For the nearly the last decade, we have been in a new era of filmmaking. Superhero films are the new Westerns, they’re everywhere, everybody is making them, and even prime time television is full of superheroes. Whether or not this is a good thing, though, is a subject of some debate, and the reason for that is the concept of the “shared universe.” Since Disney bought Marvel in 2009 and set them up with a filmmaking branch called Marvel Studios, the game has changed. The Marvel Cinematic Universe, with its deep bench of power-hitters and bullpen overflowing with colorful second-tier characters who flesh out the cast of every new MCU picture, superhero movies have become, well, comic books. The model is so lucrative that everybody wants in on the action.
Projects like “Kong: Skull Island,” and the recent Tom Cruise “The Mummy” relaunch, are examples of how shared universes are the new standard that studios are chasing. Kong belongs to the “MonsterVerse” along with Gareth Edwards’ “Godzilla” from 2014, while “Dracula Untold” and “The Mummy” are meant to launch Universal’s new “Dark Universe,” returning to their roots as the big horror studio. Last year’s all-female “Ghostbusters” remake was Sony’s attempt to kick off a new franchise that would encompass several different Ghostbusters series with different casts, and share continuity with “Men in Black” and “21 Jump Street.” Nobody wanted that, however, and Sony, a studio notorious for making bad decisions, misfired on the whole thing.
This brings us to “Wonder Woman,” the latest from Warner Bros. in their line of DC Comics films, or the DC Extended Universe as it is officially known. Now, I grew up reading comic books, and in the early 1990’s I collected comics, complete with bags, boards, longboxes; the whole apparatus. My friends and I used to dream about what great movies these intellectual properties would make if Hollywood could only see the value of the storytelling in what was, at the time, only just becoming a somewhat respected medium. I wore out my VHS tape of Tim Burton’s 1989 “Batman” film in the early 90’s. I can still quote the entire film in my sleep. I’m an artist, a writer, a reader, and a comic book guy. Naturally the last decade has been particularly exciting for me, as the culmination of a growing interest in comic book movies that began around the turn of the century with the Blade trilogy, the Sam Raimi-directed Spider-Man trilogy, and Bryan Singer’s X-Men films.
But no franchise has done more for comic book movies than Warner’s Christopher Nolan-directed “The Dark Knight Trilogy” from 2005-2012, which showed that comic movies could be serious, mature in tone, and address heavier themes in the storytelling while staying true to what the characters represent. However, despite the DK Trilogy being a Warner’s property and a DC franchise, the DCEU did not begin until 2013’s Man of Steel, which introduced Henry Cavill as Superman in a film that was heavily inspired by Nolan’s Dark Knight Trilogy. That film was divisive, as for some reason, many people who loved a mature, thoughtful take on Batman, didn’t like Superman receiving the same kind of treatment. I did, though, and this makes me one of the people who loved both Man of Steel and last year’s “Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice,” an operatic revenge tragedy starring three of my favorite superheroes, Batman, Superman… and Wonder Woman. That film was also very divisive and did not perform to the studios expectations (although it made an impressive $855 million worldwide) and is regarded by many filmgoers as “dour” and “depressing.” Speaking as someone who knows the inside of depression, I find that film far from depressing. To me it shows that even in the darkest moments, there can be hope. But then I also like “The Empire Strikes Back,” “Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom,” and “The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers,” so maybe I just appreciate the value of a good, dark, middle chapter.
It is into this climate of strife among fans that Patty Jenkins’ “Wonder Woman” is delivered, and for a guy like me, who has spent the last year arguing the merits of the DCEU films, it was important that the film not sell out the more thoughtful and mature tone of the DCEU, while also finding success not only to cement the future of the DCEU, but to prove to an overwhelmingly sexist Hollywood that women can direct, and lead the casts of, blockbuster movies. It has, after all, been common practice for studios to hedge their bets in this regard. Note, for instance, that the only female superheroes in the Marvel Cinematic Universe so far are Scarlett Johansson’s Black Widow and Elizabeth Olsen’s Scarlet Witch, neither of whom has headlined her own film, or is in any way scheduled to do so. Fox’s X-Men films have plenty of women characters, but again, as part of an ensemble, the only characters to headline their own films being Wolverine and Deadpool. Last year’s “Ghostbusters” misfire also set the cause back.
Perhaps Wonder Woman’s greatest success is in proving that action movies with ladies, by ladies, can be profitable. Budgeted at $150 million dollars, the film is going to pass $500 million worldwide in its third weekend and looks to finish its theatrical run in the $700 million range. That’s more than Man of Steel and less than BvS, but more profitable than either one, as those were budgeted at $225 and $250 million, respectively. And how is the film?
