‘Wonder Woman 1984’ was an hour too long and a disappointment, right?

Mild spoilers for Wonder Woman 1984 follow, especially in the conclusion
On Saturday night I watched Wonder Woman 1984 over Zoom with my mom. (We just start shows on our TVs at the same time with our laptops next to us.) If my mom wasn’t watching it with me I would have switched it off about halfway through. After seeing the second half I regret that decision. At least we had a good time making fun of it. We were mocking how bad and long the fight and actions scenes were particularly. Overall I was really disappointed. I say this as someone who was wearing a Wonder Woman sweatshirt, WW tank top and WW leggings while drinking from a WW cup on a WW coaster. I am not exaggerating about this, I grew up watching Lynda Carter as Wonder Woman and I had the merch as a kid too.

The first movie was solid, the plot made sense and I was entertained throughout. I guess I had high hopes for the second, which were absolutely dashed after about an hour. The villains were asinine, Wonder Woman vacillated between being all powerful and laughably weak, the scenes were too long, the plot was a mess and I just wanted it to end. I’m not the only one. Although the film has a decent 65% critics and 73% audience Rotten Tomatoes rating, a lot of people also found it bloated and meandering. Here are segments from two reviews that I agree with. Critics are always better than I am at explaining why I liked or disliked a film.

On top of rehashing bits from the first film, an extended flashback, a resurrected romance, and a buddy plot that introduces one Wonder Woman villain, these DCEU creatives decided to loop in a second foe. This one wears slick suits and a desperate smile while promising his could-be investors all they’ve ever wished for. The ’80s setting with Lord as the Big Bad makes sense in theory; if you want to do something radically different in tone/style from the WW1 origin, flee far from the mud-colored No Man’s Land to the violently vibrant era of Greed is Good, then center on a guy who’s made that his maniacal mantra. To Pascal’s credit, he clearly revels in playing an unhinged conman. However, this plot swiftly runs away with the film, dragging in haphazard geopolitics, problematic stereotypes, and muddy themes, all while subjecting Pascal to a haircut that is a crime against his face. – Kristy Puchko on Crooked Marquee

Frankly, thank the heavens for Chris “Charming” Pine. The scenes between him and Gal Gadot were the only moments that I didn’t feel needed to be trimmed in this bloated mess. Frankly, I would have much preferred just watching the Steve Trevor and Dianna Prince eighties romantic comedy for two hours. Despite the lack of eighties tunes, 1984 is on full display, like, for example, in the high action fight sequence Wonder Woman has with a bunch of bandits in the mall. As much as I did enjoy this scene, it was, frankly, rather pointless in the long run, much like the entire introduction of the film in which young Dianna competes in an obstacle course in Themyscira.

When it comes down to it, so many terrible choices were made here, except for the Steve Trevor fashion show. This, I can get behind. In paying homage to the first Wonder Woman, Steve and Dianna’s roles are flipped. This time, it is her serving as a tour guide to show him this new world he finds himself in. It is through this I discovered fanny packs are the new utility belt (sorry, but not sorry Batman).

As for the villains in this flick, yep they are here. Did I care about them? No. – From Rosalie Kicks on Movie Jawn

[From Crooked Marquee and MovieJawn.com]

I actually didn’t agree with everything that Rosalie Kicks at Movie Jawn wrote. While Chris Pine was a definite highlight, I think the Steve Trevor fashion show was too long and that we needed more time with him at the Air and Space Museum. The movie needed to be edited way down. I also had a lot of questions about potential plot holes. How does Steve know how to fly a modern jet? How is the villain Maxwell able to both grant wishes and take whatever he wants in return? (The monkey paw doesn’t decide what to take for its own good. The consequence is whatever will screw over the wisher.) How was Wonder Woman able to get that new power and then immediately change into her special suit? They could have fixed that with a little spinning scene. Where was the spinning change scene in this movie?! We didn’t get one in the first Wonder Woman movie either, right? Lynda Carter was shoehorned in at the end and she deserved so much better. They could have written her in cleverly, but nothing was clever about this film.

