Wonder Woman 1984 (2020) review

2017’s Wonder Woman doesn’t always get the credit that it deserves from the DC Extended Universe fandom for everything that it did for the franchise. At a time where most DCEU films were utterly savaged by critics, Wonder Woman was the franchise’s first genuinely well-received outing. In fact, it still stands as the best-reviewed DCEU film to date with a 93% rating on Rotten Tomatoes, and while certain parts of the DCEU fandom will feverishly try to deny it, the reason why it succeeded where films like Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice didn’t was because it was very much the antithesis of the early DCEU films. Instead of being an overly dour and overstuffed superhero epic, Wonder Woman was a predominately lighthearted but still emotionally powerful superhero adventure that was fully bolstered by Gal Gadot’s fantastic performance in the title role. Sure, she had already made a great impression when she made her franchise debut in Batman v Superman but it wasn’t until her solo film when she was truly given the chance to shine in a film that fully understood the importance of character and story. Ultimately, though, much of what made the film work was thanks to its director, Patty Jenkins, who made history as the first female director of a superhero feature from a major studio. Thus, Jenkins was wisely brought back to helm a sequel, which takes Princess Diana of Themyscira from the trenches of World War I to the more high-tech landscape of the 80’s, hence the title Wonder Woman 1984. And while it ended up facing the same unfortunate struggles that other blockbusters have faced thanks to COVID (i.e. getting delayed multiple times), WW84 has finally managed to see the light of day via a simultaneous theatrical and streaming release that allows those who are unable to see it in theaters to watch it at home via Warner Bros.’ streaming service, HBO Max. But no matter where it’s seen, Wonder Woman 1984 is another top-notch outing from Patty Jenkins that, just like its predecessor, is a prime example of the DC Extended Universe at its best which, given all the franchise’s early struggles, is very much a good thing.

It is 1984, and in the bustling metropolis of Washington D.C., Amazonian demigoddess Diana Prince (Gal Gadot) continues to operate as Wonder Woman, albeit in a relatively secretive manner that doesn’t conflict with her public persona as an anthropologist working at the Smithsonian. One day, Diana and her coworker Barbara Minerva (Kristen Wiig) come across a mysterious artifact known as the ‘Dreamstone’ that can grant those who find it the one wish that they desire the most. And sure enough, Diana and Barbara both end up inadvertently utilizing the Dreamstone’s abilities. Whereas the introverted Barbara wishes to become as strong and confident as Diana, Diana’s greatest desire results in the return of the love of her life, pilot Steve Trevor (Chris Pine), who had heroically sacrificed himself during the events of the first film. Unfortunately, these life changing developments are soon upended by the arrival of a new threat in businessman Maxwell Lord (Pedro Pascal), who seeks out the Dreamstone so that he can become the powerful figure that he’s always dreamt of being. In doing so, Lord ends up becoming the physical embodiment of the Dreamstone, thus allowing him to grant anyone’s wish and take whatever he wants from them in return. Naturally, this results in an endless array of conflicts that span the entire world, resulting in Diana and Steve embarking on a quest to stop Lord from going overboard with power and destroying the world in the process. And as Diana, Barbara, and Max all soon discover, their greatest desires come with even greater consequences.

 

