Wonder Woman (2017) by The Critical Movie Critics

Movie Review: Wonder Woman (2017)


There is an idealized Wonder Woman. It’s vague and often inconsistent in description, but seemingly ethereal in public consciousness, in spite of any prior comic book knowledge, or lack thereof. I would compare the cultural assumption to Superman, and the balancing act the original Richard Donner film had to pull off. The benefit of finally making a Wonder Woman film is that it’s long overdue, and yet it could not have come at a more appropriate time. But, the disadvantage is that everyone’s definition of how this material “should” be handled is different. The point is, Wonder Woman, the 76 year old character, isn’t atop a pedestal. The idea of Wonder Woman is. The vague, impressionable, feminine projection of strength and iconography is precious to the public, I would argue, to a fault. Iconography overshadows nuance and potential innovation.

To that degree, there’s a lot of undue pressure on Wonder Woman, given the current political climate and wide response to the DC Extended Universe up until this point. It’s as if the problems with Supergirl, Catwoman and Elektra were the idea of a female lead rather than the directionless messes the films would’ve been regardless of sex. But the question remains. How does Wonder Woman fare? Quite well, actually. From characterization to theme to aesthetic. It all works.

We begin in a lavish and well-realized Island of Themyscira, a landmark of the DC Universe I’ve waited to see on the big screen since I was 11-years old. We follow a young Diana (Emily Carey), rebellious, eager to train. As you’d expect, her mother Hippolyta (Connie Nielsen, “Nymphomaniac”) is protective and reluctant to let her training begin. With some coaxing, she allows Diana to be trained as the most powerful Amazonian to date, to defend against potential invasions to the island as well as Aries, The God of War’s inevitable return.

Pilot Steve Trevor (Chris Pine, “Hell or High Water”) then accidentally crash lands by the shores of the island, and troops pursuing him follow, thus involving the Amazons, indirectly or not, into the machinations of World War I. Smart move, by-the-by, using World War I. Easier to paint morality in shades of gray when Nazis aren’t around. Plus, it has the added benefit of differentiating itself from “Captain America: The First Avenger,” as the comparisons are inevitable. Unlike that film, however, this isn’t bogged down by setting up the team-up film following. “Captain America: The First Avenger” had an amazing origin put to screen, but when it came to Cap’s actions in the actual war it was rushed forward in a montage in order to sprint to the final act and get him in the ice. Whereas you get exactly what you came for in Wonder Woman, lots of WWI, no shying away from the true devastation of war. There’s even a Howling Commandos-esque team of misfits that joins Diana (now played by Gal Gadot, “Keeping Up with the Joneses”) and Steve’s cause, except they have actual dimension and individual screentime dedicated to more than just gimmicks. The fact of the matter is, you can compare it to “Captain America: The First Avenger” and you can compare it to “Thor,” but this is better than the sum of either or both.

Patty Jenkins is not a director you’d associate with an action tentpole, since the only theatrical film she’s helmed before this was “Monster” in 2003. Given the irrefutable merit this and “Monster” demand, I’m surprised there hasn’t been much besides TV episodes in her filmography in the 14 years since as the choices made here are good ones. Sure, I could complain about the excessive use of slow-motion, but hey, I’ve spent years buried in filmmakers using shaky-cam and rapid fire cutting as a crutch for the better half of a decade now, so I welcome well-choreographed set-pieces even if a lot of slow-mo is the price for it. Gadot is also surprisingly endearing in the role, given her lack of experience up until this point. She balances naiveté with pluck on such a tightrope and she makes it look easy. She’s not to be underestimated as an actress from here on out.

I’m also going to nip this in the bud right now, because I’ve already had conversations about it. Wonder Woman is NOT bleak in saturation for the sake of artificial edge. Without spoiling the film, it is contrasted in three separate ways, the lush, sunny paradise of Themyscira, the foggy, dilapidated London at the height of industry and the accompanying warfront. Finally, the modern day London, once at noon and again at golden hour, while not as lush as “Paradise Island,” is a step in the right direction. There is a thematic purpose to the color palette. Diana herself even stands out heavily when in costume, a striking, shimmering red and blue and gold amidst monochromatic military uniforms. She’s a walking, talking metaphor.

Romance in films also tend to go hand-in-hand, unnatural or not. Not only do Gadot and Pine have great chemistry and banter, but the story also allows them to learn from each other and has the good sense to keep clear of melodrama. Nothing is unearned in their relationship, which is more than I can say for most obligatory romances in not only comic book films, but the action-adventure genre as a whole.