Also why was Wonder Woman so hung up on one guy she loved over 60 years ago? That just made me sad, as did the fact that Cheetah’s turning point into becoming a villain was enacting revenge on a rapey guy who completely deserved it. Cheetah needed more of a backstory and she transformed from being empowered to cartoonish in about a minute. Plus the film was racist against Arabic people. It was very much like an 80s movie in that respect. Wonder Woman deserves better, and we deserve a sequel that does justice to the superhero we grew up with. I guess you can’t have many expectations of DC movies except that they’re going to mess up their franchises even when they have an ace in the hole.

I know which Wonder Woman I’m going to be watching.


maxresdefault (1)

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

85 Responses to “‘Wonder Woman 1984’ was an hour too long and a disappointment, right?”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Lightpurple says:

    Pedro Pascal’s wig was distractingly bad. Kristen Wiig seems to have wandered in from Cats and in the climatic moment, instead of doing battle, Wonder Woman just talks everyone into boredom.

  2. Justme says:

    I saw a review that pointed out the irony of Wonder Woman urging society to be ok with what they have while she is a) all-powerful, b) drop dead gorgeous, c) wealthy, d) very intelligent and educated and wearing golden armor and how that seemed to be an accidental reminder of how the elites keep telling the common folk that we’re all in this together, when really, we’re not.

    >Imagine< that. lol.

    Also spoilers: How did Steve just take over that other guy's body? Like, did this guy have family/friends/a job he just suddenly abandoned? How did that work?

    • Chartreuse says:

      That’s exactly what I said (watched it last night) everyone puts up with whatever but she’s super powerful, intelligent, beautiful and all the rest. It was a big eye roll.

      I agree with all those plot holes. They were same questions I had. The plane bit was just stupid. And she never wondering how Barbara suddenly was a different person and clueless about her using the thing? It could have been good but the screwed it up

      Plus GG’s acting ois boring. She’s attempting being serious and weighty but she’s tedious.

    • StellainNH says:

      I think he did. It reminded me of that Warren Beatty movie “Heaven Can Wait”.

    • Renee says:

      We were saying the same thing, “I think that guy just got ‘ghost whispered’.” And then he just came back and didn’t seem at all concerned about where he had been.

    • Tannedfornow says:

      @Justme, completely sums up the irony of superhero films: all the superheroes with powers no one else has telling us we’re all special and equal.

  3. Soupie says:

    Visually stunning, too many plot holes, too long. We split up time watching it, finished the morning after Christmas.

    We binged the entire The Flight Attendant. Liked it much better.

    • Darla says:

      I just came here to say this! I was so letdown by Wonder Woman, but the next day began The Flight Attendant and there was no way to stop. MUCH better experience. What an absolutely fantastic show.

    • Anne Call says:

      We watched the Trial of the Chicago 7 this weekend and it was great. Very topical for these times.

  4. Alissa says:

    I wish they had just had Kristen wiig be the villain. that could have been compelling on its own. I like Pietro Pascal but that whole thing got so ridiculous. The whole wish thing and the rules around it seemed to change repeatedly as the movie went on, and it just dragged. I enjoyed the first one but felt it was about a half hour too long, this one somehow felt like an hour too long but also not long enough to explain itself.

    not to mention all the subtle racism and weird middle Eastern stuff. not a good look.

    • lucy2 says:

      I agree, her character really got sidelined towards the end, and she was a much more interesting villain. They should have had her kill Pascal’s character and take over what he did.

      I wanted to love it, but found it a disappointment, though still entertaining enough for sitting at home. With some major editing and a few tweaks to the story, it could have been so much better.
      Also, I found the CGI to just be too much, and WW’s jumping around seemed so fake and weightless compared to the first film.

    • GamerGirl says:

      I was ridiculously excited to see that Cheetah was going to be the villain in this one – and then, nothing. When they finally transformed her, she looked like a reject from the Cats movie. She has a spectacular storyline in the comics, and they tossed it out for a boring, preachy movie and a thinly-veiled Donald Trumpian villain. I was so disappointed.

