Following on from Wonder Woman’s 2017, “Wonder Woman 1984,” by director Patty Jenkin, is undeniably ambitious. It seeks to expand the myth of Themyscria, the home of the Amazons; continue the story of Diana Prince as a continuation of her previous chronological adventure; and ignoring the larger background stories set within Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016) that follow him in Justice League (2017).
For the most part, Jenkins and company hold the idea of how WW 1984 intertwines within the aforementioned framework while creating something of its own.
This novelty is likely to be divisive among the general public, if the reception of criticism is a true omen, due to the fact that, as in the first solo outing, the 1984 battles are abstracted. more than vileness itself.
With Jenkins at the helm once again and a reduced part of his original cast, 1984 is less of an explosive superhero outing and more of a mirror of an alternative past with direct links to our present.
Like Diana Prince, a warrior poet from the Amazon, the audience is more than ready to face such an ethereal enemy.
+ The inevitable sequel …
Coming to 2020, a year that seems more the result of a Machiavellian plan of a comic book villain and, leaving aside the discussions about the model for the premiere of the film, simultaneously in cinemas and in the HBO Max streaming service (in the United States), the inevitable sequel opens, repeating the assets of the first film in front of and behind the cameras.
“Wonder Woman 1984” immediately promotes to the title a temporary change in relation to the action of the First World War of the previous film, assuming from the beginning the eternal fascination by the decade of the 80 that so many fruits have recently given to titles like Stranger Things (on TV) or Ready Player One (in the movies).
It is precisely in 1984 when Diana Prince, who has not aged a day in decades, has the opportunity to see fulfilled her impossible desire to reunite with Steve Trevor (Chris Pine), the loss never really surpassed.
However, as you discovered from the beginning, only the truth matters to be a true hero, and when the magician McGuffin falls into the wrong hands of Barbara Minerva (Kristen Wiig) and Maxwell Lord (Peter Pascal), the alter ego of Diana has to make him take action.
From the colorful poster to the fun trailer, the eighties scene promised nostalgia and humor, in a tendency to counteract the blackness of the male counterpart universe in Wonder Woman.
However, the potential of this concept ends up being wasted, except in the obvious use of Gordon Gekko’s philosophy that “Greed is a good thing” – to whom the reference escapes, I recommend the discovery of Wall Street, a 1987 film directed by Oliver Stone – and the superficial geopolitical framework of the Cold War that seems more interested in commenting on the anxieties and concerns of today’s reality than in undermine the context of the time.
This is, in fact, one of the heels of Achilles in this sequel (inherited, it is true, from the first film): the need to preach to the viewer, assuming here shameful and almost literal propositions.
It is beneficial to use a cultural vehicle of this nature to comment on sexism, unbridled capitalism, and the warrior spirit of human nature in general, instead promoting positive and inspiring values.
However, Wonder Woman 1984 executes her ideas with such a hard hand that it invalidates her best intentions.
On the plus side, rejoining athletic Gal Gadot and charismatic Chris Pine, Pedro Pascal and Kristen Wiig have fun composing an anthology of villains.
If the narrative is difficult to grasp, with a long prologue and a first act too tangled in its plot (pun), when it captures it, it offers us some striking and well-executed action scenes, with emotional involvement in charge. of the delivery of excellent performers.
If Pascal knows exactly what movie he’s in, having fun with Maxwell Lord giving huge cracks on stage, it’s a pleasure to see Wiig lending his unpretentious charm to Barbara Minerva, gradually transmuting into a fatal woman with full control of his self-esteem, and finally in a villain at the height of the heroine, two characters inherited from the pages of the comic.
If one can ignore the weak writing that justifies Steve Trevor’s return (and on which the entire premise of the film is based), it’s easy to see the desire to bring Chris Pine back along with Gadot.
The couple not only continues the chemistry we had witnessed in the previous film, but there is a lightness in the scenes in which Pine participates, lamenting only the mechanics of the narrative that leaves us wanting to have more time in his company.
+ Annotations
In short, the qualities of “Wonder Woman 1984” are nullified, not by incompetence or technical failure, but by the very limitations of the genre to which it belongs, beginning with the plot, here written in six hands by the same Patty Jenkins in collaboration with Geoff Johns and Dave Callaham.
A successful superhero film, whether Marvel or DC Comics, cannot escape much of the formula that requires an intricate plot, full of recognizable mythology and references to the pages of the comics that preceded it, preferably escalating conflicts. personal on a global-scale threat, and a lot of action, which inevitably culminates in a frantic clash of songs chaotically pixelated by the inevitable Hans Zimmer or faithful disciple; in this case, in spite of his promises, he returned to be the master.
With these measures, it will be a box office success (or streaming views or illegal downloads).
Unfortunately, the cinema here turns out to be accidental. And, sincerely wishing us to move towards a level playing field, Wonder Woman 1984 is a clear demonstration that gender distinctions make no sense, as mediocrity, like genius, is available to anyone, regardless of chromosomes.