Wonder Woman 1984 (2020)

[Kamdan]

Oh, boy, this was a bad one!

It was just about a year ago that it was reported that this movie had a terrible test screening and you'd think they'd take a lot of those criticisms to heart, but judging from that initial plot leak, they didn't do anything besides maybe change the ending so that it could coincide with the holiday season it ended up being released in.

The initial positive reviews got me interested in watching this on HBO Max release day, but within the first 10 minutes of the movie, I was ready to shut it off. I wish I had because this got worse and worse as it went on. I think everyone who got to see it early were paid off to write decent reviews. Everyone is a state of denial over how bad this movie really is, but after all is said and done, this is easily going to be one of the worst comic book movies ever.

Thank Athena the original TV series is on HBO Max now in HD! It's the perfect remedy to this god awful movie.

[The Dark Knight]

Sooooo, yeah, this movie was bad.

I trust your opinion on a variety of matters, so I'd say you're right. I've had a look through some reviews and can definitely see various areas of concern. I'll probably still see the movie next week though, and give my two cents worth of feedback.

[thecolorsblend]

Things are reaching a point where #RTSC Twitter is openly questioning how much credit Jenkins actually deserves for the first Wonder Woman. Snyder had ambiguous involvement with it and most people seem to enjoy it. He had basically zero involvement with WW84 and... yeah...

[The Laughing Fish]

Things are reaching a point where #RTSC Twitter is openly questioning how much credit Jenkins actually deserves for the first Wonder Woman. Snyder had ambiguous involvement with it and most people seem to enjoy it. He had basically zero involvement with WW84 and... yeah...

I won't say anything about WW84 because I'm not planning to see it, it doesn't interest me. But I will say this, the style of the first WW film resembles more of a Snyder film than his own DCEU films. From what I've heard, Jenkins used Snyder's stunt team to pull off the action in the first film, but for whatever reason, she decided not to hire them in the second film.

What's even more fascinating is Snyder was given an award by the American Film Institute for his contribution in bringing Wonder Woman to life a few years ago.



I'm not eager to take away any recognition from Jenkins and her directing in the first film. But it does remind me that people should never underestimate the contributions that Snyder made to help bring the character to life. He did cast Gal Gadot in the role, after all.

[Kamdan]

Things are reaching a point where #RTSC Twitter is openly questioning how much credit Jenkins actually deserves for the first Wonder Woman. Snyder had ambiguous involvement with it and most people seem to enjoy it. He had basically zero involvement with WW84 and... yeah...

Snyder still has one of those Tim Burton Batman Forever producer credits for Wonder Woman 1984, but it's pretty painfully obvious that the loss of him made this movie suffer. It doesn't help that Gal Gadot has a producer credit as well. What qualifications does she have to contribute besides her acting services? All of this was done once Snyder was kicked out of the DC films and Jenkins decided the sequel wasn't going to follow what Snyder previously setup. It's now especially confusing now that Snyder's Justice League is the next big release.

[The Joker]

SPOILER REVIEW

Well, I checked this out, and WW84 reminds me of my thoughts after seeing The Amazing Spider-Man 2 and/or Batman Forever as a child. Being that, when it works, it's good. But when it doesn't, it's absolutely glaring.

On one hand, I can't fault those involved for not necessarily wanting to do the same thing twice. I get that. However, WW84 implements a blatantly weirder, much more fragmented story line than what the general audiences were initially exposed to with the first film. And this kind of the problem - the movie pulls itself in several different directions from the very start and instead of course correcting at some point, it just keeps on pulling. Although, in the movie's defense, I wouldn't say that the film's use of humor was overly deflationary, or overtly quippy like the majority of Disney's MCU movies tend to be. So there's that.

In comparing the two films, my opinion is that the overall fundamental difference (story wise) between them, is that the original was about defiance, Diana was finding her place in the world despite everyone telling her she couldn't. The No Man's Land scene is so powerful in part because it's the moment when Diana definitely rejects the limitations others are placing on her to become the hero she can be.

