And that's only because the average has gotten so dreadfully low. Wonder Woman is a largely by-the-numbers film. In fact, it's almost entirely a remake of the 2009 animated film of the same name (which also was 'above average' - for a children's cartoon).
What works:
* Gal Gadot is not a great actress (so far), but she is physically perfect for the part, and, aided by competent direction, she becomes a very satisfying Wonder Woman.
* The World War I setting is novel, and allows a grittier texture than we're seeing in most superhero films. (It's the chief element that's been added, compared to the animated version.)
* Wonder Woman's action scenes are beautifully filmed, perfectly capturing that iconic quality that every superhero needs.
What doesn't:
* The story is rather thin, and largely a rehash of the (much better) first Captain America film, albeit set 30 years earlier.
* (SPOILER) I guessed the big villain reveal the instant his 'secret identity' character came on-screen. Note to writers: trying to surprise the audience by means of a tired cliché is kind of futile. Much smarter would have been to let us in on the twist right from the start, so we could follow the Machiavellian politics. There's a huge untapped irony in having the chief proponent of peace actually be the strongest supporter of endless war. (END SPOILER)
* The biggest disappointment, and the biggest missed opportunity, is the presentation of World War I. Arriving on Themiscyra, Trevor introduces the Germans as "the bad guys," setting the trivial tone. It may be fair enough to demonize Hitler and his Nazis, but it's not so easy to muster blind hatred for Kaiser Wilhelm II, a rather typical monarchist leader who most of us know nothing about. Later in the film the point is made that 'all sides are at fault for making war.' But it is never acknowledged that The Great War was the perfect illustration of that truth. This was an opportunity for the film to put down real emotional and philosophical roots. Instead, by shying away from the historical reality, it deliberately remains superficial and uninvolving.
In summary: the scenes of Wonder Woman in action are great - but they're offset by a lack of depth in the characters, a lack of depth in the historical setting, and a typically over-long DC climactic battle with the villain.
The people creating these comic book films need to realize that the rules of drama apply to them too. The most exciting action, the most colorful heroes, all fall flat without a strong dramatic foundation. Either make the film a bit longer, or make the big battle a bit shorter - and put that time towards building some real empathy for the *people*, some real depth to their setting.
Wonder Woman is certainly the best of the recent DC films, but only because it shares their failings to a lesser degree. I grew up loving comics, especially superhero comics. I've seen the good, the bad and the unbelievably lame - originally for 10 cents. With hundred-million dollar budgets at its disposal, Hollywood can and should be doing a lot better.
What works:
* Gal Gadot is not a great actress (so far), but she is physically perfect for the part, and, aided by competent direction, she becomes a very satisfying Wonder Woman.
* The World War I setting is novel, and allows a grittier texture than we're seeing in most superhero films. (It's the chief element that's been added, compared to the animated version.)
* Wonder Woman's action scenes are beautifully filmed, perfectly capturing that iconic quality that every superhero needs.
What doesn't:
* The story is rather thin, and largely a rehash of the (much better) first Captain America film, albeit set 30 years earlier.
* (SPOILER) I guessed the big villain reveal the instant his 'secret identity' character came on-screen. Note to writers: trying to surprise the audience by means of a tired cliché is kind of futile. Much smarter would have been to let us in on the twist right from the start, so we could follow the Machiavellian politics. There's a huge untapped irony in having the chief proponent of peace actually be the strongest supporter of endless war. (END SPOILER)
* The biggest disappointment, and the biggest missed opportunity, is the presentation of World War I. Arriving on Themiscyra, Trevor introduces the Germans as "the bad guys," setting the trivial tone. It may be fair enough to demonize Hitler and his Nazis, but it's not so easy to muster blind hatred for Kaiser Wilhelm II, a rather typical monarchist leader who most of us know nothing about. Later in the film the point is made that 'all sides are at fault for making war.' But it is never acknowledged that The Great War was the perfect illustration of that truth. This was an opportunity for the film to put down real emotional and philosophical roots. Instead, by shying away from the historical reality, it deliberately remains superficial and uninvolving.
In summary: the scenes of Wonder Woman in action are great - but they're offset by a lack of depth in the characters, a lack of depth in the historical setting, and a typically over-long DC climactic battle with the villain.
The people creating these comic book films need to realize that the rules of drama apply to them too. The most exciting action, the most colorful heroes, all fall flat without a strong dramatic foundation. Either make the film a bit longer, or make the big battle a bit shorter - and put that time towards building some real empathy for the *people*, some real depth to their setting.
Wonder Woman is certainly the best of the recent DC films, but only because it shares their failings to a lesser degree. I grew up loving comics, especially superhero comics. I've seen the good, the bad and the unbelievably lame - originally for 10 cents. With hundred-million dollar budgets at its disposal, Hollywood can and should be doing a lot better.