For a studio that focuses on getting directors to work, Warner Bros. is certainly prone to the bizarre controversy of serious interference by the executive. Or it’s initially from recent remarks by Patty Jenkins of Wonder Woman 1984 about Marc Won’s podcast of Marc Maron, which was later recorded by media around the world.
Jenkins discussed the first inning of Gal Gadot as the Amazon superhero in the widely acclaimed Wonder Woman in 2017, revealing that she initially struggled in the studio to get her vision of a heartfelt, loving Diana from Themyscira and eventually an approach to win who would have seen the character engaged in extreme ultra-violence.
‘I felt like they wanted to hire me like a beard; they wanted me to walk around the set as a female director – but that was their story and their vision, ”says Jenkins of her first experiences with the studio.
‘Even when I first joined Wonder Woman, it was like,’ Uhh, yeah, OK, but let’s do it differently. “But I was like, ‘Women don’t want to see this.’ She’s hard and tough and cuts people’s heads off … I’m a Wonder Woman fan, that’s not what we’re looking for. ‘Yet I could feel that shaky nervousness from my point of view. ”
Jenkins has since shown on Twitter that she was rarely ‘at war’ with Warner Bros. and chatted about a decade ago (presumably) with many other executives than those who eventually relieved Wonder Woman. The Monster filmmaker first started talking about a Wonder Woman movie in 2007, but only the best part of a decade later was she invited to finally make the movie with full creative freedom. It makes sense when you watch the 2017 movie, which feels like a whole other beast than other episodes in the early DC “extended universe” like the dark and bony Batman vs Superman: Dawn of Justice.
Even the later Justice League, a case with a lighter tone that is clearly influenced by the success of Wonder Woman, did not portray Gadot’s fight against Amazon as Jenkins would have had. The producer recently told Yahoo that she was ‘uncomfortable with who she was and how she was seen’, after director Joss Whedon oversaw scenes in which the superhero was too sexualized compared to her appearance in other films.
All of this brings us to Wonder Woman 1984, a so-so affair that, while enough for hardcore fans, falls into the typical superhero sequel that previously influenced Marvel’s Iron Man 2 and Thor: The Dark World. Here’s a film in which Jenkins clearly had full creative control over his predecessor’s impressive box office art and almost universal praise. Why does it have such a feeling of “meh?”
The range of set subjects is spectacular – especially Jenkins’ bravado opening vision of a cross-Themyscira athletics marathon that makes the modern Olympics look like a toddler’s egg and spoon race. The Mandalorian’s Pedro Pascal brings an unusual mix of humanity and furniture-chewing bad guys into the role of the villain Maxwell Lord, Gadot is just as beautiful as always in the lead role, and her fish-out-of-the-water violation with Chris Pine’s miraculously revived, Steve Trevor is a thing of joy.
The sequel also now adheres to Wonder Woman’s essential mantras, her powerful, independent femininity, kindness and grace. It does not draw its beats in depicting masculinity in its most toxic way, but avoids the downhills to myopia. These are nuances to estimate.
So, what do you dislike? Perhaps the only criticism that can be leveled at Jenkins is that there is little new except the 80s, and a freaky new MacGuffin to the essential composition of Wonder Woman 1984. One can not help feeling that it is a wonder film was not, there would have been room to introduce other superheroes to ease the burden of the other princess Diana.
And yet Jenkins has always preferred the stand-alone approach. Eventually, the filmmaker had to make the Wonder Woman movie she wanted to make, without any interference in the studio – again a rare achievement in Hollywood. It’s just a shame she couldn’t do the same trick twice.