Can 'Wonder Woman 1984' avoid the sequel trap?
With so many follow-ups to well-made, lucrative originals ending up dead in the water, can DC Film's superhero flick actually become a rare, high-quality sequel?
 |
| Gal Gadot returns in 'Wonder Woman 1984' (Warner Bros.) |
by Jack Linsdell
In 2017, Gal Gadot leaped onto our screens in her first (arguably) starring role as the Greek god-turned-superhero in 'Wonder Woman', playing the titular character. Directed by Patty Jenkins, the film was a critical and commercial success, not only giving a struggling DC Film's brand its first total success, but becoming one of the biggest "made by females" movies of all time and flying into people's top choices for superhero flicks. It legged it in the summer of 2017 to $821.8 million worldwide in box office receipts and rave reviews. Personally, as not much of a superhero fan, the film really resonated with me and I believe its an example of a high-budget franchise offering that was also a really solidly made and acted film (much like 'Mission: Impossible Fallout' this year).
As soon as the first film had opened to a big $103.3 million opening weekend in America alone, Warner Bros/Time Warner Inc. were quick to greenlight a sequel. After months of rumour, it was then confirmed that Patty Jenkins would return to direct the sequel also co-penning the story with Geoff Johns and the screenplay with Johns and David Callaham, whilst joining Gadot as producer on the project. Indeed, its apparent that after achieving success with the first film, Jenkins has a lot more creative control (or is credited for it) this time. And considering that she did an excellent job on the 2017 smash-hit, I'm expecting great things.
Most sequels aim to expand/set up a universe of characters that fans love or are going to love over a series of films. The only other superhero film that resonated with me was Andrew Garfield's 'The Amazing Spiderman', which was a really well told story, with emotional depth, breath-taking performances and featuring James Horner's best work. However, although the sequel 'The Amazing Spiderman 2' has lots of excellent elements and more top-notch performances, its focus on universe building and more conventional blockbuster filmmaking on double the budget of the original created a considerably weaker film. It seems that once studios get that leggy smash hit, they put all the ideas into the next film, with insane budget sizes and a lack of originality - instead of keeping to all the elements that made the original work.
Now, despite my trust in Jenkins, whose only prior feature film, 2003's 'Monster' was a masterpiece, I am concerned/interested in seeing how this sequel plays out. The news that Chris Pine is returning is deeply troubling as Steve Trevor's death at the climax of the first film was such an emotional surprise that it elevated the film to a new level and provided a believable basis on which Diana's motivations to save the world are formed. If this is somehow undone, or handled in a way which detracts from this, in the sequel I will be disappointed. I have nothing against his return if its in the form of flashbacks for example - allowing him to remain dead but still come back for the film. Also, stylistically the cold war setting in America is interesting and sets it apart from the first film visually and thematically (goods news as most sequels just recycle elements from the first film), but I'm intrigued in what Wonder Woman has been doing between 1918 and 1984 - why set it here? If Jenkins and co. have managed to craft a reason to tell another Wonder Woman adventure besides the fact that the studio wants more money, in at least a solid and coherent narrative all will be well. If the action doesn't go over the top and keeps contained, like most of the action beats during the first film, then that'll be another bonus. I hope Warner Bros. and DC Films have kept the budget closer to the originals $150 million than the $250 Sony spent on 'Spectre', for the reason that you don't need more money to tell a better story - normally it just leaves to unnecessary spectacle and elements that ruin sequels.
If I'm sounding pessimistic here then it's because I so want 'Wonder Woman 1984' to be another quality adventure for Gal Gadot's super-heroine. However, experience tells me that when studios rush into sequels to original smash hits, they destroy an opportunity to develop a quality franchise. Think how James Bond had its all time high with the billion-plus grosser 'Skyfall', then made one of the most expensive films ever made which turned into the atrocious mess that is 'Spectre'. Henry's Cavill's promising debut 'Man of Steel' showed audiences how great his version of Superman could become over several films only for all involved to make 'Batman vs. Superman: Dawn of Justice' (or Dawn of trouble for DC, which should have been the title!) Time after time, Hollywood has ruined original flicks by over-spending, rushing and overcrowding their sequels. I hope Jenkins can prove this wrong and set up the possibility of having a Wonder Woman trilogy made of three high-quality superhero, period action-dramas. If not, then the film industry has missed another opportunity. Oh well, time will tell.