If there’s one thing that can be said about this film, it’s that the 1984 part of its title is a 100% accurate indicator of what it truly is. Wonder Woman 1984 may be a modern blockbuster, but in execution, it is the spitting image of an 80’s film from the intentionally gaudy but still incredibly vibrant color palette that it sports to the overly extravagant outfits that the characters wear (e.g. Chris Pine in parachute pants… need I say more?). This is also reflected by the film’s primarily lighthearted tone which is then matched by its unabashedly old-school superhero plot with clear-cut heroes and villains. And while those two aspects of the film have admittedly been a major source of contention amongst critics and audiences, I’d say that they’re the key reason why it works as well as it does. In other words, while some may find this film to be overly goofy and cliché, it could very well be argued that it perfectly encapsulates what most of the films and TV shows from the 80’s were like from a tonal perspective. It should also go without saying that Patty Jenkins excellently maintains the same strong atmosphere that made the first Wonder Woman film such a hit, resulting in a highly entertaining homage to classic 80’s adventure flicks that’s full of great bits of humor that never overshadow the story’s powerful emotional beats. And just like the first film, Wonder Woman 1984 also boasts a lot of great action sequences and a suitably epic score. Whereas the first film’s score was done by Hans Zimmer protégé Rupert Gregson-Williams, this film’s score was done by Zimmer himself who, of course, was largely responsible for bringing the title character’s iconic theme to life in Batman v Superman.

 

It’s been well-documented at this point that Gal Gadot has basically been the DC Extended Universe’s MVP as far as its ensemble cast is concerned. As Wonder Woman, she has consistently established herself as a wholly charismatic leading lady and an indisputably badass action heroine, and sure enough, all this is once again reinforced by this film. Here, she trades in the innocent fish out of water character arc that she went through in the first film for one where, despite being emotionally hardened by everything that’s happened to her since she left Themiscyra, she’s still very much the kind-hearted heroine that we know and love. As for the heavily talked-about return of her long lost love Steve Trevor, the film’s handling of this plot-line feels like a natural way of doing the ‘resurrection’ concept that has always been common in the world of comics. And just like the first film, Chris Pine does a great job of being just as charismatic as Gadot without ever overshadowing Diana’s status as the main protagonist. This then brings us to the film’s main antagonists, and if there’s one advantage that Wonder Woman 1984 has over its predecessor, it’s that it has much stronger villains. It all starts with Pedro Pascal, who is delightfully over-the-top as the charismatic con-man Maxwell Lord while still managing to make him a surprisingly sympathetic tragic figure. This also applies to the other antagonist of the feature, Kristen Wiig’s Barbara, who gradually evolves from a meek introvert into the “apex predator” that is Wonder Woman’s classic foe from the comics, Cheetah. And while her final transformation may be a bit lacking visually, Wiig does an outstanding job at being Diana’s foil since her wish to become just like her comes at the cost of the good-natured and all-around sociable personality that she had before she used the Dreamstone..

 

I won’t be going over what I’m about to mention too much as I finish up this review, but I will say that I find it fascinating that a film that was shaping up to be one of the best-reviewed films of 2020 about a week ago… has suddenly become one of the year’s most polarizing releases. Yes, Wonder Woman 1984 has attracted some, to put it as nicely as I can, intense reactions from both critics and audiences. Basically, from what I can gather, it’s gotten a lot of flak for its light-hearted tone to the point where it’s been accused of being way too goofy instead of being a more serious and darker sequel. And yet, as I noted earlier, I’d say that this makes it a perfect representation of the era in history in which it’s set; plus, as I’m sure that I’ve made it clear at this point, I tend to prefer the superhero films that aren’t trying to distance themselves from the medium’s typically lighthearted proceedings. Case in point, Wonder Woman 1984 is a highly entertaining addition to the genre that, just like its predecessor, is fully bolstered by its terrific ensemble cast and Patty Jenkins’ excellent direction. In short, it’s another example as to why the DC Extended Universe has been a lot better than how it was when it was first starting out when it remembers that, when it comes to this genre, strong characters and a good story are always more important than whatever ‘cool’ action sequences those characters partake in. Simply put, no one does DCEU films quite like Patty Jenkins, and if you ask me, it’s about damn time that the DCEU fandom gives her the credit that she deserves for all that she’s done for the franchise.

 

Rating: 5/5!