  5. Darla says:

    I thought Pascal was doing Trump at certain points, and I found that entertaining enough, for a bit. But then, he loved his son enough to give up everything, so…that blew any Trump comparisons. When Diana tells Steve “I’ll never love again” I just thought that was so pathetic. They really did make her pathetic as far as her love life goes. Absolutely no fight scene that could even hope to touch the glorious battlefield charge led by Diana in the first WW. And the plot was ridiculous. Also, you can make a case that Diana raped the guy whose body Steve inhabited, honestly. What a mess. What a disappointment.

    • Mia4s says:

      “ But then, he loved his son enough to give up everything, so…that blew any Trump comparisons.”

      Haha! My boyfriend and I both said the same thing! I also said that I would take that Lord guy over Trump any day of the week. Sure that might be some Pedro Pascal love coming through…but regardless.

  6. Roo says:

    Yeah. WW was garbage. But Soul.. THAT was a good movie.

    • MaryContrary says:

      Totally agree. We watched WW on Christmas night and all thought it was was awful. We watched Soul the following night and loved it.

    • Lolamd says:

      We watched Soul after WW to wash away the disappointment. Soul was an amazing movie.

  7. Oliphant says:

    I’ll watch anything for more Pedro pascal content 😃

  8. smcollins says:

    Eh… I get the criticism but at the same time it’s a comic book movie not based in reality. It’s pure fantasy & a feast for the eyes, that’s it. I agree it was too long and there weren’t enough action sequences, but I enjoyed it and thought it was a nice (for the most part) piece of escapism.

    • Whynot says:

      Yes to this – have to allow it to be what it is – comic book fantasy. I easily can see why the criticism. But WW is a comic book heroine – nothing more. If you want to deconstruct her, of course she’s going to disappoint.

    • Justme says:

      Comic book movies can be great. The first WW was much, much better, so I don’t see how that’s a reason for this one to be sub-par.

      • Whynot says:

        I enjoyed it – I suppose I might be in the minority, but I did find the fun in it and don’t consider it sub-par. I was trying, albeit ineptly, to say that perhaps people are trying to hold this character to something it wasn’t designed to be, and that if taken at face value, might find the movie more enjoyable. It seems as though this particular movie is being viewed with a more discerning eye than usual. I enjoy the genre, definitely find Marvel more entertaining than DC, and usually share the public’s opinion about which ones work better than others. I’m just surprised at the reactions to this particular film. To me, people seem to be especially critical for reasons that are – again – surprising given the type of film WW84 is.

  9. EMc says:

    I forgot Pedro Pascal was in it until I saw his name at the beginning and I literally cheered out loud. When I saw him in that stupid wig I almost cried. I mean I get it, it was the 80s, but such a let down.

    The movie wasn’t good. I wanted to love it but I just couldn’t. We watched the first one again before watching 84, and it is just so, so much better.

  10. chimes@midnight says:

    The thing about setting movies in the 80s is….. NO ONE is nostalgic for the 80s. A shallow, vapid time with terrible fashion and no substance. Yeah if you grew up in that decade (I did) you might feel a little tug for the simplicity of free-range childhood, but I think people just aren’t clamoring for 80s throwback films. There have been so so many in the last decade that failed miserably and maybe one or two that were successful.

    • Darla says:

      I came of age in the 80’s, so I was a teen in the late 80’s. I don’t miss any of it. I am VERY nostalgic for the 90’s. What a decade.

    • Nic919 says:

      Stranger Things has managed to work in the 80s nostalgia in a much better way. The overall problem with WW84 is that it was simply a bad movie. The first section with young Diana was good but after that, it just was all over the place.

      • Ponchorella says:

        Yup. The first scene was great. The rest was junk. I went to sleep about an hour in.

      • ClaraBelle says:

        Yes, I thought the first one was a couple hours too long. Of course my opinion was colored by the fact that I took my 9 year old granddaughter with me who was (understandably) bored throughout. NOT a kid’s movie.

    • TeamAwesome says:

      The best thing about the 80s is the music…of which there was none in this movie. The Crown did an excellent job of incorporating 80s music and I think this was a missed opportunity.

      • lucy2 says:

        That was one of the things I was excited for when it was announced it’d be set in the 80s – the music! And then there was…none. Atomic Blonde on the other hand, has a killer 80s soundtrack, I was hoping for something similar.
        Also they didn’t even really lean into the silly 80s fashion. Why set it in that time if you aren’t going to really go for it?

