Movie Review

Bloated Wonder Woman 1984 doesn't do the superhero justice

The release of Wonder Woman in 2017 proved to be a boon for the struggling DC Extended Universe. After the derided entries of Man of Steel, Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, and Suicide Squad, the long-awaited solo film for the Amazonian warrior gave hope that the powers-that-be in the movie division finally understood how to showcase their heroes properly.

Whatever lessons they may have learned then are not evident in Wonder Woman 1984, a bloated, messy, and borderline incomprehensible film that is set in the titular year for no apparent reason other than to make lame ‘80s jokes. Diana Prince (Gal Gadot) is working at her job at the Smithsonian Museum in Washington D.C. while making occasional jaunts out to stop crimes in progress, because that’s obviously the most appropriate thing for a god-like figure to be doing.

The plot, such as it is, gets set in progress when a mysterious stone that can supposedly grant wishes is sent to the Smithsonian by the FBI for analysis. In charge of that investigation is Barbara Minerva (Kristen Wiig), a mousy and shy new employee. TV personality/oil tycoon Max Lord (Pedro Pascal) shows an inordinate amount of interest in the stone, and Barbara, Max, and Diana soon get caught up in a series of events that threaten the entire world.

Directed again by Patty Jenkins and written by Jenkins, Geoff Johns, and Dave Callaham, the film has tons of visual panache but none of the storytelling to back it up. They appease fans with things like Wonder Woman’s golden armor, invisible plane, and an ability to lasso lightning, but all of that flair is essentially just eye candy meant to distract from an inert plot.

Centering that story around a wish-fulfilling object is odd, and it doesn’t get any better as the various characters become more obsessed with it. Anybody who’s seen Big or Aladdin can tell you the downside of being able to satisfy any wish you desire, and the film follows the formula to a tee. None of that rises to the level of a great superhero story, though.

Both Barbara and Max start out as interesting characters, but as each of them gives in to their darker impulses, the only answer the filmmakers seem to have for them is “more,” which doesn’t serve either well. Oh, and Steve Trevor (Chris Pine) shows up in a truly ham-fisted attempt at shoehorning Diana’s deceased love interest into the proceedings.

Jenkins and her team don’t miss a chance to make fun of the ‘80s, and the visual jokes get tired almost as soon as they start. The film is so chock-full of wacky hairdos, leotards, pushed-up jacket sleeves, and more that the gag loses all of its meaning. Missing is almost any ‘80s music, which would have at least added some audio fun to the string of clichés.

Gadot still makes for an ideal Wonder Woman, with the strength, personality, and beauty necessary to embody the character. The filmmakers just don’t seem to know what to do with her, as the story doesn’t match Diana’s power. Wiig has a nice arc to play, although her character goes off the rails in the third act, while Pascal goes the polar opposite of his part in The Mandalorian, delivering one of the all-time over-the-top performances.

Wonder Woman 1984 wound up being one of only two blockbuster-type movies to be released in 2020 (Tenet being the other), and it makes the case that maybe franchises need to start going smaller, not bigger. If you focus on the story first, everything else will fall into place.

---

Wonder Woman 1984 is showing in theaters and on HBO Max starting December 25.

Kristen Wiig in Wonder Woman 1984.

Kristen Wiig in Wonder Woman 1984

Photo by Clay Enos

Kristen Wiig in Wonder Woman 1984.

Movie Review

Meta-comedy remake Anaconda coils itself into an unfunny mess

Jack Black and Paul Rudd in Anaconda

Photo by Matt Grace

Jack Black and Paul Rudd in Anaconda.

In Hollywood’s never-ending quest to take advantage of existing intellectual property, seemingly no older movie is off limits, even if the original was not well-regarded. That’s certainly the case with 1997’s Anaconda, which is best known for being a lesser entry on the filmography of Ice Cube and Jennifer Lopez, as well as some horrendous accent work by Jon Voight.

The idea behind the new meta-sequel Anaconda is arguably a good one. Four friends — Doug (Jack Black), Griff (Paul Rudd), Claire (Thandiwe Newton), and Kenny (Steve Zahn) — who made homemade movies when they were teenagers decide to remake Anaconda on a shoestring budget. Egged on by Griff, an actor who can’t catch a break, the four of them pull together enough money to fly down to Brazil, hire a boat, and film a script written by Doug.

Naturally, almost nothing goes as planned in the Amazon, including losing their trained snake and running headlong into a criminal enterprise. Soon enough, everything else takes second place to the presence of a giant anaconda that is stalking them and anyone else who crosses its path.

Written and directed by Tom Gormican, with help from co-writer Kevin Etten, the film is designed to be an outrageous comedy peppered with laugh-out-loud moments that cover up the fact that there’s really no story. That would be all well and good … if anything the film had to offer was truly funny. Only a few scenes elicit any honest laughter, and so instead the audience is fed half-baked jokes, a story with no focus, and actors who ham it up to get any kind of reaction.

The biggest problem is that the meta-ness of the film goes too far. None of the core four characters possess any interesting traits, and their blandness is transferred over to the actors playing them. And so even as they face some harrowing situations or ones that could be funny, it’s difficult to care about anything they do since the filmmakers never make the basic effort of making the audience care about them.

It’s weird to say in a movie called Anaconda, but it becomes much too focused on the snake in the second half of the film. If the goal is to be a straight-up comedy, then everything up to and including the snake attacks should be serving that objective. But most of the time the attacks are either random or moments when the characters are already scared, and so any humor that could be mined all but disappears.

Black and Rudd are comedy all-stars who can typically be counted on to elevate even subpar material. That’s not the case here, as each only scores on a few occasions, with Black’s physicality being the funniest thing in the movie. Newton is not a good fit with this type of movie, and she isn’t done any favors by some seriously bad wigs. Zahn used to be the go-to guy for funny sidekicks, but he brings little to the table in this role.

Any attempt at rebooting/remaking an old piece of IP should make a concerted effort to differentiate itself from the original, and in that way, the new Anaconda succeeds. Unfortunately, that’s its only success, as the filmmakers can never find the right balance to turn it into the bawdy comedy they seemed to want.

---

Anaconda is now playing in theaters.

Loading...