In WW84, the central theme is different. WW84 isn't about defiance, it's about acceptance instead. Under the 1984 year setting, it's conveyed that Wonder Woman hasn't moved forward since WW1, at least in terms of letting go of her grief and engaging with the world again. We see pictures of her friends displayed in her apartment, with one photo featuring Diana with a much older Etta Candy (which was a nice nod). Also displayed is a photo of Diana at "Trevors Ranch" which is presumably owned by Steve's relatives, and the watch he hands her as he said goodbye near the end of the first film. In the grand scheme of things, tt's not until she's able to reject her wish, painfully lets Steve go by accepting his death, that she regains her strength and grows beyond it.

Make no mistake, WW84 is primarily a Wonder Woman film, she is the star, but Steve is not just a spare part, he's a man. A man out of time, but by no means just a love interest that's constantly need saving. Much like the first film, Steve's allowed to pull his weight, and does so. That might sound obvious, sure, but there is a pattern of female led and directed films recently. I also found having Steve fly the invisible jet to be fitting overall.

Very similar to the relationship between Peter and Gwen in The Amazing Spider-Man 2, what works best in WW84 is the story line between Diana and Steve. It's pretty much the biggest highlight of the film to be perfectly honest. I actually really do like that Diana is both fundamentally compassionate and fundamentally protective. But going back to Wonder Woman's relationship with Steve, it's well done and their devotion to one another is conveyed very well. Especially so during the scene where they are saying their "goodbyes" and Diana proclaiming she would never love anyone again with Steve responding, "that's unhealthy, you deserve to find love again." As Steve knew that Diana grieving over him for as long as she did ( close to 70 years if my math's correct), was not healthy and she being aloof as a recluse was not good for her.

The subsequent learning to fly scene, I felt, was very well done. Actually, I would say that scene following directly after Diana saying her goodbye to Steve, was basically the equivalent of the NML scene, or even the first flight scene from MOS. As I think the use of John Murphy - Adagio In D Minor perfectly heightened the overall effect as Wonder Woman begins recalling Steve's dialogue as a pilot about his love of flight which gives her inspiration to do it.

As far as the villains go, I found Max Lord to be entertaining, even though I am just not personally ever been all that interested in him. His "powers" in the film, are very different from the comics. As, in the movie, he is powered by a dream stone that acts essentially like a monkey's paw. But as far as his characterization goes, the leaked spoilers from months back are correct. Max is ultimately a sympathetic 'villain', and not just a cartoonishly evil political parody. Actually, the "political satire" isn't all that heavy handed. So no, we don't have characters saying "Boy, sure is awful how this Max Lord guy likes putting his name on everything! At least he'll never be president! WINK! WINK!" To me, Max as seen in this, could very well be considered as a cross of Jimmy Swaggert, Tony Robbins and JR Ewing...all pretty notable influential men in the 80's, just as the President. Speaking of Presidents, the actor who portrays the President during 1984, while sort of resembling Regan, the film doesn't really hit you over the head with it. It's not heavy handed. As I don't recall seeing any of the classic signifiers like a big jar of jelly beans on his desk, no jokes about him being a former actor, etc. Which is a good thing if you're concerned with Hollywood politically satirizing to a heavy handed degree. Which was a understandable concern going into this.

Max's caring for his son is highlighted upon several times during the film, in addition to near the end of the film itself. Personally, I expected Max to be preying on people's greed throughout the film. But rather, Max spent most of the movie just fooling people to make "I wish" statements, often just casually, without the victims having any understanding or expectation that they'd be granted. Interesting way to go about it....

They seemed to be going with the idea that the cost was something vitally important to you, rather than something actually related to the wish itself. Like, all of these "wishes" are fundamentally selfish and unwholesome, they're fantasies without consequence, and as they progress the entire pace of the film starts collapsing into a fever-dream sort of discordant progression and that's entirely the point. Now, if you are only interested in analyzing the theme, it's twofold. First, the implementation of the dream stone is that you need to be sure getting what you want is worth the price. And often it simply isn't. Secondly, that just wishing for things to magically reset and get better won't help. The world gets better because people put in the hard work to make it better. You can't count on something falling out of the sky to save you. Cause at the end of the day you need to be prepared to put in the work to save yourself.