The Witches (2020) review (HBO Max)

 

When it comes to some of the most prominent authors in literary history, one whose work has consistently stood the test of time is Roald Dahl. From 1942 up until his death in 1990, Dahl was responsible for penning a whole bunch of classics such as Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, James and the Giant Peach, and Matilda. To date, his various novels and short stories have sold over 250 million copies worldwide and are widely touted for their creative imagery and their unabashed knack for dark humor to contrast with their primarily whimsical nature. Many of his works have been adapted to the big screen over the years although it is worth noting that, when he was alive, Dahl was usually quite critical about them for the various changes that were made to his stories. This included the last adaptation that was released before his death, 1990’s The Witches, which was directed by Nicolas Roeg and notably produced by none other than Jim Henson. Dahl, however, was not too pleased with this adaptation of his 1983 novel, namely due to its drastically different ending. Nevertheless, the film was well-received by critics and while it wasn’t exactly a box-office hit, it has since gone on to become a cult classic of its time. But now there’s a new adaptation of The Witches upon us, and just like the 1990 film, this one is star-studded on both sides of the camera. For starters, the cast is headlined by a pair of Oscar winners in Anne Hathaway and Octavia Spencer. And as for the behind-the-scenes crew, the film serves as the latest outing from director Robert Zemeckis, AKA the man who’s given us films like Who Framed Roger Rabbit, Forrest Gump, and this reviewer’s favorite film of all-time, Back to the Future. However, Zemeckis isn’t the only big-name filmmaker attached to this project as it was originally proposed as a stop-motion film directed by Guillermo Del Toro, who instead serves as a producer alongside his good friend Alfonso Cuaron while also being one of the credited screenwriters alongside Zemeckis and Black-ish creator Kenya Barris. And while it may be far from being the best project that any of these men have ever worked on, it still manages to be a decently charming family flick that delivers a solid new take on Roald Dahl’s classic story.

In 1968, a young boy (Jahzir Kadeem Bruno) loses both of his parents in a car crash. He’s then sent to live with his grandmother (Octavia Spencer) in Alabama, and while it does take a while, she does help him start to overcome his grief. However, their idyllic lifestyle is soon threatened when the young boy has his first encounter with a witch. And since his grandmother is quite familiar with witches after seeing one when she was a child, she tells him everything that he needs to know about them; namely, that witches are really demonic creatures and are notorious for hating children and doing anything they can to get rid of them. Thus, to avoid any further witch-based encounters, the young boy and his grandmother promptly decide to take a vacation and stay at a prestigious hotel. Unfortunately, they end up arriving at the exact same time as a whole group of witches led by the most powerful witch in the world, the Grand High Witch (Anne Hathaway). The young boy ends up eavesdropping on their meeting, where the Grand High Witch reveals her newest scheme to get rid of all the children in the world by using a special potion to turn them into mice. And to make matters worse, the young boy is then discovered by the Grand High Witch, who immediately uses her potion to turn him into a mouse. Now stuck in mouse form, the young boy crosses paths with two other kids that were recently turned into mice, food-loving Bruno (Codie-Lei Eastick) and a girl named Mary (voiced by Kristin Chenoweth), who is revealed to be the mouse that the young boy had been keeping as a pet for the past few months. With both their help and his grandmother’s, the young boy now finds himself in a time-sensitive situation as he and his friends work to stop the Grand High Witch’s sinister plan before anyone else ends up suffering the same fate as them.