Wonder Woman revels in its simplicity, and understands that contrived complexity does not equate to engaging storytelling. Execution is everything, and what initially feels like the beaten path holds more emotional resonance than arguably most of this superhero Renaissance providing the foundation for this project in the first place. It’s colorful, it’s poised, it’s calculated. In a word, it’s wonderful.

Critical Movie Critic Rating:
5 Star Rating: Fantastic

5

Movie Review: Lady Macbeth (2016)
Movie Review: Delusion (2016)



'Movie Review: Wonder Woman (2017)' have 18 comments

  1. The Critical Movie Critics

    June 3, 2017 @ 7:39 pm Jax

    Off to see this tonight, thanx for not spoiling the movie for me as so many early reviews are doing.

    Reply

  2. The Critical Movie Critics

    June 3, 2017 @ 7:48 pm Orcan

    The story is a bit cliché and the villain was weird, but otherwise Wonder Woman is a solid film.

    Reply

  3. The Critical Movie Critics

    June 3, 2017 @ 8:04 pm BCaF

    girl power. yaay.

    Reply

  4. The Critical Movie Critics

    June 3, 2017 @ 8:25 pm Eddie

    If it weren’t for the few sequences in which WW dazzles with her superheroine powers, WW could pass itself off as a powerful wartime drama. The connection between Steve and Diana was as pure as a movie connection can get, the grit of war is made evident, and Gal Gadot wonderfully portrays a woman discovering herself.

    TL;DR WW is a damn good watch even without the superhero stuff.

    Reply

  5. The Critical Movie Critics

    June 3, 2017 @ 8:38 pm OdoMeter

    She chooses love. Excuse me while I spit up in my lap. Total rip of “5th Element”.

    Reply

  6. The Critical Movie Critics

    June 3, 2017 @ 8:54 pm Mustachiatta

    Marvel has finally met its match and that it was done with a movie with a female superhero is all the more better. Maybe now DC can build upon their universe without Zack Snyder’s misguided influence and give us a Batman, Superman and Justice League we so badly want.

    Reply

    • The Critical Movie Critics

      June 4, 2017 @ 12:33 am Matt

      Zack and Deborah have their mitts all over it–he just didn’t fuck it up by directing it.

      Reply

  7. The Critical Movie Critics

    June 3, 2017 @ 9:04 pm beark

    Id like to mould me some Gal Gadot!

    Reply

  8. The Critical Movie Critics

    June 3, 2017 @ 9:22 pm Tutune

    Am I missing something? Wonder Woman is no more special than any other superhero movie. People, including this critic, are grading it differently just because the star has breasts.

    Reply

    • The Critical Movie Critics

      June 3, 2017 @ 11:15 pm shrinkage

      You’re not missing anything. This follows the same template as the rest. The feminists and liberals are using it as a win because the star and director are women and it somehow proves they’re better than their male counterparts.

      Reply

  9. The Critical Movie Critics

    June 3, 2017 @ 9:46 pm Mario

    Good review, this is definitely the best from DC so far.

    Reply

  10. The Critical Movie Critics

    June 3, 2017 @ 10:00 pm anbidden

    I thought it was good up until the end. That climax was so lame..

    Reply

  11. The Critical Movie Critics

    June 3, 2017 @ 10:09 pm DanGolden

    Didn’t think it would happen in my lifetime but DC has managed to make another strong hero movie other than Batman. Though it suffers from a weak antagonist, Wonder Woman has good story and character arcs and Gal Gadot embodies the role well. Time will tell if they can parlay the success to the rest of the universe.

    Reply

  12. The Critical Movie Critics

    June 3, 2017 @ 10:46 pm The OD

    The CGI is an absolute cringefest. Her leaps are so unnatural, obvious greenscreen use, slo-mo is used in excess and the Ares fight is the stuff jokes are made from. So disappointing.

    Reply

  13. The Critical Movie Critics

    June 4, 2017 @ 9:01 am Pursey

    Great writeup

    Reply

  14. The Critical Movie Critics

    June 4, 2017 @ 1:10 pm Beth Goodman

    In my opinion, Wonder Woman is the best I’ve seen from both houses at DC and Marvel. I loved it all especially the small aspects like Diana’s fish out of water amazement/disgust in London and the priceless expressions on the soldiers faces when she charges the enemy trenches.

    Reply

  15. The Critical Movie Critics

    June 20, 2017 @ 4:55 am Rodney Twelftree

    Great review Deshawn. One of the things I myself noticed was how underplayed the romantic angle of the film was; it wasn’t overt or the driving force of the narrative, but rather an ancillary (yet crucial) subplot around which Diana’s arc progressed.

    Reply


Come Join the Conversation (or Start It)

Privacy Policy | About Us

 | Log in

Advertisment ad adsense adlogger