Wonder Woman (4/5 Stars)

A standard hypocrisy implicitly permeates most action blockbusters, which rely on strong-armed violence to solve problems all the while preaching the modern day values of pacifism and tolerance. In Wonder Woman, such hypocrisy is explicitly brought to the forefront and an elemental part of the plot and philosophy of the movie. Wonder Woman, also known as Diana, the Roman version of the Greek Goddess Artemis, has spent her entire life in the secret realm of the Amazons, a Greek tribe of woman warriors. There is a mythology in her tribe about a woman warrior from stopping all the wars of the world by killing her brother Ares, the Greek God of War. (I’m not sure why Diana and Ares are in the same story. Really it should either be Diana and Mars or Artemis and Ares, but whatever). The secret realm is penetrated accidentally by a British pilot named Steve Trevor in a World War I by-plane escaping German forces circa Istanbul. Steve Trevor, played by Chris Pine, describes to the Amazons for the first time what is going outside their cocoon. It is the War to End All Worlds. It’s been going on for years and seemingly won’t ever stop.

Diana, played by Gal Gadot, sees her destiny. She becomes convinced that a particular German is Ares and that she must take her sword and shield out into the world and kill him in order to end the war. That this plan could possibly work would appall any lightly seasoned student of history. The tragedy of World War I was that it took so long and so many lives before the forces realized that further violence would not help them “win” the war, at least not in any traditional sense of the word, and that neither side was the “bad” side. I had a sinking feeling during much of the movie that Diana might actually succeed in her mission and thus turn the movie into a dangerous piece of revisionist history. It was only until the last twenty minutes that I became relieved that the movie had turned the implicit hypocrisy of the modern blockbuster into a teachable lesson. (Although I have no idea what Wonder Woman may have actually learned if she is still bandying about the modern day world trying to solve problems with sword, shield, and costume.)

Yes, “Wonder Woman” has been competently directed in the fight scenes, but most of the film’s fun comes between the interaction of Chris Pine and Gal Gadot. Steve Trevor though he is right when he describes himself as an above-average male, knows that Diana, being a goddess, is his superior. He takes this in stride and the movie does not make a big deal out of it. Actually, if I had to make a model of one particular aspect of this movie as a teaching point, I would show the superior way “Wonder Woman” treats the subject of misogyny. As this movie takes place in World War I in a European society entirely controlled by men, there must needs to be the obligatory scenes of men objecting to a woman in the room and so on. I’ve seen this scene many times and have learned to take its general heavy-handedness like I take my cough syrup, with reluctance but knowing its good for me. That is until “Wonder Woman.” In this movie, these scenes are are played with nuance and are consistently funny. The point is still being made, but watch “Wonder Woman.” It does it better.

“Wonder Woman” was directed by Patty Jenkins. In 2003, as her directorial debut, Patty Jenkins made the great movie “Monster” starring Charlize Theron. Then she fell off the face of the earth, not directing another mainstream movie for fourteen years until this years “Wonder Woman.” This, in my mind at least, is the best living evidence of the idea that woman directors are treated unfairly in the movie-making industry. Patty Jenkins should be making a movie every other year. She shouldn’t have to wait until a bunch of studio heads sit around a boardroom and conclude after much deliberation that they would look like shmucks if “Wonder Woman” were directed by a man.

More women writers and directors would certainly go a long way in making men look better in movies. “Wonder Woman” is a good example of a trend I’ve spoken of before: that members of one sex have a tendency to idealize members of the other. Well, in “Wonder Woman” the most interesting and noble character isn’t Diana. As the main character in an origin story, she has a lot to learn and must have room to grow. No, the best person is the man, Steve Trevor, and it is his noble efforts to stop the war and help Diana with her mission that provide the heart and soul of the movie. If we had more women writers and directors who wrote stories with women as main characters, we would have more male characters like Steve Trevor, an above-average man, instead of say the multitude of man-childs that have dominated the comedies and blockbusters of the past hundred years of cinema. I will be sorely disappointed if I have to wait another fourteen years for the next Patty Jenkins movie.