Max's entire arc is like the apotheosis of the Prosperity Gospel, a frenzied pursuit of more, more, more, and ultimately, it's killing him and everyone else. It doesn't form neatly plotted sequences of events because his powers mean it literally doesn't have to. I guess that's both a positive and negative for the film itself.

I was also kind of confused at the whole diet supplement thing with Max Lord that got dropped fairly early on. I thought there would be some sort of a reveal that he was dying or something, but I guess it was just a general signal of poor health, so that the demands of being the living dream stone were wearing on him, I was a bit surprised he didn't take people's health until the end--he was talking about doing so but getting in rougher shape as the movie progressed, so I was thinking that maybe it would turn out he *couldn't* and would die from his obsessive actions.

Once Max walked into the energy field thing near the end, during the mass-wish granting genie session, to which I got some Riddler/Batman Forever vibes from (which is ironic since "Beautiful Lie" from BvS is played briefly during this scene as well), he begins saying things like, "I take *your* health, and *your* vitality!" but it doesn't seem like this actually requires the large numbers. The best impression I took away is that he could have taken someone's health before but was apparently too obsessed/manic with reaching his goal thru the film with working his way up to actually do so until he got to the end game. And speaking of which, WW1984 implements a very unconventional way to defeating Max. Rather than there being a big battle (ala Wonder Woman vs Ares), Max basically sees the error of his ways and takes back his wish of being the literal host of the dream stone just so he can go reunite with his son who's calling for him. This sort of reasoning with the baddie, may or may not work for people watching this, but I think it does harken back to the golden age concept of Wonder Woman genuinely wanting to rehabilitate her villains, rather than the trope of defeating them over and over again.

And remember, renouncing the wishes didn't just magically retcon all that happened. There are mementos of all the chaos. I mean, with what happened in WW84 being such a massive event in human DCEU history, it's kinda odd to think that the mass 1984 wishing event actually predates the events of MOS/BvS if we're looking at this literally. Unless maybe, the act of Max rescinding his wish actually affected the whole world and everything from the point of his initial wish on was eventually undone, where the world rewove the tapestry of time to get back to the way it had been. Which would be a very silver age way of handling the outcome. For better or worse, superhero comics have consistently been sketchy when it comes to the aftermaths of huge world-shaking events .... Course, I'm overthinking this.

Max rescinding his wish affected the whole world and pretty much everything from the point of his initial wish on was undone--not instantly, but the world rewove the tapestry of time to get back to the way it had been.

Admittedly, I did dig the shout out that the dream stone was created by the Duke of Deception. A golden age WW villain that, surprisingly, hasn't been used all that much since the Golden Age with Marston. Although he does appear as the primary villain in the recent "Legend of Wonder Woman" limited series. Come to think of it, I still recall thinking DC was going to bring him back in continuity in a big way as a way to explain Wonder Woman's New52 continuity being revealed as a "lie" during the onset of Rebirth, which seemed like a prime opportunity to do so, but oh well. Going back to the dream stone, there is a line where Barbara/Cheetah comments that the Stone is citrine, "commonly used in fakes" or some such. Which is amusing. What better for a stone created by the Duke of Deception? Also, it's perfectly in keeping with his Golden Age portrayal, as I could easily see him laying traps like the dream stone out of pure malice. Simply just to watch the chaos.

With Cheetah, once again, the character is decidedly different from the comic book versions. In the comics, Barbra Minerva starts off as an heiress/archaeologist/fortune hunter, and becomes an avatar for the Cheetah god, and covets Wonder Woman's golden lasso as an artifact. Which isn't at all what's going on with her origin in WW84. Actually, the characterization of Barbara Minerva has more similarities with Selina Kyle/Catwoman from the Batman Returns. Both started out as women who have a very low self esteem and are unrecognized by most people. Then they go through a massive transformation that makes them strong confident women but also very damaged. Within the context of the film, her actual wish was to "be like Diana, strong, sexy, etc." She got superpowers and everyone's attention, in the most superficial way, but at a cost. Essentially, its a compressed metaphor for giving up your ideals for power, or more generally ignoring the means in favor of the ends.