On my first viewing, I came away somewhat disappointed, but this was owing largely to my love of MoS and BvS, which films are both heavier and I think more complex in their thinking. Subsequent viewings have brought me around, however. Wonder Woman, as a character, has to stand apart from Superman in more ways than just her gender, and what we have here is a representation of the DC Comics “trinity” that should be a powerful ensemble: Superman, a kind-hearted alien in whom people seek a savior, and who thus feels the crushing weight of his inability to save every single person every single time, for he is not a god; Batman, who embraces the darkness because he lost his innocence at a young age, yet who clings to the notion that mankind is basically good, if given the right inspiration to act; and Wonder Woman, a compassionate, optimistic, yet indomitable warrior, a literal demigod who fights for love.
Wonder Woman’s first solo film tells her origin, and it does this in a way that intentionally recalls Richard Donner’s “Superman: The Movie,” but is still thematically linked with the DCEU. After three viewings, I still get choked up when Diana drops her cloak and climbs out of the trenches in full armor, charging across no-man’s land to the German line, deflecting artillery with her shield and bullets with her vambraces, leading the British and American troops from a place where they were pinned down, without hope of advancement, to liberating the small village of Veld. That is powerful stuff, and it’s the moment Gal Gadot’s Diana really becomes Wonder Woman.
The place where the film sometimes falters for me is in the juxtaposition between Patty Jenkins’ take on an optimistic, unsinkable hero who acts out of love and compassion, and the film’s attempt to continue the overall moral complexity of the DCEU, which can best be summed up in a quote from William Bradford, the long-standing governor of the Plymouth Colony in Massachussetts: “All great and honorable actions are accompanied with great difficulties, and both must be enterprised and overcome with answerable courage.” Or, as put simply, and perhaps most eloquently, by Jack Kennedy some three-hundred years later: we choose to do these things “not because they are easy, but because they are hard.”
Wonder Woman enters the world of men as an adult, but one who has been sheltered by her mother, who has lived a lifetime on an island still in the Bronze Age, believing that all war is the fault of Ares, the Greek God of War, and who is thus somewhat overwhelmed by the notion that people have both light in dark in them, and that saving the world isn’t as simple as killing Ares and watching a cloud lift from the hearts and minds of mankind. Her victory in Veld is soon followed by a very dark defeat, and her victory at the end of the film comes with a terrible price. This absolutely fits with the established DCEU material, and Diana’s childlike version of morality takes a beating; yet I never feel like the film draws a clear conclusion from it.
Diana believes that Ares is responsible for World War I, during which the film is set, and she believes that if she kills the God of War, mankind will be free of his influence and they will all stop fighting and be good and honorable and compassionate again. After the climactic battle with Ares, German troops are shown standing up and putting their arms around not only each other, but also Wonder Woman’s friends who have accompanied her on this mission. It’s as if she was right, but of course we know that a second World War occurred, and then Korea, and Vietnam, and the Gulf War, and 9/11, and the War on Terror.
At the end of “Batman v Superman,” Gadot’s Diana told Ben Affleck’s Bruce Wayne, “a hundred years ago I walked away from the world of men. From a century of horrors. Men have made a world where working together is impossible.” Putting the Wonder Woman solo film into that context, it ought to be the story of how she got there. It just never quite feels like it is. More confusingly, this Wonder Woman believes that people are essentially good when not being compelled by Ares, yet she mows through German troops like a reaper in a wheat field. I don’t have a philosophical problem with killing in battle, and indeed I paid good money to watch Wonder Woman kick every possible butt. I’d have been upset if the film hadn’t delivered. But if she believes Ares has simply corrupted these people, then why kill them? Especially when the movie makes so much hay about her being loving and compassionate.
I feel like there’s a philosophical question to be asked there, but perhaps it’s as simple as, Diana is an Amazon, a warrior raised among warriors, trained by them, destined for one job, and she sees killing in battle as an honorable exercise if it allows her to save more lives overall by reaching Ares and stopping him. I would have liked for the film to take some time to reflect on what Diana has learned by the end, or indeed to demonstrate that she has learned anything at all. In the film’s postlude, Diana has a voiceover where she says, “I used to want to save the world, to end war and bring peace to mankind. But then I glimpsed the darkness that lives within their light. I learned that inside every one of them there will always be both. The choice each must make for themselves – something no hero will ever defeat.” It’s fine that she says it, of course, but I’m not sure that the movie really shows it, which makes the words ring somewhat hollow.