      • M.A.F. says:

        That was the first thing I noticed – the lack of 80s music. Don’t title your film 1984 if you aren’t going to use the music from that year.

    • Nanny to the Rescue says:

      I’m nostalgic for the 80s, because, you guessed it, I was going through my best youth years then.

      “A shallow, vapid time with terrible fashion and no substance.” – This is true, but I would say the same for the 90s, the 2000s, and the 2010s. I’d argue that we’re getting worse and worse.

  11. Seraphina says:

    I too watch WW as a little girl. I heard this was a waste of time. A shame. And while I loved the first movie, it did rub me the wrong way that she fell in love with Steve and his death caused her rage to fight Ares. Yet again, a man has to be the catalyst. Wrong message.

  12. Rapunzel says:

    Wonder Woman basically rapes the dude Steve took over. Ugh. So gross. And unnecessary. And it’s sick how they made her so desperate for Steve. That’s the opposite of how Wonder Woman would behave.

    The film should have streamlined its story. No need for two major villains.

    And Pedro Pascal should never be without a mustache. See the Mandalorian if you don’t believe me.

    • Sigmund says:

      Pajiba has a really excellent article talking about this, as well as the problematic scenes in Bridgerton.

      I’m surprised no one working on this movie thought, “we can’t have WW rape this random guy”. But apparently no one did.

  13. FHMom says:

    We watched it last night. It was not good. It had so many plot holes, and I felt bad for Kristin Wiig. Pedro Pascal was the best part of the movie. I didn’t recognize him at first. And I will say it…I don’t get the love for Chris Pine. He looked terrible. Even my kids noticed his bad hair. He is definitely the least attractive Chris. And, yes, that includes Pratt.

    • LightPurple says:

      Pine seems to be aging rather quickly.

    • Darla says:

      I so agree about Pine, and also he’s just so slight. Not my type. I like him and all, but not my type. Maybe Pratt is more physically attractive, but he gives off such huge do*che vibes that I just can’t see it. I don’t even see this as a contest, Evans is the best Chris and by far. Hemsworth never did it for me, I swear don’t know why. Obviously if I met a guy who looked liked him irl I would be bowled over, yet, onscreen he leaves me meh. I do think he’s funny and I like him, but…meh.

      Evans in my view doesn’t even have any Chris competition.

      I mean, we maybe need to bring in some new Chris’es to make this interesting?

    • H says:

      I thought Pine looked HOT, even in those stupid parachute pants. He’s my favorite Chris. As an English major who went to Berkley, I’ll let him read poetry to me any day over that do*che Pratt.

  14. ce says:

    I have so many things to say but to sum it up is this: WW was one of two movies I was looking forward to seeing this year: In The Heights was pushed to next summer, but at least I could see this one? Not all hope is lost for 2020, right? Well, WW was the film approximiation of this crap year: felt like it went on forever, bad in a way which was preventable, and highly disappointing.

  15. Charlotte says:

    Honestly, I don’t get the love for the first Gal
    Gadot WW film – me and my husband watched it and thought it was rubbish! But we hated Deadpool too and seem to be in the minority so maybe we’re the weird ones *shrugs*

    • Chisom says:

      My thoughts exactly. I detested the first WW movie that I couldn’t bear to watch it again. Don’t understand the love for Chris pine. He is just meh. Gal Gadot’s acting is also not so good.

    • Gobo says:

      I though it was incredibly dull. Certainly a huge improvement on the rest of the last decades worth of DC films, but that really is faint praise.

      • Ripley says:

        Incredibly dull and sooooo sllooooww. Even the fight scenes were slow which is impressive. I so wanted to like the first one and even thought about getting HBO Max to watch this to advocate for women directors, etc. but we can’t afford it at the moment.

    • TheOriginalMia says:

      I liked the first one. It wasn’t bad. It was just there. I’ve never watched it after seeing it in the theater. The bar was so low after BvS that it was a vast improvement.

    • Becks1 says:

      I didn’t love the first one – the opening sequence was fantastic, but then I lost interest in it about halfway through. (I’m usually hit or miss on comic book movies, I either love them or get very bored.) I will watch this one though just to see, but hearing that its “too long” is a bummer in my opinion. I hate when I’m watching a movie and I just think, “this would be so much better if it was a half hour/hour shorter.” Sometimes, less really is more.