Being that Cheetah is probably the most recognized villain from Wonder Woman's rogues gallery, it's kinda wild to think that she basically gets the short end of the stick in this movie, as she is very much a secondary villain compared to Max Lord. It's kinda like having the Joker playing second banana to Rupert Thorne in a Batman movie. Bizarre. Ideally, they really should have just excluded Cheetah from the entire film to be perfectly honest.

I guess even though both character's are decidedly different from their comic book counterparts, I did think that both antagonists being presented with sympathetic motivations even though you can't agree with them or their methods or their goals you can at least feel sorry for their predicaments and empathize with that to a certain extent. A villain like Ares, as presented in the first Wonder Woman film, is more of a force of nature that has to be overcome as opposed to a fully fleshed out character (the closest Ares got was something of a amalgam of his Greek origins and Lucifer from christianity. Especially so with his pure disgust of humans and their being imperfect added with the proclivity for war.) In that sense, both Barbara and Maxwell come off fairly ok within the context of the film, even though liberties are absolutely taken from their comic counterparts, and Babs/Cheetah is the weakest link out of all the main characters in this. Which is, again, unfortunate considering her standing within Wondy's rogues gallery as a top tier villain.

I see there's a lot of 'rape' comments being thrown around with the whole Steve inadvertently possesses another guy's body, and later having sex with Wonder Woman. I can't help but think it's 2006 again with Superman Returns with Lois being unaware she slept with Superman, and even had his child! Course, this actually goes as far back as 1980 with Superman 2. But hey, with Zeus being Diana's daddy now thanks to the New52 and the 2017 film, this kinda situation isn't exactly completely unheard of. Thanks, Azarello. 

Also, I was sorta/kinda surprised there wasn't a rockin' 80s soundtrack to this. Especially with the use of a remixed "Blue Monday" that was played for the trailers, but no. 80s music is used at an absolute minimum here. Which was disappointing to me, and speaking of disappointing, I believe the overall action sequences thru the entire film just don't feel no where near as polished as the action sequences in the first film.

Liked the Lynda Carter cameo at the end, as brief as it was. Being that Asteria was thought to have sacrificed herself for the Amazons, as told in WW1984, I kinda got a sequel idea in mind that involves Asteria and Circe, but that's neither here nor there.

All in all, my overall assessment is that WW1984 is like Iron Man 2 following up on Iron Man (Disney's MCU has plenty of other examples, but we'll just go with Iron man right now). Some of it is well done, and other parts are just cheesy, and mediocre at best (like the opening mall scene ... I didn't get anything out of that). It's an uneven film for sure (and the opening credits literally has Geoff Johns' name all over the place ... to which I couldn't help but think of TLF over here on the forums haha), especially so when compared to the first one which was more of a worthwhile film, in addition to being more focused in it's storytelling. The Donner influence is blatantly there, but I've never been one to hark back to that style of storytelling, so that approach didn't do anything for me either. Again, it's a mixed bag for sure, but thanks to the Diana/Steve scenes (their goodbyes being poignant), with the unconventional use of sympathetic entertaining antagonist (and I meant "antagonist" as Cheetah barely registered for me personally), along with of course, the Lynda Carter cameo at the end (about damn time she showed up!), saves it from being an absolutely wreck. Ultimately, I found WW1984 as a 'pales in comparison to the first film' sequel that's been a consistent trait with superhero sequels for over a number of years now. This is just another example.

If viewing this thru the lens as a Silver Age Wonder Woman story, it's alright.

Preferably, WW1984 would have been a straight up followup to the established Snyderverse canon. Which, I don't think any DCEU film has really tried to do since, well, Wonder Woman (2017).

We'll see what happens Post-ZSJL.

[Kamdan]

That's quite a novel you wrote there! Good review!

It's funny to think that if the movie was released in the summer as it was intended to be, it would've already been out on video by now. I've gotten over the initial anger over how bad this movie turned out to be and now I've moved into the frustrated realm just thinking of simple ways they could have fixed their problems.