While it may be easy to simply call this film a ‘remake’ of its 1990 counterpart, this new version of The Witches does manage to avoid being a straight-forward retelling of its classic story, whether it’s by having African-American protagonists or revealing that the kid’s pet mouse was a transformed kid as well. Plus, if there’s one advantage that this film has over the previous film, it’s that its ending is a lot more faithful to the book since, as noted earlier, Dahl took significant issue with the 1990 film for having a more traditional ‘happy ending’. Granted, the changes that this film makes does mean that it takes a lot more liberties with its source material than even the 1990 film did, but at the very least, this isn’t a case like Artemis Fowl where the changes that were made significantly alter the story beyond recognition. At the end of the day, most of these changes are simply from a cosmetic standpoint, and for the most part, the film does an excellent job of maintaining Roald Dahl’s whimsical style that delivers a good-natured adventure where the kids are the heroes but is still allowed to have the delightfully twisted dark humor that Dahl was well-known for. And while I’m aware that the film has gotten some criticism for supposedly being ‘too scary for children’, I’d argue that it’s relatively tame compared to all the other family-friendly films over the years that have gained notoriety for their darker moments (and yes, this includes the 1990 adaptation of The Witches). All this makes up for the fact that the film ends up feeling like a routine affair for the filmmakers who are attached to it, especially Robert Zemeckis. It’s not that the film is ‘bad’ or anything since, if Zemeckis’ past work wasn’t enough of an indication, he’s not that kind of director. It’s just that, like what happened when Tim Burton made his remake of Planet of the Apes in 2001, this is one of those instances where, if you didn’t know that this was directed by the guy who made Back to the Future, you probably wouldn’t have figured that out until the credits because it could’ve been done by anybody.

For many people, one of the best aspects of the 1990 film was Angelica Huston’s standout turn as the Grand High Witch. But while that may have been an undeniably tough act to follow, Anne Hathaway proves that she’s more than capable of taking on that daunting task. With an over-exaggerated accent that’s matched by an equally over-the-top performance, Hathaway is clearly having a lot of fun as the main antagonist. And sure, it’s completely understandable if some may find her performance to be a bit too campy at times, but at the end of the day, she’s still one of the best parts of this film. This strong performance from Hathaway is then perfectly matched by Octavia Spencer’s equally terrific turn as the main protagonist’s grandmother. Spencer has always been well-known for playing characters like this who are very much good-natured protagonists but can still dish out some tough love when necessary, usually through some delightfully spunky snark. And while he’s not in the film too much, we also get the always-reliable Stanley Tucci as the manager of the hotel that all the main characters end up at who mostly spends his time trying to deal with the eccentric gestures of the Grand High Witch. Finally, to close out the main cast, we have newcomer Jahzir Kadeem Bruno as the main protagonist who, just like in the original novel (and not the 1990 film where he was named Luke), is unnamed. He is credited as ‘Hero Boy’, however, which is rather ironic because that makes him the second main character in a Robert Zemeckis film to be called that since that’s also what the main protagonist of The Polar Express was credited as. Nevertheless, while this may only be his first leading role in a film (that and his character is a mouse for half of it), Bruno instantly makes a strong first impression with some solid charisma for his age.

While it’s admittedly been a while since I’ve done so, I did read The Witches when I was younger. It was one of many Roald Dahl books that I read growing up alongside other classics such as Matilda and Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. However, you may be surprised to learn that I never watched its 1990 film adaptation. Simply put, it was just one of those films that was never on my radar back then. As such, it goes without saying that I don’t have the kind of connection to it that many others from my generation have, which has clearly had a major influence on folks’ thoughts towards this new adaptation. I mean, if the usual reception towards Disney’s recent string of live-action remakes wasn’t enough of an indication, folks are always a lot stricter when it comes to remakes. And yet, from the perspective of someone who hasn’t seen the 1990 adaptation of The Witches, I’d argue that this new version of the story is a genuinely harmless affair. It avoids being a direct carbon copy of its predecessor and even manages to deliver a more faithful take on the novel’s ending… even if the changes that it makes everywhere else are more prominent than those from the 1990 film. Really, at the end of the day, the worst thing that I can say about this film is that it’s arguably the most by-the-numbers feature that Robert Zemeckis has ever directed. To be fair, his direction is solid as always, but at the same time, I will admit that I’m curious about how this film would’ve turned out had it been the Guillermo Del Toro-directed stop-motion film that it was originally planned to be. Ultimately, though, the film does manage to be a nice showcase of Roald Dahl’s brilliant storytelling and could very well serve as a gateway for younger generations to experience the rest of his work.

Rating: 3.5/5