    • Digital Unicorn says:

      The first one wasn’t bad, Gadot is not a great actress but you didn’t really notice in the first one as it was a good plot, well written, well directed and she was surrounded by many very talented actors. I haven’t seen this one and from pretty much all accounts its dire, terrible plot/script and as such it doesn’t hide her bad acting. I hear the young actress who played a young Diana stole the show.

  16. TheOriginalMia says:

    It wasn’t good. At all. I binged Bridgerton. That was a palate cleanser.

  17. Eliza says:

    The 1st movie was solid until the third act fight scene – DC MUST INCLUDE NEEDLESS CGI EPIC BATTLE AT THE END!! Having a large staged hand to hand combat with stunts would be more satisfying than that blurry CGI mess.

    I haven’t seen the 2nd, but I could see how it could become too long and too convoluted. Many sophomore slumps suffer from that: trying to shoe horn in what was popular from the 1st (her childhood training, Chris Pine chemistry) regardless if it helps the plot, add in extra fight scenes to keep it “action” plus bigger budget, and needing more than 1 villain to keep it from being the same ol story (even if 2 villains now is the standard)… as for run time… so many movies would benefit from a 90-100 minute runtime, but with them being so expensive for some reason they all now need to be 2hrs+ so people fell like it’s worth it (mindset pre-covid and hbo release obv)

  18. Leah says:

    I liked it but didn’t love it.

    The nostalgia yes but the ending no. I liked the opening sequence with young Diana. I grew up watching the old Wonder Woman series but I never read the comic books so there was a few things in this film that I didn’t know she could even do.

    Didn’t care for the Cheetah character and her reasons why. Deep seated issues there that would have best been worked out in therapy rather than how she approached them. She was an educated woman surely she would have had a better reason than a twisted dark “revenge of the nerds” trope.

    Didn’t like the villain either because he was much too human even when he was changing into something worse. Villains should always remain unredeemable, it’s what they do best.

    • megs283 says:

      I agree RE Cheetah. She said something along the lines that her life is horrible. LADY YOU WORK AT THE SMITHSONIAN. People would killlllll for that job.

  19. megs283 says:

    Ok. So I loved the opening footrace, and WW’s monologue at the end (it spoke to me!). I love Gal Gadot as WW…

    I could have done with a much shorter fashion show scene, and that flying through the air thing was way too long. And it seems like they should have gone with one villain – two was too much. Kristen Wiig didn’t get her due. Pedro Pascal’s hair was horrifying.

    Lastly, I agree with the Chris Pine situation. I mean – he seems like he was a great guy and all, but pining for him for 60 years…?

    • sa says:

      But is 60 years to Diana really the same as 60 years to a regular human? Especially since the movie made a point of showing that although Diana was living in society, she hadn’t really let herself become part of it, with friends or other attachments. If you don’t fill you’re life with other sources of love (and I don’t even necessarily mean romantic love, but friends, or even pets), then your last love will continue to loom large.

      • FicklePickle says:

        I mean, we don’t even really know how old Diana is? She could be 2000 years old for all we know. When were the Greek gods roaming the Earth in the DC-verse?

    • Desmond says:

      “Pining” for him! Oh!

  20. Mia4s says:

    I didn’t mind it. Points for originality in not having another lame over CGI’d finale (Looking at you….basically every single other comic book movie).Pine was charming and Wiig showed promise (not developed enough) and Pascal was fun; but wow it needed to be shorter and to have another rewrite…or three. Look Pedro Pascal is wonderful but when your movie is called Wonder WOMAN and your male antagonist is the more compelling and fun character? Uhhhh…

  21. CactusWren says:

    Not sure whether this was caused by auto-correct but OGWW is “Lynda” (not Linda.)
    And, agreed, the movie was not great.

  22. Mabs A'Mabbin says:

    I haven’t seen it yet, but my husband set himself up Sunday to get immersed in all things WW. Getting everything done beforehand so as not to be bothered. Snacks. Everything lol. Two hours later he emerges completely deflated. And how the dialogue and tone insulted viewers lol. I doubt I’ll watch it now.

