Wonder Woman 1984 Continues the DCEU’s Trend of Disappointing Sequels

I wouldn’t call myself a huge DC Extended Universe fan. While DC has released plenty of high quality content for the small screen, its cinematic releases just haven’t garnered the same consistent, overwhelmingly positive attention as, say, movies in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. DC movies are overwhelmingly dark, often fetishize violence, and feature morally grey heroes that audiences struggle to root for.

There are exceptions, of course. Man of Steel (2013), for instance, is a halfway decent superhero flick, even if it isn’t particularly original or interesting. However, where Marvel filmmakers excel at expanding origin story movies into equally compelling sequels and ensemble films, the DCEU tends to fall short. For example, DC’s unification of two of their most popular comic characters in Batman vs Superman (2016) was nothing short of a disaster.

Unfortunately, while nowhere near as awful as Batman vs Superman, Wonder Woman 1984 falls victim to the same sequel inferiority curse. Patty Jenkins’ original Wonder Woman scored big time with audiences in 2017. Well-developed, lighter than your average DC film, and boasting as strong a female lead as you’re likely to find anywhere, the 2017 movie left very little to dislike. As for Wonder Woman 1984? Let’s just say I felt disappointed pretty disappointed by the time the credits rolled.

That said, let’s get into what I specifically liked and disliked. As always, spoilers ahead!

What I Liked

Steve (i.e. Diana’s grief and inner turmoil)

The Steve issue was possibly the most genuine, engaging aspect of Wonder Woman 1984. Chris Pine provides a solid onscreen presence in most any movie, and his return as Steve Trevor adds much-needed emotional dimension to this one. The film does an excellent job of establishing the lasting impact Steve’s sacrifice has had on Diana’s life and psyche. Her grief provides both a concrete tie to the first movie and an important baseline for Wonder Woman’s motivations going forward. As an audience, we empathize with how Diana would give almost anything to get Steve back. When she does, our investment in their relationship grants Diana’s internal conflict even higher stakes. Does she choose happiness over power and save the man she loves? Or does she give that up to save humanity from itself yet again?

The scene where Diana revokes her wish sets up the most powerful sequence of the entire movie. Set against a backdrop of mayhem and destruction, it almost perfectly parallels the climax of the first movie. Steve’s claim that he “can save today,” but that Diana “can save the world” rings as true as ever, and striking a familiar emotional chord never hurts. (Except that watching Diana lose Steve again really, really did.)

The sequence ends with Diana sprinting through a landscape of abject anarchy, powers restored. She makes her choice, returns to being the stunning, lethal Wonder Woman we all know and love, and goes on to save the day. But her shattered expression reminds us what it costs her to do so.

Pedro Pascal Unhinged

If you’ve ever heard a story involving a djinn, you’ve probably spent some time planning out how you would use those three wishes. Pedro Pascal’s Maxwell Lord demonstrates what happens when you get too greedy. As it turns out, Lord’s access to unlimited wishes launches an intoxicating spiral of selfish destruction that nearly brings society to its knees. Pascal’s character begins as an effervescent, larger than life TV personality and gradually morphs into a fanatical mess of popping veins and bleeding eyes as his wish-granting power consumes him.

This movie had some serious gaps as far as character development was concerned. (I’ll touch on that soon.) However, Pascal delivered a masterful performance with the cards he was dealt. He outdid himself, turning a cartoonish, one-dimensional villain into a figure that seized my attention and held it for the duration of the film. That takes almost as much skill as acting from behind a Mandalorian helmet.

What I Disliked

1984

Someone made a concerted decision to put the year 1984 in the title of this movie. Now, having watched it, I still don’t understand why. You can’t use 1984 without making people think of George Orwell’s dystopian work of the same name. While the themes of Orwell’s 1984 seem particularly relevant to society today, Jenkins’ film makes no Orwellian allusions whatsoever. That’s like calling a movie “Aquaman vs. the Joker” and involving neither the ocean nor clowns.

Wonder Woman 1984 also felt more like 1980’s lite. Instead of embracing the unique characteristics and anxieties of the decade, it dwelled on superficial things like shopping malls, breakdancing, and parachute pants. While the film touched upon the 1980’s petrol bust in passing, its allusions to Cold War tensions seemed like an afterthought, and it included absolutely no ‘80’s music (a travesty). What’s the point of setting a movie in the 1980’s if you don’t take advantage of anything related to the 1980’s?