For one, they could have avoided this whole rape conversation if they had made it a big reveal how Steve came back instead of Diana knowing right away he was Quantum Leaping. They could have taken photographs of themselves and realized it was another person she was with when they started to flip through them after they got them from the photo developer, keeping with the time period, which most of the time felt very contemporary.

Another gripe I have is how the immortality of Diana is handled. They clumsily tried to establish that everyone she associated with in the first one seems to have passed on. She seems very stuck up and snobbish not having any friends and turning down a chance to share a taxi, which seems like a waste of money when you're a superhero they can easily transport from place to place without being seen. If Gadot could actually act, maybe they could have given her an appearance like Selina Kyle and Vicki Vale had in Burton's films when they were working. Kim Basinger honestly looks like another woman with their hair in a ponytail and wearing glasses. They should've had enough sense to make her somewhat different in appearance from her Wonder Woman persona, perhaps having a slight British accent she could've picked up while she lived in Europe and hung around who I'm assuming was her only friend, Etta Candy.

Wiig's gawky performance was very uninspired since we've already seen this done with both Michelle Pfeiffer and Jim Carrey. I honestly wish that they would've gone with Kate McKinnon in the role as someone very personable that craves more ambition that drives her to becoming a formidable foe and a more terrifying transformation than just Wiig beating up a man who tried to assault her but was unexpectedly saved by Diana. There was no threat which is hard to take seriously when Wiig's reaching back into her Bridesmaids routines. Of course, there is doubt McKinnon probably couldn't take on the role any seriously than Wiig, who does have the chops, as long as she's not distracted by all of the girly antics she and Gadot had on the set.

We also desperately needed to see more consequences of actions taken. You completely and utterly lose me when you show Wonder Woman take a falling tumble roll with two children gripping onto her breaking her fall and expect me to believe she saved both of them without any injuries. Maybe show one of them die or at least be hurt enough so that she can feel guilt. We need to see her hurt more than just a gash on her arm or blubbering over the lost of her flyboy toy. Would have been a better payoff to her having the armor at the end too instead of just being in there for the sake of merchandising.

It's just a shame that they can't quite find the middle ground between Zack Snyder's darker approach to the DC Universe and this more lighthearted take that should be striving to be better than the 80's & 90's attempts at superhero movies instead of emulating them. You definitely can tell now Snyder had a lot of influence on the first one and was sorely missed.

[The Joker]

That's quite a novel you wrote there! Good review!

Thanks.

For one, they could have avoided this whole rape conversation if they had made it a big reveal how Steve came back instead of Diana knowing right away he was Quantum Leaping. They could have taken photographs of themselves and realized it was another person she was with when they started to flip through them after they got them from the photo developer, keeping with the time period, which most of the time felt very contemporary.

Well, the thing is is that Wonder Woman is aware Steve is in someone else's body pretty much from the get go. But she's been longing for Steve for so long, she's convinced herself that there has to be some way in restoring the guy's body back to him, along with Steve being able to remain with her. Eventually, Steve has to gently tell her this isn't possible, and that's where Diana breaks down emotionally.

Another gripe I have is how the immortality of Diana is handled. They clumsily tried to establish that everyone she associated with in the first one seems to have passed on. She seems very stuck up and snobbish not having any friends and turning down a chance to share a taxi, which seems like a waste of money when you're a superhero they can easily transport from place to place without being seen. If Gadot could actually act, maybe they could have given her an appearance like Selina Kyle and Vicki Vale had in Burton's films when they were working. Kim Basinger honestly looks like another woman with their hair in a ponytail and wearing glasses. They should've had enough sense to make her somewhat different in appearance from her Wonder Woman persona, perhaps having a slight British accent she could've picked up while she lived in Europe and hung around who I'm assuming was her only friend, Etta Candy.

I guess I took it a little differently. My interpretation wasn't that Diana was being stuck up, but remaining aloof and distant for years in the idea that refraining from relationships would spare her from the emotional devastation of eventually losing them down the line. As she is the immortal, and they are not. It's also worth noting she's distant with both males, and females in the movie as well. As Diana even acts aloof with Barbara. One could also say that this is a form of 'survivors guilt' as well. I guess it's up to the viewer on how well this is conveyed, but that's interpretation I got. I get the disguise argument though.