    • AB says:

      I’m not surprised, Mabs.

      I loved watching the original TV series re-runs as a child but was so let down by the first film which I found beyond dull. Especially the over-extended fight/action scene against her father near the end, which seemed to go on for hours.

      The addition of watching-paint-dry Kristen Wiig to the second film copper-fastened my lack of interest in seeing it.

  23. Michael says:

    Patty Jenkins got rid of the original co-writer for the first WW movie and several other people. She brought in her own people so she would have more control. I wonder if she will take ownership of the finished product. I was really bored by the movie even though I still like Gadot as WW and there were some visually great scenes. I skipped a lot of it.

  24. bonobochick says:

    Yea, I was underwhelmed. It was convoluted and bloated. I also really enjoyed the first Wonder Woman movie.

    I saw something on twitter that WW84 was a mess due Geoff Johns’ involvement. Hopefully the third movie will correct the wrongs of WW84.

  25. Riley says:

    Did Kristen Wiig’s character at the end renounce her wish? I don’t think she actually said it, so I wonder if they’ll bring her back in another installment. Maybe they will dive deeper into her character then.

  26. Mgsota says:

    I liked all the actors but I guess it was the plot that I had a problem with…it was just messy. I loved Chris Pine’s 80’s fashion show though. I was a kid in the 80s so I just loved the references.

  27. sa says:

    I liked it. I won’t say it didn’t have problems, but I don’t think it deserves the degree hate being flung at it. And I don’t get the people who say the beginning didn’t tie in to the movie, the beginning was about how you can’t take shortcuts to getting what you want, which is what the wishes were. It was not ambiguous.

    My biggest issue was definitely how okay they were with Steve taking over some guy’s body and apartment and sleeping with Diana. It was creepy and rapey.

    And, of course, if you set a movie in the 80s, it NEEDS 80s music. The lack was a glaring misstep

  28. Grant says:

    I’m a Wonder Woman stan. I LOVED the first one, bloated, CGI-ridden third act and all. I was so disappointed by WW1984. I may be in the minority but I felt like there was too much Pedro Pascal, to the point where Diana herself had a supporting role in her own movie. Like, did we really need all the nonsense with his kid? I think that time would have been better spent giving Diana more face-time. The action scenes were too few and far between. I also didn’t appreciate how much they seemed to nerf Diana powers-wise. Overall, just a big ‘ole mess.

    • megs283 says:

      Agreed RE Pedro Pascal’s character. He got too much screen time on his way to the bottom (and top and back down again).

  29. Imara219 says:

    I loved the Blerd Girl comic reviewer take on the movie. 1st they were in DC in the 80s but the diversity really wasn’t there and it made the POC characters cartoonist caricatures. I also didn’t appreciate the Middle East message it provided 2nd) one reviewer said it was the best sci fi horror body snatch movie of the year and I agreed. It was horrifying how Steve came back. So many ways they could have incorporated his cameo without the troupes being stepped over. 3rd) Cheetah is a hardcore villain and one of WW greatest foes. A sheer force of nature that WW really struggle with. She works well as a foil in the comics but the way they did her backstory made little sense and they totally did her dirty as a villain. Lastly the ending was anticlimactic.

  30. MsIam says:

    Well, I know I’m in the minority here, but I hated the first Wonder Woman movie.I just don’t think Gal Gadot brought much to the role. And I was a straight up Wonder Woman geek growing up as a kid, I alternated between playing Wonder Woman and Cat Woman when playing with friends, lol. So I had already planned to pass on this one, but thanks for the confirmation.

  31. Sayrah says:

    It was a bit long but I found it ok until the end. That seemed dumb

  32. Casey says:

    How are racist movies like this still getting made? Jenkins should be ashamed of herself.

  33. Gotcha says:

    Not a good movie and Patty and Gal will mess up Cleopatra also.

  34. Sunnyvale says:

    lol this movie confirmed to me that how the calopatra movie will be a epic fail just like her upcoming mystery movie🙈at least in the sense that it’ll make less than what it will cost.
    Everyone is overestimating her and after watching her other movies i noticed all her characters are the same and she can’t do much (linguistically). They better cut their losses with the next one and just stick to 2 movies. For me I only watched it for Pedro

  35. CC2 says:

    Villains were fine, better than the first. The opening scene was too long, and the time could have been used to show Diana practising her powers-actually learning to make things invisible, using the lasso to make people see truth, etc.