And, with the whole "turning male hero characters into females" thing being the hot potato at the moment for the industry, there is huge pressure on Jenkins to deliver another high-quality instalment to a potential female action-hero franchise, which the industry so desperately needs more of. For more on this read my previous article.
'Wonder Woman 1984' lassoes into theatres on November 1st 2019, starring Gal Gadot, Chris Pine, Kristen Wiig, Pedro Pascal, Connie Nielsen and Robin Wright.
Most sequels aim to expand/set up a universe of characters that fans love or are going to love over a series of films. The only other superhero film that resonated with me was Andrew Garfield's 'The Amazing Spiderman', which was a really well told story, with emotional depth, breath-taking performances and featuring James Horner's best work. However, although the sequel 'The Amazing Spiderman 2' has lots of excellent elements and more top-notch performances, its focus on universe building and more conventional blockbuster filmmaking on double the budget of the original created a considerably weaker film. It seems that once studios get that leggy smash hit, they put all the ideas into the next film, with insane budget sizes and a lack of originality - instead of keeping to all the elements that made the original work.
Now, despite my trust in Jenkins, whose only prior feature film, 2003's 'Monster' was a masterpiece, I am concerned/interested in seeing how this sequel plays out. The news that Chris Pine is returning is deeply troubling as Steve Trevor's death at the climax of the first film was such an emotional surprise that it elevated the film to a new level and provided a believable basis on which Diana's motivations to save the world are formed. If this is somehow undone, or handled in a way which detracts from this, in the sequel I will be disappointed. I have nothing against his return if its in the form of flashbacks for example - allowing him to remain dead but still come back for the film. Also, stylistically the cold war setting in America is interesting and sets it apart from the first film visually and thematically (goods news as most sequels just recycle elements from the first film), but I'm intrigued in what Wonder Woman has been doing between 1918 and 1984 - why set it here? If Jenkins and co. have managed to craft a reason to tell another Wonder Woman adventure besides the fact that the studio wants more money, in at least a solid and coherent narrative all will be well. If the action doesn't go over the top and keeps contained, like most of the action beats during the first film, then that'll be another bonus. I hope Warner Bros. and DC Films have kept the budget closer to the originals $150 million than the $250 Sony spent on 'Spectre', for the reason that you don't need more money to tell a better story - normally it just leaves to unnecessary spectacle and elements that ruin sequels.
If I'm sounding pessimistic here then it's because I so want 'Wonder Woman 1984' to be another quality adventure for Gal Gadot's super-heroine. However, experience tells me that when studios rush into sequels to original smash hits, they destroy an opportunity to develop a quality franchise. Think how James Bond had its all time high with the billion-plus grosser 'Skyfall', then made one of the most expensive films ever made which turned into the atrocious mess that is 'Spectre'. Henry's Cavill's promising debut 'Man of Steel' showed audiences how great his version of Superman could become over several films only for all involved to make 'Batman vs. Superman: Dawn of Justice' (or Dawn of trouble for DC, which should have been the title!) Time after time, Hollywood has ruined original flicks by over-spending, rushing and overcrowding their sequels. I hope Jenkins can prove this wrong and set up the possibility of having a Wonder Woman trilogy made of three high-quality superhero, period action-dramas. If not, then the film industry has missed another opportunity. Oh well, time will tell.
And, with the whole "turning male hero characters into females" thing being the hot potato at the moment for the industry, there is huge pressure on Jenkins to deliver another high-quality instalment to a potential female action-hero franchise, which the industry so desperately needs more of. For more on this read my previous article.
'Wonder Woman 1984' lassoes into theatres on November 1st 2019, starring Gal Gadot, Chris Pine, Kristen Wiig, Pedro Pascal, Connie Nielsen and Robin Wright.
Comments
Post a Comment