Wiig's gawky performance was very uninspired since we've already seen this done with both Michelle Pfeiffer and Jim Carrey. I honestly wish that they would've gone with Kate McKinnon in the role as someone very personable that craves more ambition that drives her to becoming a formidable foe and a more terrifying transformation than just Wiig beating up a man who tried to assault her but was unexpectedly saved by Diana. There was no threat which is hard to take seriously when Wiig's reaching back into her Bridesmaids routines. Of course, there is doubt McKinnon probably couldn't take on the role any seriously than Wiig, who does have the chops, as long as she's not distracted by all of the girly antics she and Gadot had on the set.

Wiig as Cheetah just didn't do it for me. The portrayal, nor the movie version of the character. I think I would have just saved Cheetah for the third film, and have Eva Green play her. But beggars can't be choosers. 

We also desperately needed to see more consequences of actions taken. You completely and utterly lose me when you show Wonder Woman take a falling tumble roll with two children gripping onto her breaking her fall and expect me to believe she saved both of them without any injuries. Maybe show one of them die or at least be hurt enough so that she can feel guilt. We need to see her hurt more than just a gash on her arm or blubbering over the lost of her flyboy toy. Would have been a better payoff to her having the armor at the end too instead of just being in there for the sake of merchandising.

Consequences would have worked, and definitely so under a more Snyder-esque vision, but I think since this film was wanting to lighten things up for the MCU crowd, along with clearly being influenced by the Donner Superman films, having a child die would have made this film more uneven than it already is. The golden armor has never really had much substance in the comics, and I think it was originally conceived for Elseworlds' Kingdom Come miniseries that eventually bled over into the main continuity. WW1984 tried to give it a bit more of a significant context, but it's brief appearance, and instantly getting torn apart wasn't no big loss.

It's just a shame that they can't quite find the middle ground between Zack Snyder's darker approach to the DC Universe and this more lighthearted take that should be striving to be better than the 80's & 90's attempts at superhero movies instead of emulating them. You definitely can tell now Snyder had a lot of influence on the first one and was sorely missed.

True. Agreed.

[The Dark Knight]

It's just a shame that they can't quite find the middle ground between Zack Snyder's darker approach to the DC Universe and this more lighthearted take that should be striving to be better than the 80's & 90's attempts at superhero movies instead of emulating them. You definitely can tell now Snyder had a lot of influence on the first one and was sorely missed.

I think they should just embrace the darker tone. That's when DC is at its strongest, as shown with JOKER. The lighter stuff feels like pandering, and when it doesn't work that hurts even more.

I haven't seen the film, and I'm not in a rush. But from what I've read, my gripes would be:

No flying - save that for after JL. Diana's leap into combat during BvS seemed to be a definitive statement about her current abilities.
Cut the lasso swinging way down.
No body transfer for Steve. Just have him wished back into existence. Problem solved.
Turning the jet invisible with the touch of Diana's hand. Huh?
I would've wiped humanity's knowledge of the film's events at the end. A much cleaner resolution for continuity.

"It's alright" is what I get from your overall sentiments, Joker. Seems like it's a missed opportunity, tonally and narratively.

[The Joker]

"It's alright" is what I get from your overall sentiments, Joker. Seems like it's a missed opportunity, tonally and narratively.

Pretty much, TDK. WW1984 just simply isn't on par with the first film. Which, unfortunately, seems to be more the norm, than the exception, when it comes to sequels in this "cinematic universe" era we are in. Truthfully, it felt like the film was more focused on emulating Richard Donner and to some extent, the MCU, than it was being a 'true' followup to the 2017 Wonder Woman movie. The '80's setting is just perplexing, as there really isn't any big story reason on why it had to be set in the 1980's to be perfectly honest. Course, WW1984 was green lit under the time frame where Stranger Things and the 80's setting was a big deal, so that's probably the major reasoning behind it.