    Something was wrong in the editing stage, i think. And no Wonder Woman theme track!!?? The fight scenes felt like sex without an orgasm without it. In fact, the whole movie was like sex without an orgasm. It was missing that factor. The first one had a decent build up /character development.

  36. anp says:

    Overrated actress.

  37. Karina Ciprian says:

    Everyone is making me glad I skipped it this weekend. I watched Soul on Disney+ instead and it was so good. Definitely recommend that one, although slight content warning, it does have to do with death and the afterlife. Just letting you all know in case anyone is struggling at the moment and wanting to avoid those topics.

  38. GuestwithCat says:

    First off, there can NEVER be too much Pedro Pascal in a movie. He and Kristen Wiig were the best actors in this mess. “Wig and Wiig” is how I will remember this movie.

    Actually one scene stands out to me and broke my heart and there was no dialogue in it. It was when Pedro’s villain character was reflecting back on his life. It was when he was young and shy and hopeful, putting out business cards in front of the door to his new business. Pedro Pascal didn’t have a word of dialogue and I think they computer de-aged the hell out of his face, but the man can act with just his face and body past the computer trickery. It hurt how innocent and vulnerable he looked in that moment. That one moment made the movie for me.

    Kristen Wiig’s Barbara is so identifiable and real to me. I’ve been her for most of my life. The difference is I grew up in a rough environment, so I am not as meek as she is when someone threatens or tries to intimidate me. Unfortunately due to the constraints of the movie, they had to make her a caricature and rush her into super villainy. I just don’t think a woman who takes the time to befriend a homeless person is going to make the transition she did, and certainly not as fast as she did. I’m going to assume the magic of the stone corrupted her or exploited her deepest fears. She did convey a lot with her face in the moments Diana rescued her. Her trauma ran deep there and she didn’t address it except to essentially become someone else. Hence, living a lie. Which does tie back to the opening scene of the movie, which wasn’t a waste. The whole movie is about how taking shortcuts in life is living a lie and so the “wins” are not really wins.

    I’m sorry but as beautiful as she is, Gal Gadot is missing something in her acting. I don’t know what it is. But Pedro has it and Gal doesn’t.

    Chris Pine is Chris Pine. Steve Trevor, Captain Kirk, the rich dude in the Princess Diaries sequel…he’s kind of the same character whenever I’ve seen him so far. And yet there’s something about him which I think keeps him from being interchangeable with other actors and other Chrises.

    It was horrifying how they wrote Steve back into Diana’s life. The risks Steve took with another man’s life and the liberties he took with that man’s body were sickening. At least in “Ghost” the medium gave consent to be borrowed. It would have been better to explain he was genuinely reincarnated and just managed to remember his past life all of a sudden. Sigh.

  39. Nanny to the Rescue says:

    Sorry, accidently posted here instead of way up.
    I have fixed it.

  40. Vanessa says:

    I actually like the movie way better than the first one I didn’t get the hype for the first one I really did enjoy the movie a lot . I like the villains in this one a lot more .

  41. chitowngal says:

    I loved Lynda Carter as ‘Wonder Woman’. It was Lyle Wagonner that I couldn’t get behind. He always seemed so cheesy to me. I always wanted WW to get together with Buck Rogers (even though I liked Erin Grey) I watched this and fell asleep in the middle of it. It was too long for no purpose. I didn’t buy Pedro Pascal as the villain. The hair was a distraction, but I felt he was miscast. Kristen Wiig’s character seemed to exist for no other reason than to pose a threat to Wonder Woman, which we all knew WW would overcome. This reminded me of Superman 2, when the Kryptonian villains and Superman are fighting in New York and then he goes into the chamber in the Fortress of Solitude and has his powers taken away. The movie’s message was an important and timely one, but it wasn’t delivered in the right way.

  42. Annaloo. says:

    Skip. Watch Pixar’s Soul instead. Weird, charming movie… Loved it.