Wonder Woman 1984

Wonder Woman 84 is a generational film, it's not simplified, and it's not straightforward. Certain ideas or the performances of individuals may occasionally stutter, but as a whole, it's a distinctive experience. The situation in comics in 1984 was very complicated, the entire DC Universe was due for a major reboot. Having been born in 1971, director Patty Jenkins is very nostalgic about the era, forgetting that superhero comics were not nearly the global phenomenon they are today, making her film less accessible to certain potential markets. The same is true for the general realities of this decade, from which WW84 picks only a certain part. It's not as clear-cut as the first Wonder Woman, which was set in a clear escalating conflict. The second film lacks the comparatively breathtaking climax that was Wonder Woman's triumph in No Man's Land. It took a very long time for classic superheroes to be domesticated in the comics even in the post-war world, and for the newly introduced heroes in the movies, the same path has to be followed, and while it may be different, that doesn't mean it will be any less rough. It's irrelevant that the film Wonder Woman first fought in the trenches of World War I, though in the comic books Wonder Woman wasn't born until the fight against Nazism. Never mind that the film sequel fetishizes an era irrelevant to the comic book Wonder Woman, rewriting her story to best illustrate today's view of her role in society while dealing with the trauma of Americans today. Importantly, this icon of the 20th century, the essence of femininity in all its forms, continues to inspire. Because that is her main message. At heart, Diana of Themyscira is not an ordinary kid from Kansas or a millionaire orphan, Diana is an ambassador of peace in a world of people whether in costume or in plain clothes. The year of repeated postponement of the premiere was very difficult - I was looking forward to the sequel and the eventual film surprised me a lot. I'll be happy if there's a third film. I'd definitely go watch it again in the IMAX, preferably both films. (31/12/2020)

In WW84, there are scenes that are at best average for this genre or stupidly cut short and/or just plain stupid layering clichés upon clichés. All the eccentricities you'd expect and forgive from the Superman: The Movie because it was a pioneer of modern comic book movies and also because it was made in the year 1978, and here the creators try to sell this as a cool retro throwback thing, but it is very much lacking in terms of the screenplay and rests on its laurels. The action scenes are probably the weakest points of the movie as a whole. Patty Jenkins does not really succeed at shooting action using unnatural-looking CGI, like in the first movie, and putting a total of only 4 short and indistinct action scenes into a 151-minute giant blockbuster is almost a crime. Maybe that's why it didn't even bother me as much as in the first movie. Otherwise, this movie is in all ways a forgettable watch, which actually received more media attention than it is actually really worth. (27/12/2020)

I was expecting worse based on the tragic reviews, but it's not that bad. The best part is at the very beginning, with the Olympic tournament of the Amazons, and it is captivating. Then the pace slows down significantly, and there is surprisingly little action for a comic book film, and even when it happens, it's not very impressive. But I enjoyed the idea of granting wishes, it kept me from getting bored, though Pedro Pascal failed to impress me with his acting for the first time. Had I seen it at the cinema, I would have left disappointed, but I watched it at home and it turned out to be okay. Story***, Action***, Humor**, Violence>No, Entertainment***, Music*****, Visual****, Atmosphere***, Tension***. 5.5/10. (30/12/2020)

The attempt to repeat the same procedure in a different retro era didn't turn out well. Whether the main scriptwriter of the first installment, Allan Heinberg, voluntarily left to make TV series or had a falling out with the other creators, his name is no longer involved in the sequel, and it shows. The ingredients are the same, but this time that central thread that turned an adventure fairy tale into a legendary spectacle has gone missing – or at least it's been tampered with. I won't lie, I appreciated the old-fashioned first half, which behaves at times like Richard Donner's Superman, and at times like B movies from the same era (which I mean in a good way). This time as well there are no unnecessary interconnected universes established; instead, they follow the path of the comics in a direction that was aimed at decades ago, both in print and on celluloid. And most of the time, it even works in terms of building upon the wartime antics, because if anyone has almost atomic chemistry, it's Gal Gadot and Chris Pine. How you get past the fact that someone is appearing in a foreign body and how that body is then treated remains bittersweet, awkward, but still genuine and believable in terms of romance, where I believed every word and shed more than a tear during any tearful statements like "I will never love again." But that's where the biggest positives end, and I'm not sure about the rest. I have no problem with the nature and direction of the other characters, since it falls within the visual tradition, but I don't know why Pedro Pascal is being forced into Rock Me Amadeus mode, and why there seems to be about thirty minutes too much of him in the plot, more than would have been necessary for a rich portrayal of his motivation. Similarly, the frequent "educating" of the viewer is glaringly obvious, and there could have been fewer moral lessons on gender or consent, not just because they don't fit the genre but also because they are almost clumsily served directly to the camera. And finally, the most unforgivable aspect: the final showdown and its outcome is the weakest part of the film, as if it were present only to bid farewell to the plot in any way necessary. The action is banal and almost invisible due to darkness, the final moral lesson is illogical, the costumes and masks don't work at all, and most importantly, by that point, it has already extended past three hours in duration; as much as I enjoyed the film, I can't understand this decision to leave everything uncut. Patty Jenkins has fallen victim to megalomania syndrome, and it cost Wonder Woman a satisfying conclusion to the trilogy. (19/07/2023)

If it’s going to be 1984, then with everything that comes along with it, was probably said by Patty Jenkins et al., and the second Wonder Woman was written and filmed exactly as it would have looked 37 years ago. That is, with a fairy-tale plot, in which there is also the threat of the Cold War and the victory of the most important human values, with the main (semi) divine protagonist, who distributes smiles in all directions, eliminates villains without killing (do not expect the sword and shield, Diana's only weapon is a lasso) and she is tormented by unhappy love, with a super-exaggerated and amusing villain whose plan evokes a smile, and with only a few action scenes. But we don't have to wait long for them, as some people complain, because what's between them is entertainment. I really like this concept. Gal Gadot clearly enjoys her relaxed position, absolutely great is Pedro Pascal, who plays Max Lord in exactly the same way Gene Hackman played Lex Luthor, Chris Pine has comedic talent and is still amazed by everything, and hats off to Kristen Wiig, whose Barbara, on the other hand, was obviously inspired by Selina/Catwoman, played by Michelle Pfeiffer, and who gradually transforms without any effects, only thanks to her acting and increasingly animalistic costumes. In the end, I have to do something I haven't done in a long time, and that is to praise the music of Hans Zimmer, who mixes a Williams orchestra full of jubilant Superman fanfares with Morricone romance, period synths and his typical drone (and the Lion King). (16/04/2021)