going experience I had been missing this year.
I love Wonder Woman. I didn’t grow up on the source material. I grew up on Lynda Carter. Reruns of the campy Wonder Woman TV show, which originally ran from 1975–1979 were a favorite of mine as a little kid. Not only was it an entertaining show for a preschooler in the eighties with the jumping and bullet-blocking and running, but I was also in love with Lynda Carter both as Diana Prince and Wonder Woman.
A true wonder!
You see—sounding all Freudian alarms—my mother is a brunette and, from what I could tell at that young age, she could do anything and everything, so I grew up likening my mom to the Amazonian goddess. I also thought any pretty lady with brown hair was my mom including the woman on the Sun-Maid raisins box. (Despite my mother being a beauty queen and model—just like Lynda Carter—the real Sun-Maid Girl died at age 90 two months before I turned four.) From my vantage point, my mom was completely capable of saving the day and harvesting yummy raisins. A true wonder woman.
The Sun-Maid Girl, aka, Wonder Woman, aka, my mom.
I wasn’t a big reader of the Wonder Woman comics. Blame that on my time as a boy in 1984. Wonder Woman comics didn’t make their way to me and by the time I was old enough to choose my own reads, I was too deep into graphic novels about the Vietnam War, X-Men comics, and other Marvel titles. But I always knew Diana’s story and powers, and recognized her as one of the most powerful characters to grace the pages of comic books.
Settled into the couch, we hit play and HBO Max glowed to life to give me the Christmas gift I’d been waiting months for.
The opening scene set the tone. A thrilling action scene showcasing the abilities of Diana’s people back on Themyscira. It dropped a few hints of what challenges Diana/Wonder Woman might face and the lessons she will learn or be reminded of. Good opening. And then the film fell apart and Christmas was ruined.
Nah, Christmas was fine, but Wonder Woman 1984 was a disappointment. And not as much for me as for Diana and Wonder Woman. And for actor Gal Gadot. She was robbed of an interesting story. There is no character development in WW84 for our hero. Diana is in the exact same place as she was at the end of the first film. She picks up a few new abilities along the way, but one, like flying in an invisible jet felt like director/writer/producer Patty Jenkins was force feeding me a MacGuffin only to throw it away after I agreed to swallow it. Flight is a big thing in this film but Wonder Woman learning to master it seemed wasteful as I was convinced she was learning to fly based on the way the first film ended. That’s on me.
When we left Wonder Woman in the first film, she was heartbroken for Steve Trevor (Chris Pine). When we meet her again in 1984, some seventy years after his death, she still pines for him. (See what I did there?) By the end, she’s the same. Closed off, unwilling or unable to open herself up to people, most notably to people who could love her and she could love in return. This, despite that Steve tells her that’s a stupid thing to do—remain closed off. When he comes back to life through a wish, he is filled with a zest for life, a chance to experience something again. Pine plays Steve with an almost childlike wonder and it’s fun to watch.
They missed an incredible opportunity to build an interesting story tying in time, the struggle and pain of being ageless—timeless. Maybe that’s how Steve comes back. He exists in a tear in time. What is the hardship of a god living among men? Not her challenging duty but her struggle.
And why 1984? For the fashion jokes? The nukes? Missed opportunity there. Especially since the year is in the title.
Kristin Wiig is great. She’s surprising as she anchors her Ghostbusters (2016) character into Barbara Minerva/Cheetah. But I wanted more form her relationship with Diana. When Barbara wishes to be like Diana, “Sexy, cool… special,” there’s a chance for her to also face the backlash of being an ageless goddess. That opportunity was dampened when Barbara cartoonishly chooses to become a full baddy. But you can’t blame Barbara, she was written that way.
Everything was written as a MacGuffin. One little thing to get us to the big moment with the big baddy—a Donald Trump-ish huckster played by Pedro Pascal. Pascal as Max Lord at first is a slimey but sympathetic character. That quickly devolves into him being a super-duper bad guy bent on world domination that overcorrects in heightening the stakes. The manner in which he goes about dominating the world is trite but also is based on a lazy Orwellian approach to what technology would be like in 1984. It gives the sense that the film was written during Lynda Carter’s heyday where 1984 still seemed futuristic.
There’s so much opportunity squandered. Diana/Wonder Woman is an ageless goddess with a lonely heart and incredible powers. How does one live like that? In the first film, Diana is learning what it means to be human. This film could have had her learning what it means to be a god among humans. Instead, the character is a pawn. She’s not driven by anything. And that’s what gets me.
Diana could be relatable. Make her the troubled messiah. She lives among us so long, she longs or struggles to be like us. And maybe losing her power—the unknown risk she takes when Steve comes back—is attractive to her so she can live and love. And if they had to bring back Chris Cline, the could have dipped into the mystique and magic of Diana’s world. Something more than a silly wish. Something more interesting that pushes Diana to face new internal struggles while working to defeat the external forces of evil.
The film sets itself up as movie that’ll deal with time. There’s a date in the title. But why 1984? For the nukes? For the broadcast Max Lord needs to tap into? For the fanny pack jokes? Jenkins and Co. could have given the theme a little more oompf by leaning into their own ideas of time and address the hardships a an ageless, nearly all powerful goddess faces. Instead, we get a joke about modern public art being trash and a WWI watch coming to life because… because the ghost of the man who owned it has come back from the beyond. Two completely unrelated things. But they didn’t have to be.
The film takes its time with the wrong beats. There are many big moments, often in the middle of the action, where Wonder Woman’s face is the focus. The only takeaway from these slowed down moments of intensity are for the sake of empowerment. And, okay, fine. That’s cool. I get it. Wonder Woman is empowering. The movie, however, is not empowering. It’s a vehicle that reduces Wonder Woman to a physically strong woman who does not develop as an individual. She’s the most dimensional inspiring cinematic female character since the offensive Captain Marvel.
Time proves to be a major influencer in the film in the way it’s wasted. When they have to fly to Cairo, they do so by stealing a jet that Diana has access to thanks to her job at the museum, and allegedly will face no consequences for hoarking a fighter jet for personal reasons. Regardless… They have to get from Washington D.C. to Cairo, a trip of just over 5,000 nautical miles. A modern Boeing 747 can fly 8,255 nautical miles on a full tank of gas. A fighter jet with a smaller tank would likely need every last drop and the wind at their backs the entire time to make the tip without refueling or plummeting into the ocean. Instead of being concerned with that, Steve and Diana choose that time to have their romantic scene. Flips and tricks and dawdling through a Fourth of July fireworks show. And why was Steve surprised by the fireworks and it being July 4th? He just arrived in a new body the day before. He certainly checked the date on a newspaper or heard something on the radio or a TV. And the Fourth of July was already a holiday before he was killed in World War I.
“I love you, and this is real pretty, but we really need to get somewhere.”
These gripes would be nitpicking if they weren’t so easily remedied by giving the main character an actual story arc.
Wonder Woman 1984 was a fine superhero movie. Far from the best (Captain America: Civil War). Better than the worst (Justice League). It had its share of fun action moments, but even in an action film, the action must be secondary to the story.
After watching the film, we turned on the old TV show. There’s not much character development there either. But it’s a 1970s network television procedural. It’s meant to be campy. And it was more than enough.
Following the three-hour Lynda Carter bender, I realized that you could totally edit scenes in WW84 to make a trailer about a woman who takes care of, then falls in love with, a mentally handicapped man. And that would be a great story to tell. Wonder Woman with Hollywood blockbuster money behind her deserves something interesting.
