Before watching this film, I occasionally saw some bad reviews online, so my expectations were extremely low. I was expecting a rotten, rotten movie. In my judgment of movie viewing value, bad movies are often more worth watching than good mainstream movies in the general sense. For example, in my recommended sequence, "Promise" is more worth watching than "Avengers" Take a look, because the latter is too "ordinary", "mainstream", "mediocre", or "boring". But after watching it, I realized that this "Wonder Woman 1984" is obviously not a bad film. On the contrary, in a general sense, it is a decent mainstream A-level production. The MV is also very enjoyable to watch. Of course, if this is the only case, then its status is similar to that of "Avengers", and it is difficult to find any recommended significance. But that's not all there is to the film, it's more "interesting" in every sense.
Movie lovers have probably heard Godard's words, "It is not a political film, but a political film." Although this film's position is completely different from Godard's, it has vigorously practiced this sentence. talk. Few of the mainstream superhero blockbusters in recent years have delivered such a clear political message and have such a high degree of political consciousness. Of course, even pure entertainment blockbusters that seem to have nothing to do with politics (the "Avengers" can be used again as an example here) are deeply, or subconsciously, political.
The special thing about this film is that its political nature is so straightforward, so "in your face" is poured into your face, even a "quasi-illiterate" who has only received primary and secondary education can see it at a glance. And its performance problems are different from other previous mainstream superhero films, so realistic and current, which further enhances its textual value.
While "politics" is a common theme in superhero films, they often focus on philosophical, abstract, fictional issues that, in a pejorative way, are "false and empty." In "Watchmen," or "Captain America's Civil War," for example, we can see two seemingly opposite, extreme ideological confrontations presented in fictional stories. This confrontation is often highly detached from reality, a kind of mind play that we plus-sized children love.
As mentioned above, the politics of "Wonder Woman 1984" is not abstract, but straightforward and directly connected to current reality. In a nutshell, it is a mainstream, yet somewhat rare re-evaluation of the current US President Trump. The main villain of the film, "Max Lord", is obviously Trump, which is not even a metaphor, but a message on the table to tell you.
All history is contemporary history, especially when it comes to evaluating films. What we need to care about is not the age of the film (1984, for the most part, the setting of 1984 was an aesthetic choice and a reminder of the film's political nature), but why in the present This movie appeared in this era.
Why is this film a re-evaluation of Trump's "mainstream and non-mainstream"? This question can be viewed from multiple angles.
The big theme of the film falls on truth and lies. "A lie cannot produce good results", the imaginary fulfillment of a wish after making a wish is a typical lie and "alternative reality". This part highly overlaps with the characteristics of Trump and his voters in mainstream perception. Full of lies, self-proclaimed self-proclaimed winners, "understood the king", spread fake news, and even invented a new word "alternative truth", we don't need to mention that in the statistics of a mainstream media, Trump averages every day The undisputed statistic of how many lies was told is far higher than any previous president of the United States. These are highly corresponding to the theme of this film, which is one of them.
It is very interesting that Lorde in this film is a TV star and is on the verge of bankruptcy. He just brags about his success on TV and creates a false personality. In reality, Trump has also gone bankrupt many times. Many people suspect that Trump does not have much money at all. His status as a "successful rich man" is completely set up as a TV star, and it is bragged out of thin air. This is the second.
There is no need to work hard, nothing to do, as long as you say it, your wish will come true. This can be understood as the "alternative truth" created by Trumpism. Trump can completely disregard the reality. Voters believed, as if it really did, and so the new term "alternative truth" was born. This is three.
The above three points, and of course many points that I did not think of for a while, are mainstream evaluations of Trump. Trump is a typical far-right, alt-right, even fascist, and of course lying is what they do most often.
So where does the non-mainstream evaluation come from? Many viewers who have watched this film may have already thought that the most "reactionary" part of this film is also a clear political position that is very common in DC film sequences. , is a billionaire saving the toiling masses from urban criminals, why is the urban crime rate so high? Our movie will not tell you that it is because of the social injustice caused by the uneven distribution of the rich and the poor, forcing the working people to take the road of crime. And will say: Some people are born crazy, and some people are "born to watch the world burn". Not to mention how stupid and absurd this statement is, the simple theme of billionaires becoming heroes is enough to naturally disgust many people with high enough political sensitivities. So it's no surprise that the "Batman" series is often criticized as bourgeois shameless self-promotion and propaganda.
