DC Comics or, at least, the company that became DC, introduced the comic-book superhero in the 1930s and remained the leading comic producer for a few decades, before Marvel Comics, that 60s upstart, overtook them. In the 1980s, they reclaimed the apex by retooling their classic characters while simultaneously introducing some of the most innovative graphic stories in history. By the mid-1990s, Marvel was in trouble, before terrible decisions and unimpressive movies shook the company and Marvel, with their cinematic universe, rocketed to mainstream success in the twenty-first century.
DC's own films faltered, but Wonder Woman (2017) demonstrated that Warner Bros. could make a decent film with a DCU hero other than Batman. Its sequel, ready for release during a pandemic, finally became available on Christmas of 2020.
The results prove as mixed and inconsistent as its protagonist's history.
The opening flashback establishes Wonder Woman's history and the film's themes through a spectacular action sequence, catches up with the 1980s Wonder Woman (Gal Gadot), who acts in implausible secrecy to maintain continuity with Dawn of Justice. We have a recreated era and numerous spectacular visuals. Atomic Blonde gave us a better, cooler look at the 80s, but one which wouldn't have worked with Wonder Woman. This movie provides, appropriately, excellent superheroic battles, often with tributes to well-known 80s movies. If you're looking for those kinds of scenes, look no further.
However, the film must settle into a plot. The discovery of a device created by the gods results in the return of Steve Trevor (Chris Pine), superpowers for a new acquaintance (Kristen Wiig) of Diana's, and the godlike ascendancy of corrupt businessman Maxwell Lord (Pedro Pascal). And because the villain has been given such over-the-top powers, the entire future of the world is at stake. Indeed, the world becomes aware of this fact, in ways that should result in a very different global reality by the time the previous, but chronologically later, DC films appear. Never mind. There are bigger problems than internal continuity.
Diana's relationship and conflict with the Cheetah have greater impact than the amplified, trumped-up apocalyptic shenanigans that form the main plot. However, both that character and the conflict get shortchanged, because Diana's traditional archenemy has been reduced to a footsoldier for Maxwell Lord. As for Lord, he needed plausible development, instead of a shoe-horned, belated flashback that's supposed to explain his character. People I care about fighting for low stakes beats people I don't care about saving the world. More than anything Wonder Woman 1984 requires more humanity.
Then there's Diana's great love, the restored-to-life Steve Trevor.
I know we're watching a film about an Amazonian superhero with a magic lasso fighting a villain who can alter the fabric of realty, but I would still like to know how a pilot from the early twentieth century can somehow fly a contemporary aircraft, drive a car like a Tokyo Drifter, and operate heavy military equipment. If you're going to include Trevor in the story, make his contributions plausible by in-universe standards.
THE NEXT PARAGRAPH CONTAINS A SPOILER. SKIP IT IF YOU DON'T WANT TO READ A SPOILER.
Wonder Woman 1984 incorporates a number of elements of the amazing Amazon's comic-book history. It cheats us, however, of one particular notorious comic-book moment involving the film's main villain. Instead of coldly killing Lord on camera, (which might have explained Wonder Woman's silence between the end of this film and her next chronological appearance), we see a rather more family-friendly conclusion.
SPOILER COMPLETED
Wonder Woman 1984 begins like a comic from the 1980s and then gets lost in its own excesses—in a film about the dangers of excess. I'll let you decide if that's appropriate or ironic.
In the end, I found this film entertaining. It's less impressive than Wonder Woman or Shazam!, but better than Aquaman (which, arguably, it most resembles tonally) and a lot better than the recent DCCU Superman/Batman outings.
But it isn't the revival of DC's cinematic universe for which Warner executives and fans had hoped.
Director: Patty Jenkins
Writers: Petty Jenkins, Geoff Johns, Dave Callaham.
Gal Gadot as Diana Prince / Wonder Woman
Chris Pine as Steve Trevor
Kristen Wiig as Barbara Minerva / The Cheetah
Pedro Pascal as Maxwell Lord
Robin Wright as Antiope
Connie Nielsen as Hippolyta
Lilly Aspell as Young Diana
Amr Waked as Emir Said Bin Abydos
Natasha Rothwell as Carol
Ravi Patel as Babajide
Oliver Cotton as Simon Stagg
Lucian Perez as Alistair
Gabriella Wilde as Raquel
Kelvin Yu as Jake
Stuart Milligan as the President of the United States
David Al-Fahmi as Mr. Khalaji
Kevin Wallace as Televangelist
Wai Wong as Lai Zhong
Doutzen Kroes as Venelia
Hari James as Trigona
Hayley Warnes as Aella
Many statuesque women as Amazons
Lynda Carter as Asteria
Note of Possible Interest:
So about a certain American president.
The man in the White House during the 1980s defined the era as much as electric drums, greed, hucksterism, the Cold War, and leg warmers. The film gives us a generic president who bears some superficial resemblance to Reagan. Those with a quick eye will notice the jelly beans in the oval office (1:46:13-14). However, this man is decidedly not Reagan, nor do they play him that way. I understand that they don't want to alienate anyone but, honestly, with a few changes to the dialogue and a different handling of that scene, they could have presented Reagan in a way that would have satisfied all but his most extreme supporters and detractors. An ersatz Margaret Thatcher appeared, somewhat comically, at the conclusion of For Your Eyes Only (1981), and I don't recall anyone, including Mrs. Thatcher, being put off by the appearance.
The gods only know what the history books look like in the DCCU.
Oh, wait. You thought this postscript was going to address another occupant of the White House?
Honestly, that would be misleading. This incarnation of Maxwell Lord borrows from a number of figures who influenced the 80s, from Norman Vincent Peale to Donald Trump. He is not, however, Trump. A few nods aside, he's a cinematic take on an established comic-book character, through which the film channels the cultural obsession with excess.
Note to my note: While Peale published his defining work, The Power of Positive Thinking, in 1952, he has influenced generations of business-people and evangelists, for better or worse, and many political figures, from Richard Nixon to Bill Clinton. Peale pervaded aspects of American culture in the 1980s.