Poor pacing and lackluster character development

As a general rule, one should never have to check how much time is left in a superhero movie. Regrettably, Wonder Woman 1984 started out slow and grew steadily more tedious and nonsensical as it went. This issue was compounded by narrative weaknesses and one-dimensional characters. Unleashing an ancient, wish-granting artefact was a pretty gimmicky plot device to begin with, and most of the film’s run time dwelled on the ensuing chaos as the “Dreamstone” bestowed more curses than blessings.

As far the movie’s secondary cast was concerned, my discouraged brain found very little to cling to. I could appreciate the decline of Kristen Wiig’s Dr. Barbara Minerva into villainy. It made sense for her to crave the respect and acceptance that accompany Diana’s effortless mystique. However, I took issue with the way the film established Barbara as a “loser” via random acts of rudeness by otherwise insignificant characters. It felt lazy and clichéd in a middle school drama kind of way.

The movie also did a poor job of developing Maxwell Lord as the primary villain. Aside from his financial struggles, absentee fatherhood, and an overemphasized drive to make his son proud, Jenkins and co. gave us very little understanding of Lord’s background and motivations. Pascal’s performance sold the character more than the writing itself. It didn’t feel like the filmmakers had a cohesive idea of what to do with him. Which leads us to…

The subpar script

As mentioned, the pacing of this film wasn’t great to start out with. But what really killed me was the abundance of awkward, cheesy, and plain unnecessary dialogue. Each time the plot (finally) picked up momentum, another cringe bomb would drop. Even the final confrontation between Lord and Diana turned into more of a long, rambling conversation.

I wanted to like this movie. I really did. But the script made enjoyment a struggle.

I still don’t understand Steve hijacking another dude’s body

Seriously, explain to me how that was supposed to work. Was Steve possessing a random man while Diana hallucinated Chris Pine’s face onto his body? Or did Diana’s recognition of Steve’s “return” temporarily erase said random guy from existence?

Either way, the whole takeover seems morally questionable. There had to have been a better way to bring Steve back. After all, this universe already recognizes the existence of mythological figures and magical items. Is a simple, old-fashioned resurrection really so far-fetched?

Wonder Woman can fly??

Okay, I admittedly know nothing about Wonder Woman’s comic book abilities. However, from a purely movie-oriented standpoint, Diana flying seemed completely unnecessary. I get that it was supposed to be symbolic. As was pointed out earlier in the movie, flying was always Steve’s thing. So, Diana learning to fly herself could be construed as her working toward letting Steve go. That doesn’t really change how I felt about the scene.

First of all, the montage went on for an agonizingly long time. I’m talking several minutes of watching Wonder Woman soaring through the clouds with no real purpose. The flying scene did absolutely nothing to drive the plot forward. Diana flies around for a while, lassoes some lightning, and just when I thought she was using her newfound talents to transport herself to the final battle, it turned out that she never even left Washington D.C. at all. After all that wasted time, she still has to go back to her apartment to grab the crazy golden Amazon armor. (Which looks a lot like CGI straight out of Gods of Egypt.) Never mind that people are dying as she takes her own sweet time.

Finally, I have a problem with how the flight segment ended. Before returning to Earth, Diana sticks one fist out and adopts a pose strikingly reminiscent of something Superman might do. Superman is obviously also part of the DCEU, and the two characters have already interacted in Batman vs Superman. So I understand why the connection exists. However, Wonder Woman is her own hero with her own story—no Superman posturing necessary.

So what’s the verdict?

My sister wanted me to mention that she fell asleep while watching this movie from our family room floor. This is not a good sign for Wonder Woman 1984 for several reasons. First, the floor is hard and the carpet is itchy. Second, the dog spent most of the evening roving said floor. And third, this movie had plenty of action sequences to keep viewers conscious.

Although buoyed by performances by Gal Gadot, Chris Pine, and Pedro Pascal, Wonder Woman 1984 offered an underdeveloped shadow of the masterpiece we enjoyed in 2017. With a better script and a clearer direction, it could have been so much more. I hear DC’s making another Wonder Woman movie in the near future, so maybe—how does the saying go? If at first you don’t succeed, try, try again? Maybe a second Wonder Woman sequel is what DC needs to finally break its curse.

I would give Wonder Woman 1984 a 5/10.