We live in a time where our country is extremely polarized, and the way that occurs is by people taking too stark of a worldview, dehumanizing people who don’t agree with them, and insisting that one point of view is the only correct one. That’s what makes people unable to answer defeat with grace, victory with humility, injury with forgiveness, and strength with mercy. It’s also the reason for war, as every side believes they’re right. Because of this, the message of Wonder Woman is a timely one, but one that I wish had been explored in more depth. This film, however, seeks not to deconstruct Diana but simply to put her on a journey and invite us to follow, and to see the conflict through her eyes.
On a nuts-and-bolts storytelling level this means we don’t get much insight into the villains, something I miss since villains can be compelling, and as conflict is the heart of drama, and villains are the source of conflict, the better the villain the better the drama. This isn’t to say we don’t learn about the motivations of the villains in this film, but we never quite get to see them as people, something that supports Diana’s initial, stark worldview but does little to support her eventual declaration that everyone has both light and dark in them. It also unfortunately forces some very talented performers to constrain themselves to one or two notes, hardly representative of the palette available to them.
Somehow, in the end, I don’t mind, and I will give credit to Gal Gadot for that, because this is her first leading role and she absolutely crushes it. She’s engaging, charming, and so earnest that you will follow her on any adventure, and that’s the capital upon which the film trades. Clearly, Zack and Debra Snyder knew what they were doing when they hired her, and Patty Jenkins obviously knows how to get great performances out of her leads – it was Jenkins’ 2003 film, “Monster,” after all, for which Charlize Theron won her Academy Award. Gadot – with a hard T, she’s Israeli, not French – got her start as a model and a beauty queen before breaking into acting. She’s had supporting roles in some of the Fast and Furious movies, and appeared as Wonder Woman in last year’s “Batman v Superman,” but before landing the role, she was ready to quit acting and study law. As an Israeli national, she served her mandatory term in the Israeli Defense Force, where she was a weapons instructor, something that makes her absolutely convincing as a warrior. Patty Jenkins has said that she was upset when she learned that Wonder Woman had been cast before she came on board as director, but was relieved when she met Gal because she understood immediately that they had found the perfect person for the role.
There’s room to challenge the character further in other films, and I hope they do. After all, true drama comes from challenging your characters, really putting the screws to them, and the problem with most superhero films is that there’s no real drama, no stakes, no chance for failure; and it takes the chance of failure in order for victory to mean a damned thing. I grew tired of the Marvel films a few years ago because they have a formula, they adhere to it strenuously, and they don’t challenge either their heroes or their audiences with the choices they make. What sets the DCEU apart from the MCU, in my mind, is that they have the guts to structure a superhero movie like an Elizabethan revenge tragedy, or in the case of Wonder Woman (rather appropriately) a Greek heroic epic, and to trust the audience to be mature enough to understand the grey tones of real-world morality. In a landscape populated almost exclusively by films that want to be comic books, it’s refreshing to see comic book movies that function as classical films.
One of Wonder Woman’s great victories is what the film says about men and women, and what we can accomplish together. Chris Pine, as Wonder Woman’s sidekick and love interest, Steve Trevor, doesn’t have to make a complete ass of himself in order to make his leading lady look good; instead she’s just already inherently amazing, and he gets to be awesome too, and they accomplish great things by working together. He learns of course that he doesn’t always have to protect her, that she can not only take care of herself but can also protect him, and that the two of them have skills and knowledge that compliment each other. It isn’t a competition with them, it’s pure harmony, and it’s a breath of fresh air for an action movie. Indeed, the more Trevor gets out of Diana’s way, the better she shows herself to be, and the better he is, too, because she brings out the best in him. Yes, a healthy relationship in a superhero movie. We need more depictions of healthy relationships in any medium.
My favorite thing about this movie, though, came in my third viewing, when I saw it with my parents. My mom’s reaction to seeing a woman mopping the floor with all these bad guys, and doing it convincingly: my mother leaned over to me and said, “she’s sort of everything I’d like to be.” I imagine a lot of women out there are feeling that, watching this movie. I imagine now there will be an entire generation of girls who grow up with this movie and this character, this version of this character, close to their hearts. And that is, if you’ll forgive the expression, a wonderful thing. In the end, there’s no greater justification for this film’s existence exactly as it is, and none other is needed. It’s a movie I’m proud to support, and will be proud to own when it is released on blu-ray. If you haven’t seen it, get out there and do so. And take at least one of your favorite ladies with you.
