Wonder Woman 1984: When Lack of Diversity Makes Wonder Woman Lose Her Wonder
If you were to ask the typical moviegoer who is the first female superhero you think of, chances are they would say Wonder Woman. While other female superheroes do exist (say Catwoman or Storm for example), they often take a backseat to the male protagonist, serving as a romantic interest or cliche rather than as a nuanced, complicated character. So when Wonder Woman came out in 2017, it provided a much-needed breath of fresh air in an overly saturated male-centric superhero genre. Seeing Princess Diana in her native land with her sister warriors of Themyscira by her side inspired millions of girls around the world, telling them that they too could be the heroes of their own story.
But while Wonder Woman (2017) pushed the boundaries of representation and diversity forward, its sequel, Wonder Woman 1984, failed to break new ground, sacrificing the empowering plot of its predecessor for empty spectacle. And the consequences were considerable. While Wonder Woman (2017) boasted a B Mediaversity rating, 93% critic score on Rotten Tomatoes, and 76 Metascore, Wonder Woman 1984 suffered from a measly C- Mediversity rating, 59% critic score on Rotten Tomatoes, and 60 Metascore. So what went wrong?
Where Wonder Woman 1984 Went Wrong
The film opens with a breathtaking flashback sequence, showing a pivotal moment in the life of young Diana, years before she’d become Wonder Woman. As she competes against fellow Amazons twice her size and age in feats of strength and skill, a perfect euphony of swift camerawork, quick editing, and an epic score fills the screen. The scene showcases Diana’s fearlessness and teaches her the virtue that truth triumphs over deception. Unfortunately, the rest of the film pales in comparison, whether it be in visual cohesion, story structure, or emotional impact.
To start things off, the film treats Barbara, Diana’s coworker at the Smithsonian Institution, as a two-dimensional plot device that reduces her to the strange girl trope. The two bond over a meal discussing how they fit in society, but beside that, Barbara’s role in the film becomes apparent: so Diana can have a big (poorly rendered) CGI fight with a physically imposing antagonist in the third act that seemingly every superhero film has. Considering the lack of nuanced female friendships in superhero films, it’s a shame that the screenwriters favored a heterosexual romance with Steve Trevor rather than exploring a potential relationship between Diana and Barbara, especially given that Wonder Woman is canonically bisexual in the comics. This was a perfect opportunity to represent the LGBTQ+ community that has been historically underrepresented, particularly within the superhero genre.
Instead, the film relies on what we are used to in superhero films, a heteronormative relationship in which the superhero’s purpose is based on their partner. Romance has the potential to be resonating and meaningful, but in Wonder Woman 1984, it feels forced and undeserved, especially given the context of how Steve sacrificed himself in Wonder Woman (2017). Diana’s abilities are regained only when she learns to let go of Steve, and there’s something deeply depressing and illogical about a female superhero whose identity is intertwined so much with a man that she is willing to lose her powers for him. Also, what is going on with the man whose body has been magically overtaken by Steve? Does he have a family or a job? Is he in the white man’s sunken place? Doesn’t Diana, who is supposed to be a beacon of truth and morality, find the notion of Steve inhabiting another man’s body problematic? The plot could have focused on this as the consequence of Diana’s wish, as it would have been much more thematically resonating for her to struggle with choosing her moral code over her love for Steve.
And that begs another question, why doesn’t Diana miss her Amazon sisters or her mentor who inspired her to believe in truth in the opening scene? Wonder Woman (2017) devoted the entire first act to the Amazons, portraying them as warriors, politicians, caregivers, and complex women with nuanced relationships. It set the standard for a feminist plot that didn’t pander to its audience but empowered them. The sequel would have benefitted from furthering this story arc by venturing deeper into Paradise Land, home of the Amazons of Themyscira. Instead, it takes place in a mostly white D.C., even though the city has been majority-Black since the 1950s and white residents made up just 26% of the population in 1984. It also relies on a banal plot device in a stone that can grant wishes, which seems more like a lazy deus ex-machina. rather than something original and exciting. Diana’s wish doesn’t cause a chain of events that lead to her losing her powers, they just magically disappear as a tradeoff for the sake of the plot and theme.
Lastly, I want to talk about the theme of the film: truth. Wonder Woman 1984 bashes the viewer in the head with this theme through dialogue that lacks subtlety and relies heavily on telling the audience rather than showing them. Its connection with the main plot seems incoherent at worst and passable at best, reducing the complex issue of longing for what you don’t have into something that is black and white (reminiscent of Kendall Jenner “solving racism” by handing a police officer a Pepsi) rather than addressing class differences and social/economic inequality. Barbara wants to be cool and confident so that she can become likable, but must stay a nerd because if she wishes to be like Diana then she becomes a cheetah? That just seems cruel and anti-feminist. And the film’s solution of Diana magically convincing the entire world to stop being greedy over the span of a painfully ignorant monologue was as tone-deaf as when Gal Gadot sang “Imagine.” The world may be beautiful if you’re a gorgeous Amazon superhero, but for most people, telling people to put rose-colored glasses over their terrible situation is patronizing. I’m sure the filmmakers’ intentions were in the right place, but the execution of the theme was mediocre and is obviously pandering to today’s political climate, sacrificing its authenticity in the process.
Why It Matters
You might be thinking, why do all of these things matter, can’t Wonder Woman 1984 solely be based on entertainment value? While I would argue the film doesn’t even meet that quota, we as a society cannot settle for mediocrity. And from a financial standpoint, there is a great benefit to having authentically inclusive representation. Yes, there is content that represents underrepresented communities in a profound way, but there’s still a huge room for improvement before we can get complacent. Very few films have the audience and reach that the Wonder Woman banner has, which is why it’s so important that the film, along with movies that have similar platforms, empower underrepresented communities instead of kicking them to the curb. Yes, there will be bumps and bruises along the way, but that’s to be expected with generational long-lasting change. The late great novelist James Baldwin put it best, “Not everything that is faced can be changed, but nothing can be changed until it is faced.” Take risks as creatives and challenge the status quo, and then just maybe Wonder Woman can have a shot at getting back her wonder.
Actionable Insights
Take tests like the Race in Entertainment Media (R.E.M.) Test to help evaluate Authentically Inclusive Representation in your content.
Use your platform to empower underrepresented communities instead of avoiding them in your film.
Hire more women and POC in behind-the-scenes positions who can incorporate their lived experience into the plot, otherwise, their characters’ storylines may lack authenticity or even be depicted as raceless.
Write characters that defy both negative and positive stereotypes to help prevent prejudice and discrimination.
Showcase stories that are authentically diverse, as meaningful representation consists of more than simply casting women and people of color.
CSS Intern
Disclaimer: The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed in this blog belong solely to the author, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Center for Scholars & Storytellers.