‘Wonder Woman 1984’ reviews: what the critics are saying

“‘Wonder Woman 1984’ is neither great nor terrible,” writes Stephanie Zacharek of Time Magazine.

That seems to be the general consensus of critics as the sequel film hits international theaters this weekend.

The highly anticipated follow-up to 2017’s “Wonder Woman” was slated for release in June, but the ongoing global pandemic has moved the film to Christmas Day in the United States. The outbreak also drove Warner Bros. ‘parent company AT&T to deliver the film to theaters and on its HBO Max streaming service on the same day.

“Wonder Woman 1984” takes place seven decades after the events of the first film. Diana Prince, the eponymous Wonder Woman played by Gal Gadot, lives in Washington, DC and works at the Smithsonian. In her spare time, Diana dons her Amazonian armor and plays the role of a superhero, saving the people of the city.

Diana’s life is interrupted when aspiring oil tycoon Maxwell Lord (Pedro Pascal) obtains a magical rock called the Dream Stone. The artifact is wishful thinking, but there is a cost.

For Diana, The Stone brings back Steve Trevor (Chris Pine), her love from the first movie who died sacrificing his life to save others. Unfortunately, to keep Steve in her life, Diana will eventually lose her powers.

Diana’s friend and coworker Barbara Minerva (Kristen Wiig), a wallflower who envies Diana for her confidence and beauty, is granted these characteristics and, as seen in the trailer, turns into the villainous Cheetah. . The Lord absorbs the magic of the stone and gives himself the possibility of granting the wishes of others, which he uses to gain power and prestige.

When Barbara and Lord team up, Diana must face off against the two villains to save the world.

“Woman Woman 1984” currently holds an 88% “Fresh” rating from Rotten Tomatoes out of 92 reviews. As new reviews appear, this rating may change.

Critics largely praised Gadot in the role. Once again, Gadot portrays Diana with effortless grace and cold confidence while also bringing depth to an immortal woman moved and adrift in a mortal world.

However, critics called the plot “messy” and “tangled” and were disappointed with the CGI creature form of Cheetah that appears during the film’s third act.

Here’s a look at what critics said about “Wonder Woman 1984” ahead of its Christmas debut:

“For nearly two hours of its 151-minute run, ‘Wonder Woman 1984′ accomplishes what we expect from Hollywood tents: it takes us away from our worries, erasing them with sheer escape, ” said Peter Debruge, writer for Variety his review of the film. “For those old enough to remember the ’80s, it’s like coming home for Christmas and finding a box full of childhood toys in your parents’ attic.”

Where the film fails is in its special effects.

“A lot of effects are hokey,” Debruge wrote. “Some are downright embarrassing (like when Wonder Woman interrupts a well-choreographed desert chase to save two children in danger).”

Debruge was one of the many reviewers to mention Cheetah’s disappointing computer-generated rendering in its final form. The creature’s design is a “lame miscalculation at the cat level,” he says.

Read the full Variety review.

For Angelica Jade Bastien, writer for Vulture, the attraction of Diana Prince is her femininity and her maternal instincts. His strength is not only showcased in fight scenes, but in subtle emotional moments.

Bastien felt that Diana’s character was “poorly developed in this total mess of a plot”.

She said she called the Dream Stone “hackneyed” and found flaws in Diana’s pain for her late lover Steve decades after her death.

“Sure, Gadot and Pine have lovely chemistry once again, but his character’s return from the dead – in which he essentially takes control of a poor guy’s body – prompts more questions about the shortcomings. of logic, ”she wrote in her review. “And then there’s their utter atrocity, a particularly damning reminder of how this genre fails to take into account one of the most beautiful aspects of being human.”

Bastien wondered why this desire for Steve had become the central crux of Diana’s identity almost 70 years later.

“Why? She doesn’t miss her Amazon sisters, whom she will never be able to see again?” she asked. “It’s been about 70 years and she still hasn’t left Steve? There’s something deeply sad and predictable about a female superhero so bonded to a single man that she’s ready to lose her powers for him. “

Bastien called the romance “claustrophobic” with an ending “snatched from a Hallmark movie”.

Read the full Vulture review.

For Zacharek, Gadot shines when she is Diana Prince, a woman with human complexities and weaknesses.

“But being a woman is never enough for anyone,” she wrote. Besides saving the world, Diana-as-Wonder Woman is frequently tasked with saving little girls from danger – she puts them to safety with a wink, and they beam at her with appreciation, so grateful they have. finally a superhero of theirs. “

“Why do we always have to remember Wonder Woman’s purpose? Why can’t she just be?” Zacharek asked.

She noted that when “Wonder Woman” arrived in 2017, there was a promise that Hollywood would see a new breed of superhero movies, those led by and featuring women who might be less worded than those focused on. men.

“As fun designed to take the world away from its troubles for a few hours, ‘Wonder Woman 1984’ fits the bill,” she writes. “But it’s also normal to wish for less noise and more wonder, especially in a world filled with the former and sorely in need of the latter.”

Read the full Time review.

“Wonder Woman 1984” is “a fun but messy sequel to the reintroduction of the Amazon superhero in 2017,” Esther Zuckerman wrote in her review of the film for Thrillist. “There’s a lot to love about” WW84 “: daring performances from a charming cast, fantastic costumes, [Patty] Fast direction from Jenkins. But it’s in the service of a plot that loses sight of what makes the character so great in the first place. “

Zuckerman noted that the filmmakers were in a difficult position to repeat the success of the first film. After all, much of it centered around Diana’s naivety and her wonder at discovering a whole new world.

Decades later, Diana is jaded and isolated, her mind dull, Zuckerman wrote.

“What makes up for that in the first act is Barbara Minerva,” she says. “Wiig is hilarious, but grounded, both as the ignored nerd she started out with, and as a butterfly who is suddenly able to walk in heels and take off a minidress.

Read the full Thrillist review.

Disclosure: Comcast, the parent company of CNBC, owns Rotten Tomatoes.