No one was more excited than I to see the return of my favorite female superhero, but after looking back on the Trailers for Wonder Woman 1984, my one thought is—I should have seen it coming. The quirky jabs at 80’s fashion and strange fight sequence choreography should have clued me in that this sequel was going to be nothing like its brilliant predecessor. Let’s get into why I was crestfallen no more than halfway through the film.

The Opening scene was good and set the theme for the movie: We go back in time and see Diana as a little girl attempting to cheat in order to win a huge Amazonian competition. Antiope reminds her that she cannot have it all, she can only have the truth—and the truth is she didn’t really win. The opening scene was intense, moving, and gave us a revelation Diana had as a child which will become relevant later on. A flashback when used properly should be related to something which will occur in the story later, or a realization the hero/heroin will have in the journey.

The tone completely changed in present day: From this we move into present day and enter a zany 80’s world with comedic rescue scenes. This gets into my first problem with the film—it felt silly and low tension. The way to give weight to any actions in fiction, is how the actions are treated by other characters and what consequences arise as a result. If thieves are spinning in colorful circles in a mall, and a woman in a wedding dress is flying in the air it feels more like Looney tunes than it does a heroic rescue scene. This isn’t to say you can’t have light hearted rescue scenes, but it was one of the only 4 action sequences in the entire film. Most of the action is seen in the trailer. If a film is 2 1/2 hours, with 30 minutes of action (and that’s being generous) those sequences have to count. Making our opening sequence silly downplays the weight of the entire film.

So much wasted unnecessary screen time: The first film made good use of its two and a half hour length. No scene was a waste of time or dragged on, and something was either established or relevant to the plot. My brother’s first concern with Wonder Woman 1984 was the runtime. It didn’t seem like it had enough going on for it to mandate being 2+ hours. He was right. Many scenes were way too long or just plain unnecessary.

• Setting the stage for where Diana is right now is something that could be done in one or two scenes, but instead we get the first half hour of her mourning Steve and hum drum work life. Usually a superhero film doesn’t start off this slow. This was another sign I was getting something totally different from the first film.

• We didn’t need twenty minutes of Barbara Minerva going from nerdy to sexy (one would have sufficed, like Michelle Pfeiffer in Batman Returns). But this movie really wanted to hone in on a strong woman message by having Barbara work out and try on dresses, I guess. I’ll get into the defects of her as a character later.

  • Diana and Steve basically having “Romantic Time” for thirty minutes was also unnecessary.

    -Steve trying on clothes and her showing him around the city felt like I was getting a Rom Com and not the promised superhero film.

    - Also, I know Steve is from 1918 but he’s never seen a trashcan or a train? Both were invented. This was something I’m glad Marvel chose to skip with Steve Rogers, his introduction and shock to the modern world. They handle it in small ways (less is more). We don’t need a scene for every new thing Steve doesn’t recognize.

    -Not to mention, he’s been in the other’s guy’s body stalking Diana for some time now as he tells her later at his apartment so why is everything so new to him? And wouldn’t it scare him instead of giving him the reaction of a small child when they first see an I-phone? He seems to be awed by literally everything Diana shows him.

    This isn’t to say that you shouldn’t have a movie focus on a couple or on romance, you absolutely can. However, make every scene the couple has together—count. For example, in Captain America the First Avenger Steve Rogers and Peggy Carter are on screen together quite a bit. The difference between them and the couple from WW 1984, is that every conversation they have (be it funny, sincere, sad, or awkward) bears relevance to their relationship and development as a couple. Steve and Peggy talk in the vehicle when he’s relating to her all the times he’s fought bullies (this gives her insight to the fact he doesn’t quit even if he’s outmatched), they talk when their in the plane with Stark (and it’s to establish Steve is jealous and likes her even though he hasn’t said it), and the list goes on. In WW 1984, all of Steve and Diana’s time is dedicated to walking around and cracking jokes. I don’t remember a single relevant conversation which developed them as a couple aside from the one in which he tells her she may have to give him up, and when she actually does. None of their interaction develops them as people, it’s just them marveling at the modern world or being humorous.

    More wasted time:

• Did we really need to see Maxwell Lord offering everyone in America a wish one at a time for an hour? We could have established his power in one or two scenes and then jumped straight to him trying to find a way to reach the world’s population by talking to terrorists and then going on TV.

• Lastly, for most of the film we see the world falling into chaos little by little as a result of everyone wishing on Maxwell Lord but nothing is done to resolve this until the very last part of the film. We could have gotten to the climax sooner if we’d cut a lot of the excess footage.

  -Basically the movie could have been chopped down by at least an hour.

  Diana’s lack of a character arc and her wanting relationship with Trevor: It goes without saying, I love Wonder Woman and Gal Gadot is a sweetheart, but I didn’t feel like I was watching Diana or Steve Trevor in this film. I saw Gadot and Pine having fun on set for the most part.

• It seems to be a popular theme in media now to have a woman give up what she wants most, i.e. her man, (WW 1984, Wanda Vision). This is a good story point to have, but it shouldn’t be the only one going on.

  -In Buffy, this is one plot for one episode (the season two finale). With Diana, it’s all she has going on for the whole film, whether or not to give up Trevor to get her powers back and save the world.

  -I found it interesting, but a little selfish for Diana to be struggling with such a choice.

  -Diana just kind of bops around with Steve, showing him the sights, they steal a plane that has no security, apparently, until they’re in the air. Not to mention, Steve wouldn’t know how to fly it and Diana miraculously and conveniently has the ability to make it invisible.

• Steve being in another guy’s body is a problem in and of itself.

  -Neither him or Diana seem to have a problem with it in the beginning, him stealing another person’s life. She says she only sees Steve, even though when he looks in the mirror he sees the other guy. But she saw the other guy when he first comes to her so why did he change in her eyes all of the sudden afterwards? Does everyone else see him as the other guy too?

