Skip to main content

Wonder Woman review (SPOILERS!)


So…Wonder Woman, 2017.

I am impressed.

Let’s get the obvious out of the way first, Gal Gadot is unspeakably gorgeous, yet plays Diana with such confidence and poise that indeed, as Sammy says, “you don’t know whether to be terrified or aroused.”  (And doesn’t that summarize the Israeli female soldier stereotype? Could a non-Israeli actress have pulled this off?) Yet at no time does Diana fall into the trap Heather MacDougal describes in her famous essay, “ I hate strong female characters” – in other words, a woman who is ass-kicking but that’s all she is, the one-dimensional figure epitomized by Scarlet Johannsen’s Black Widow. Instead we see Diana through a wide range of states of being – confident, confused, curious, despairing – we see how her naïve honesty is precious, but also fuels a certain hubris, and isn’t that the quintessential Greek mythic flaw? Her romance with Steve begins as curiosity, cracks when she realizes that, gasp, he has flaws (as first loves tend to do), and only manifests as love when she realizes he’s gone and it’s too late to explore it further.

The movie challenges the square-jawed male hero roles as well – nearly all the male characters suffer from some sort of trauma. Our male heroes are soldiers using “good guy violence” to beat “bad guy violence,” but they really just want to sing, or to be an actor. Characters who would normally be comic relief are still so, but are also the heroes (as opposed to just sidekicks for the heroes). They struggle with racism, and the conflicts inherent in fighting alongside, and for, the very people who deem them less than human (if anything I wish the movie had explored this a bit more). In all, it was very nice to see WW return to her antiwar roots.

What I loved the most was how the plot was a refreshingly more sophisticated departure from the classic action hero movie structure of, “hero has origin, hero wins some battles, hero suffers big defeat, hero makes kickass comeback.” From start to finish, Diana is an unstoppable force of nature. Even Ares doesn’t give her much of a challenge. Physically. No, Diana’s hero’s journey is mental, her conflict internal and coming-of-age-like: how can she retain the power of her idealism once her innocence is lost? Steve Trevor and his gaggle of friends are off having a more traditional male adventure, but that’s all in the background, happening while Diana’s center stage, having an adventure that is in a way a running meta-commentary on the action hero tropes.

Because of this, Ares is the perfect villain. At first I thought casting effete old “Lupin” as Ares was ridiculous, but then I came to realize that his physicality wasn’t the point. He is intensely threatening, NOT because he can throw lightning bolts – remember, Diana kicks his ass without too much trouble. No, he is dangerous because he positions himself as the god of truth. He offers to unmask humanity for what it is (as he literally does with “Doctor Poison”), revealing the ugliness and rot inside. In his explanation of the world – backed up, you have to admit, by very persuasive evidence – all struggle is pointless. Humans are irredeemable, so why waste time trying to redeem them? He threatens to dematerialize the whole concept of heroism.

It’s an incredibly postmodern challenge for Diana, and it’s a challenge the film forces us as viewers to face as well. Those of us who grew up as naive kids loving superheroes, until those dreams were chewed up by reality. There are times when the movie has her strike a cheesy “superhero” freeze frame pose, or make some statement like “love is what will save mankind.” If you, like many of us, are tempted to snicker and dismiss it as kitsch, then that positions you squarely on Ares’ side: the side that says everything is shit, humans are shit, that all endeavor is pointless and the world would be better off if it were empty of us.

Diana’s triumph is that she chooses to believe, chooses to hold on to heroism, not out of naiveté like she did at first --- but that, even after she’s seen the rot behind the mask, she still chooses to believe she can make a difference, that the struggle is worth it. Similarly, the movie offers *us* that choice  – we can dismiss it as cheeseball, or we can choose to let ourselves believe, even for just a few minutes in a dark movie theater, that goodness can triumph and love can conquer all. The choice is ours, and THAT is the freedom that Wonder Woman fights for. She fights to bring us, not the overthrow of some tyrant and then, yay, everything’s awesome (Steve even says, “it’s not like there’s this one bad guy you beat and then it’s all over"), but rather, the freedom to choose hope over cynical despair.
That’s the hero we need for today's world. That's a hero I’ll applaud any day.


Grade: A

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Regarding "men behaving badly on film"

A response to this article in the New York Times magazine. I can understand why Ms. Schwarzbaum (Riff, December 22, 2013) is somewhat put off at the wave of “ingratiating geezer group project” movies featuring aging male characters trying to recapture “one last victory before coming to terms with...death...routine, responsibility, commitment.” It's a trend I find just as irritating for its hackneyed, single-story drumbeat. However, unlike Ms. Schwarzbaum, I don't find it surprising.  Society prepares girls, from the moment they are born, to be future-looking – the baby dolls and toy cookware they are given train them to take on, to embrace, responsibility. As they grow, they are praised for quietly taking on roles of nurturance, and criticized should they demand space or voice for themselves. As they become women, their challenge is to not fear their own independence, to dare to depart from their role as caretakers and maintainers if they so choose. Boys seem to face an

Jar Jar Binks on the Crisis in American Democracy

Jar Jar Binks and the Crisis in American Democracy I’m not planning to vote for Donald Trump, but I can understand his appeal, and not just to racists and idiots. To help me explain this, I’m going to draw upon the most intellectually rigorous source material I can: the Star Wars movies. I’ve seen so many folks on the internet draw parallels between Trump and Senator Palpatine, and if you’re going to do that, I think you need to extend the metaphor to cover the entire setting of the films. Let’s examine the lead-up to that fateful moment when everyone’s favorite gungan, Jar Jar Binks, singlehandedly destroys the Republic by calling for the emergency powers vote. Examine, if you will, the state of the Republic prior to that moment: It was a freaking mess. There was so much political logjam in the Galactic Senate that when one member world actually launched a full-scale invasion and conquest of another, partisans in the Senate blocked the Chancellor’s attempt to even b

Review of Avengers: Endgame (Spoilers, assemble!)

April 26, 2019 One of the things I loved about devotedly following every month’s adventures in dozens of different comic books which, thanks to a shared universe (generally Marvel or DC), had interrelating or at least tangentially connected plots, was becoming attached to characters and watching them grow and develop and change over time (part of why I so dislike reboots, that erase such evolution)…and every so often there would be a giant summating moment. DC’s Crisis on Infinite Earths was really the first (and arguably still the best) of such grand convergence moments, but Marvel really was the master of them. Secret Wars, Fall of the Mutants, Inferno, Onslaught, Age of Apocalypse, Civil War . Superhero movies, I thought, simply had no way of replicating this sort of phenomenon, as a limitation of the medium. I mean, you only get 2 hours, right? What are they going to do, have two dozen interrelated two hour movies? Well, now we do. Watching both Infinity War and