Could stand more "Wonder" here

 

Wonder Woman 1984

Two stars

Director: Patty Jenkins    

Stars: Gal Gadot, Chris Pine, Pedro Pascal, Kristen Wiig, Robin Wright, Connie Nielsen

Running time: 2hr 31min

For a long time I have been behind giving female characters in the superhero genre of movies more of the spotlight. I have wanted to see male characters step back, relegated to second-tier status, and let their female counterparts shine.

We have seen this more and more. Not only has Wonder Woman had two feature films, we have seen characters like that of Regina King in “Watchmen” take center stage and Scarlett Johansson’s Marvel character “Black Widow” will get her own film in 2021. Women are getting greater attention in this genre, as it should be.

What is particularly distressing is when a script subtly, but significantly, undercuts this progress, which is the case with “Wonder Woman 1984.” It gives the impression that the wheels of equality in Hollywood are turning more slowly than we would like to believe.

On the surface, it is a stunning film to look at. Of course it’s set in 1984 and there is significant detail to recreate that period. One of the initial scenes takes place in a mall in Washington D.C. and the thought that went through my head as the camera passed by all the shops we used to see in shopping malls’ heyday was that a rather large portion of the $200 million budget for this film went to vintage Nike shoes and parachute pants.

Back to the story – Diana Prince (Gal Gadot) works at the Smithsonian as a researcher. There she meets a new colleague, Barbara Minerva (Kristen Wiig). Barbara is a stereotype, the kind of awkward but intelligent person that seeks to belong to the “in crowd.” The two strike up an unlikely friendship but not because Diana pities Barbara. The two share a sense of abject loneliness.

Into their lives struts the smarmy Maxwell Lord (Pedro Pascal), who ostensibly wants to make a significant donation to the Institute. While this may appear to be philanthropic, it is anything but. Maxwell wants access to the archives and is looking for an artifact that, over the millennia, has granted one wish to anyone who touches it. Barbara is his gateway to the artifact.

Maxwell needs the stone because his oil company is failing and he is in debt to his many investors. He needs a quick fix to turn his fortunes around. He is that slick personality we all used to see on late-night television commercials. He’s too over-the-top to be trusted and he comes across that way at every turn – so much so that we have a hard time understanding why investors would give this used-car salesman a dime of their money. His only redeeming quality, apparently, is his love for his son. And even at times his son’s presence seems like an inconvenience, though we’re told that Maxwell loves his son and wants to make him proud of his father.

The stone does indeed have the ability to fulfill wishes and it has its effects on Maxwell, Barbara, and even Diana. Maxwell first looks to seize power from his investors. But the power he gains feeds his lust for more. Barbara innocently enough wants to be more like her friend Diana. And Diana, not believing the stone has real power, just wants to be reunited with her long lost love.

But each wish comes with consequence and we learn that dating back thousands of years BCE, the stone has been linked to the downfall of the mightiest of empires. This time it could end the human race.

Granted with each new installation of these superhero movies, the stakes become even greater. Producers and directors feel the compulsion to do something bigger, even more fantastical that the previous version. But this film is almost cartoonish in its premise. There are so many “oh come on” moments that I believe will turn audiences off.

But that is not its greatest flaw. It’s a superhero film, so to paraphrase Coleridge, we must suspend our disbelief to feel its impact. No, its greatest flaw is that the fate of the world hinges on whether people collectively, and more specifically, one main character, can make the right choice. And I cannot suspend my disbelief to that extent. The outcome is affected only indirectly by Wonder Woman, which is a bit of an insult to her. One would think that if film is going to empower a character like this, she would be the one solely responsible for saving the day.

I had a similar issue with Michael B. Jordan’s film “Just Mercy.” The film’s conclusion as to whether a black man would be executed for a crime he didn’t commit didn’t come down to whether or not his black attorney mounted an iron-clad defense. It came down to a white, male prosecutor’s conscience. The common thread between the two is that the lead characters have ultimately been hamstrung and don’t have the final say in how matters are resolved. Since “Just Mercy” is based on a true story, it’s somewhat forgivable.

This film is entirely fictional. Perhaps director/writer Patty Jenkins felt the need for a different type of ending than the first Wonder Woman film in which the outcome is decided by her. But this ending falls far short. There could have and should have been a better ending. Wonder Woman deserves better.

SIDE NOTE: If you do see this film, be sure to stick with it through the credits. There is a great little surprise in there.