  -They sleep together so casually I was left wondering, what the heck? In the first film, Patty Jenkins left it artistically open as to whether or not they sleep together because she said if you gave a clear answer it ruins it either way. I agree, but then why in this movie do we get Diana in bed with Steve eating pop tarts…just no. Does Steve have a problem looking like someone else when he’s with Diana? I know women would have a problem with it if things were turned around and Steve slept with Diana in another woman’s body.

  -If Diana wished Steve back why couldn’t he have just come back to life or something anyway since we’re using magic? I don’t understand the decision making behind putting him in another person’s body. It brings about too many issues and questions, not to mention concerns regarding assault.

  Maxwell Lord and Cheetah as villains: I thought there was potential for these characters, but they were not handled properly.

• Lord being driven by inadequacy and his relationship with his son was good. It was pretty obvious he was being made into a glorified business man( a.k.a. Donald Trump), but as a villain it’s not a bad premise.

  -The worst thing about the way he was handled could be summed up in my rant on unnecessary footage. We didn’t need so many scenes of, “What do you wish for?”

  -I could talk about how Lord kind of came off as an emasculated man in his silly interactions with Barbara and his pathetic so called “fight” with Trevor in the White House, but Lord being somewhat weak and emotional could be part of his character. The fact that Steve Trevor a spy for the American military, struggles in a fist fight with him makes no sense whatsoever (he was competent in the first movie but whatever, I guess he’s a weakling now).

• With Barbara I was confused…she makes a wish to be like Diana and that comes with confidence, sexy clothes, cat calling, and the ability to beat up cat callers.

  -She doesn’t use her newfound abilities for anything until she thinks they might be taken away and then she fights Diana in the White House and teams up with Lord to keep her powers.

  -She’s supposed to be cool and confident yet Lord (in one of the most pathetic seduction scenes ever) gets her to give him the rock, making her look very desperate.

  -Barbara wishes to be an Apex predator and only becomes Cheetah for the last few minutes of the movie. Supposedly, she gave up her humanity for this wish but after fighting Diana she renounces it and turns back to normal—a very short moment in the sun. Her entire arc felt disingenuous, mostly, all of it could be tied back to….she isn’t really a villain. Barbara Minerva is similar to the classic DC Riddler in the sense that she’s a talented person who by worldly terms is an uncool geek that people don’t respect despite their intelligence. The main difference, Riddler has the capacity to be ruthless in and of himself. He’s brilliant and tired of being the smartest person in the room but not having the respect. It’s his own decision to take up criminal actions in order to gain acknowledgment. Barbara, makes a wish to be attractive and in exchange loses her warmth and humanity. The capacity for violence and lust for power should have been in Barbara without the wish taking her “goodness” from her. It would have made her more frightening as a villain because she was harboring the animalistic tendencies after a lifetime of being walked on and now she finally has the power to instill fear.

  The Theme of the film and the unbelievable solution to the Climax: As I mentioned earlier, Diana learned in the opening of the film back on Themyscira an important lesson which she reiterates to Lord at the end to convince him to renounce his wish: You cannot have it all, you can only have the truth. Some people had a problem with this tagline, but I agree with it one hundred percent.

  The scene where Diana gives up Steve, if taken completely out of context from the rest of the film, is a good one and it brings to mind the practical applications of the film’s message. When Diana tells Steve “I can’t say goodbye,” he says “you won’t have to, I’m already gone.” Diana can’t have it all. She cannot have Steve back without repercussions (he’s stealing someone else’s life and she’s losing her powers), and the truth is—he’s dead. This scene got me and would've been even better had I not known Steve was in another guy’s body.

• We cannot have it all, as much as we’d like to. We can only have the truth. Absolute truths like, you can’t make someone like you, you can’t escape death, you can’t bring someone back from the dead, you can’t be the best or the richest without hard work, etc.…

• Lastly, the most unbelievable thing in the whole movie was everyone on earth renouncing their wish because Diana tells them they should. Like I’m supposed to believe everyone was actually noble and selfless enough to do this? My sister and I have known people who would do anything to be rich and famous. There’s no way they’d give that up. Most people wouldn’t and they’d tell you straight out. Not everybody is a superhero willing to put others needs before their own. It’s a delusional and blindly optimistic view of humanity. Did the terrorists give up their wish as well?

  Heroes have had to give up what they want most for the sake of the world before (Superman with the Black mercy, Angel in “I will Remember You”), but in each of these cases there was an ignorance of the consequences, therefore giving the audience a dramatic build up to when the hero has to say goodbye to their deepest desire.

• Superman doesn’t know he’s in a dream world created by the black mercy while his friends are dying and need his help in the real world. When he learns what’s going on, the decision to break himself free is incredibly painful but immediate.

• When Angel gets to be human for a day with Buffy, he’s not thinking how vulnerable that will make him and put her at risk. As soon as he realizes he’s no longer able to defend her as well as he could as a vampire, he make the choice for both of them to go back to the way things were and be the only one to remember their day together.

• Diana, in WW1984, knows the whole time Steve is in someone else’s body and she’s losing her strength because of her wish to have him back. Not to mention the world is going to hell in a handbasket all around her due to Maxwell Lord being the wishing stone. We’re aware of the consequences the whole movie and are kind of just waiting for Diana to make the right choice. And the tension is low because we know she has to make it. If we didn’t know Steve being back wasn’t real, or that he took someone else’s’ life, then the tension would be higher because when you tell us he’s the thing she has to give up there would be shock.

  I saw the movie with my sister and our best friend. They both could feel my soul dying at certain parts (my sister and I are connected so we usually feel the other’s pain). The film wasn’t awful, but “I think we can do better.”