Wonder Woman 1984

Your rating

Average rating

(9 votes)

Add your review

In order to be credited for your review and save all your ratings, please create a free account and log in. Premium membership is also available for just $12 a year, which removes all adverts, prioritises your submissions, and more.

I own this movie on DVD.

Man this movie is a mess. It feels like it was shot, cut to pieces, re shot, cut to pieces again, then stitched back together. Boring villain, phoned in performances, non sensical plot... and very troubling implications about Wonder Woman and the guy who Steve possesses.
They botched Cheetah, they got Wonder Woman's personality and goals all over the place, and this movie opens up a lot of plot holes for future films in the timeline that this is supposed to be a prequel to.

Mistake Status: I'll get to it at some point probably since I'll be doing a lot of the DCEU movies for mistakes. In time.

Quantom X

The 80s are back, for better or worse, and so is Wonder Woman in this kind of corny sequel to her monstrous hit. Here, a magic wish-granting stone with a price is the McGuffin here, and Max Lord wants only ultimate power! Cheetah, meanwhile, wants to be an apex predator while WW/Diana wants Steve back. What follows is a whole lot of wishes, some flight, silly battles against muscle and nature, and a script that flip flops everywhere towards its meh conclusion. While Wonder Woman 1 was OK, this time she falls off her horse. The poster is glitz and glamour, and gold is nice, but this film is cheap, shlockey and sad. 4/10.

Erik M.

3.6/10.One sad thing here is Kristen Wiig, they should've gotten Judy Greer, seems to put out the best effort.Personally I think she took it out of desperation after the disaster that was Ghostbusters 2016.Gal Gadot's performance remains as bland as before only now she's a producer which I disagree with as most actors haven't a clue about directing, writing, or producing anything.The plot, what plot?Nothing more than griping about the 80's supposed culture of greed here. Pedro Pascal who matches Gadot in blandness,p;ays the cliched greedy businessman.Chris Pine's brought back for really no reason, still being the wuss he was in the last one.Connie Nielsen, Robin Wright are back as they probably got a 3 picture deal, add nothing though thankfully not as much screen time as before.Lynda Carter surprised me in the sense that I thought she'd play the President, not some bit part as an Amazon.Then there's Kristen Wiig, oh boy do I hate this walking cliched stereotype.Nerdy, insecure woman who just wants to be hot then goes all psycho once she obtains it, She also goes back regular by the end, ripping off Amazing Spider-Man's Lizard, far superior character in both comics and movie.I at least admit they were smart on three things:1.The design of Cheetah, pretty good.2.Kristen Wiig is pretty, no denying that, best part of this clunker.3.Bringing back the Amazons for the beginning.I'm sure all those teenage and 20 something guys who make these blockbusters possible thank them too.That all said it's still annoying, preachy, sloppy written, and pretentious.I admit to being wrong about Kristen Wiig, best part of the movie here.I still plan on obtaining it on DVD in several months to join my collection of "So Bad They're Good To Watch And Laugh At Movies."What annoyed me here was how much they ripped off:1.Amazing Spider-Man:Scientist becomes half animal monster.2.Amazing Spider-Man 2:Nerdy brief friend becomes villain,3.Who Censored Roger Rabbit:Wishes come at a price only a stone here instead of a magic lantern.4.Frankenstein:Monster starts out good,goes bad.4.Lord Of The Rings:Magical object corrupts a person's mind.5.Aqua-Man:Flashback of hero quite young in training.Then the big one.The Dark Knight Rises.Just where the heck do these overpaid dolts,Jenkins and Gadot,get off on lecturing the rest of us on greed?.Gadot works as both and a producer here making 10 million,far more than what any actor should ever get.I would claim to be surprised but I'm not.This whole thing was just anti American as its predecessor,more anti male here and also anti President Trump.Those of us with sense will laugh at them all day and night long.Patty Jenkins may be one of the most overrated directors of today.

Rob245

Other mistake: Fireworks use heated metals to produce the various colors seen when they explode - Iron, Nickel, Cryolite, magnesium and copper filings. Flying a jet engine through exploding fireworks would cause serious damage to the engine.

Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.

Suggested correction: Diana had conjured an invisibility shield around the jet that would likely protect it from the fireworks.

raywest

Agreed, the spell does obviously do more than just make the plane invisible. When looking at the invisibility of Themyscira, the spell obviously filters out the atmosphere and only can't keep out solid objects like planes and ships.

lionhead

If the cloak of invisibility "filters out the atmosphere", how is the air needed to run the engines getting in?

It filters the atmosphere, not keep it away. So it keeps the atmosphere that comes in clean.

lionhead

More mistakes in Wonder Woman 1984

Diana Prince: Nothing good is born from lies. And greatness is not what you think.

More quotes from Wonder Woman 1984

Trivia: At one point during the movie Wonder Woman uses her lasso to move around by riding the lightning. This is a reference to the Metallica album "Ride the lightning" which came out in 1984. (02:04:00)

lionhead

More trivia for Wonder Woman 1984

Question: What was the point of having Steve take over the other man's body instead of just returning from the dead in his own body? Unless I'm forgetting something, the ramifications and ethics of him taking over his body are never explored in the film, so it has no effect on the plot, and Diana renouncing her wish would not play out any differently, because Steve goes away either way.

Phaneron

Answer: There's no definitive answer (and hopefully others will weigh in here with opinions). Diana had wistfully wished that Steve was still alive without ever knowing or intending it would happen, nor did she have control over the form it took. By happenstance, another man's body was possessed. The movie's timeframe is too short to know what ethical decisions would eventually have been made over Steve's soul inhabiting another body, though he does mention the moral dilemma it poses. After a reasonable amount of time, they would have to decide if Steve should continue in a co-opted body. Character-wise, it shows Diana's anguish over losing Steve yet again in order to defeat Cheetah. Steve's soul being brought back may foreshadow his resurrection in another way in the next film. Chris Pine (Steve) is reportedly returning for Wonder Woman 3.

raywest

Answer: I don't think writer Patti Jenkins is familiar with the Wonder Woman comics in so much detail that she was actually trying to pay homage to previous Steve Trevor story lines or hint at what's truly happening, but maybe. Steve Trevor has died and come back to life before in the comics. He's never possessed the body of another person, but once a brainwashed Eros possessed his body and once when Trevor came back to life, he dyed his hair black and went as Steve Howard. It does seem like Jenkins left things vague to bring up later, like with Cheetah.

Bishop73

More questions & answers from Wonder Woman 1984