Last year's "Joker" was also often classified as a "right-wing" movie for "inciting right-wing populism", but I don't see it that way. The clown's criticism of the difference between the rich and the poor in society is direct, and his incitement can also be completely understood as an incitement to the people's revolution. As the opposite of Batman, The Joker can also be regarded as a representative of the proletarian revolution, and this film can also be regarded as a left-wing movie. This seems to be an anomaly in the DC movie sequence, but we can't forget the terrible fact that, after all, in DC's big picture, the Joker is still the ugly villain.
Speaking of "Wonder Woman 1984", what is the reactionary nature of this film? In reality, our Trump is a right-wing populist "fascist" who has lost his momentum and is about to step down. I believe the anti-Trump beliefs of this film are sincere. In Hollywood, even people with a political stance on the right side have a hard time supporting a liar like Trump.
but! This film tells us that although Trump has done a lot of bad things, others are not bad. Like Hitler killed millions of people, but he still loved animals. No, "The Destruction of the Empire" tells us how human and pitiful Hitler was. Trump is not bad, he is just stupid, and stupid and cute! He thought that by saying good things on stage and creating an "alternative reality", he would really be able to realize the people's wishes. He is actually a good-natured and honest man, but he is just too stupid to do things. If a good person like Diana can entice him with good reason, he will really be able to correct his evil and return to the right. Bad people may not be able to change, but stupid people can really be changed. That's what "Wonder Woman 1984" tells us about Trump.
Is this assessment accurate? The scary thing is that it might actually be a bit accurate. Personally, I really don't think Trump really has the intelligence to systematically understand the ideology of far-right fascists. He acts like a low-IQ but successful opportunist.
But what we understand about Trump is just speculation with an extreme lack of evidence and details. The "reactionary" nature of this film is of course not only reflected in the "whitewashing" of Trump and far-right fascists. The anti-extremist right wing is not necessarily the left wing, but may also be the ordinary right wing. And this is the film's clear political stance: the mainstream "right wing" of the Republican Party.
The movie tells us that Trump is indeed a liar, but he is a good liar personally. He has never done anything directly harmful, he is a humorous, loving father, and even a good person who cares about the well-being of all mankind, but he is too stupid, doing things in the wrong way and causing disaster. You must not knock us down with a single stick because our party produced Trump, and think of a new way out.
No, the hero Diana told us bluntly, you may be poor, you may suffer, and you may be wronged, but who is not poor and who is not suffering in this world, and who has not been wronged? If you make random wishes like this and get out of the status of poverty, it will disrupt the social order and bring us great disaster. Here comes an interesting, shameless reversal of black and white: we were originally criticizing Trump, a far-right fascist, but suddenly, inexplicably, it became a criticism of the specter of communism. Don't imagine a better world, our world is beautiful enough as it is.
Thousands of words turned into one sentence: "We helped you fight the extreme right, but you must not think about attracting the soul of communism". Both are the same, both have bad consequences, the best is to maintain the status quo and do nothing. We have a proper term for this position against social change, called "counter-revolutionary". The film's position here seems to be a "counter-revolutionary" in the literal sense.
The same similar tension is also reflected between Diana and Leopard Girl, where it has evolved into a blood theory that is even more retrograde than capitalist conservatism: my ability is innate and inherited. You can't learn it the day after tomorrow. My inheritance has natural legitimacy and cannot be questioned. Tens of thousands of words can be expanded here, so I won't repeat them.
This is perhaps the fairest and safest position American mainstream political conservatism can take. The name is anti-right and anti-Trump, but it is actually anti-left.
Having said so much, it seems that I am going to criticize this film. In fact, it is not. Although I may not agree with the political position of this film, or I strongly disagree, this film is still very worth watching. The reason is that it is relatively rare. There is a classic dialogue in "Pirates of the Caribbean", a British officer said to Captain Jack "You are the worst pirate I have ever heard of", Jack replied "at least you have heard of me". The film seems to have a similar meaning: maybe its political stance is reactionary, but "at least it's political". To me, mainstream superhero movies that try to get rid of the politics and just keep entertaining are just "fun" enough for me.
This kind of film is really easier to stay in film history. I can seem to imagine that in a cultural studies university class 50 years later, a teacher would bring up this film to cite to students a certain trend of thought or ideology in American society 50 years ago, whether critical or agreeable Yes, this film has texts worth analyzing and discussing. In contrast, the "ordinary", "mainstream", "mediocre", or "boring" "Avengers" have no chance of staying in history.
That's why I recommend "Wonder Woman 1984" and give it a high score: it's "interesting," "rare," and both "mainstream and non-mainstream," making it worth analyzing as a cultural studies text. It has become one of the more mainstream superhero movies worth watching in recent years.
View more about Wonder Woman 1984 reviews
