The trailer and the idea of the film “Wonder woman” immediately caused a reaction of the audience: feminists are rejoicing at the presence of a female warrior in the movie, the appropriate people have decided that this is another movement of the Overton Window in the direction of feministic fascism (the idea of the superiority of women over men).
But “Wonder Woman” with some of its very serious negative sides, unexpectedly not so bad film. Although, unsuitable for the target audience.
Young Diana lives on an island hidden from humankind, where it only live an ageless Amazon woman. The Greek God Zeus created this little state, where eternally young women lives and the Amazons were created to help people and to protect them from the God of war Ares. But Amazons work very badly. They just sat on their island, away from people, having the only weapon against the enemy of the human race and not wanting to use it. They also aggressively treat all the people who were supposed to protect.
The main character Diana is the only child in the company of adult women, who considers the position of their experienced mentors “slightly” wrong. She absorbed the mythology of the island and a thirst for battle, clearly inherited from her father Zeus (which unknown in the end of the film, but predictable).
It should be noted that the film “Wonder Woman” like some other pictures with superhero theme, building its story on key characters of ancient myths, continues to adapt mythical epic in a modern way, which was serving in its time as one of the main tools of worldview forming of the Greeks. What is the purpose of those who tries to drown people in seemingly forgotten stories of gods, demigods, and mortals, everyone can speculate on their own. For a more holistic understanding of these issues and identify trends we recommend you to read the article, “Transformation of an image of American superhero”.
But let’s back to our story. One day in women’s paradise accidentally flies the British pilot Steve and the whole ship of warlike Germans comes after him. So, after the battle, not without loss among the women, Amazons recognize that humanity goes wrong without their care. Because it is, First World War passes.
Already matured Diana, despite the ban of mother wants to go to help people, she believes that it’s fault of Ares, who makes all the evil and aggression. Diana and Steve go to the outside world, where Diana is going to find and kill Ares to stop the war on Earth.
The first thing to discuss is, of course, the feminism of the film. Does the film contain it and what extent.
Analyzing a gender theme, let’s start with the pros:
- Diana is feminine. This is a plus in one way and disadvantage in another or rather, the main lie of the authors, but this will be considered below. Diana beautiful, gentle, naive, amorous, caring, kind, loves children. She didn’t lost her feminine nature, and defeated the enemy in the end, strengthening her power only with one faith – faith in love. That is why Diana is very different from most of women warriors in films, including “Xena” and many others. An interesting point that in the mythology of the Amazons stated that they had to spread the love and mutual understanding. As Ares inspired people with negative feelings – anger, aggression, evil, Amazons were supposed to be his opposites. But women decided not to do their job. No love and no protection of humanity. They were just hiding and garden from private wards, entrusted to them by god in his last legs. Moreover, they tried to protect Diana from her direct purpose – the murder of Ares, for which she was born.
- There are equally strong men and strong women in the film. In fact, the antagonists of the film – a man and a woman, the protagonists – a man and a woman, and the protagonist Steve is not shown as someone who is worse, stupider, or weaker than Diana. Naive in our world Diana needs his guardianship and some mentoring. Actually, it features Wonder woman movie from marvel’s “Jessica Jones,” or Disney’s “Star wars”, “Moana”, “Tangled”, etc. In fact, even in the absence of the idea of Islands of women and Amazons it shown outright feminist fascism: women are wonderful characters, strong, brave, honest, etc. and men is extra in the best case.
Let us turn to the disadvantages. Unfortunately, there are a lot of them, and almost all of them fit in an article devoted to the theme of women warriors:
1. The first is the standard lie. Movies where the image of the warrior women shown always lie in a few points. First about appearance: in “Wonder Woman” it was said that in addition to powers from the blood of Zeus, Diana was also training from far childhood to be a real warrior. In this case it is better to see once, than hundred times to discuss.
So, here is the real women champions in combat sports:
Women warriors from cinema:
2. The second lie is connected with the fact that trained woman can be equal with a trained man in combat. No, she can’t. Physically. Women at war could be successful snipers, pilots, and even tank driver, but in direct hand-to-hand combat, a woman cannot defeat a man in other things being equal (health, weapons, or the fact that you can use as a weapon). Superhero movies based on the fact that the woman personally with slender arms and legs hitting multiple enemies, commandos, gets back and then again goes to fight with the enemy. Sometimes it’s trying to justify saying that “it superpower”, but it’s a lie, which goes to subconscious. So, the girl may not adequately calculate her physical strength and get into the frankly unpleasant situation. Also this removes the age-old taboo that “the fair sex cannot be beat” for boys.
The films do not show that the hit of a woman and a man has a cardinal difference in the degree of harm to the enemy. Although for anyone who has an idea of human physiology, it is clear that for the same impact, men and women react differently due to physiological differences.
3. The next drawback is the sexualization of female aggression. All the Hollywood moviemakers suffer from this. “Wonder Woman” managed to wear an armored suit, exposing her thighs, neck, arms for exact attacks of the enemy. If they still somehow explained the fact that Diana is not afraid of bullets because her bracelets and shield attract them to themselves and then reflect, then in terms of hand-to-hand combat or use of cold steel it looks ridiculous. However, this image set by default to girls as a model of behavior, and to boys as a model of an ideal woman: aggressive, evil, half-undressed, rough, etc. After all, superheroes today in most cases become idols of children.
4. Diana has been dreaming of fighting since her childhood, she dreams of fighting, but her mother does not let her do it. The situation looks artificial on two points. 1. On the one hand, the training of others fascinates the girl, and that is why she aspires to learn the art of fighting as soon as possible. Accordingly, if the mother wanted to reduce the “fighting spirit” of her daughter, then she would have to try to interest her in something else, and not just forbid her to train. 2. On the other hand, according to the plot, Diana is the only one who is able to kill their enemy Ares, and therefore, the behavior of the mother with her prohibitions looks doubly stupid.
It turns out that the conflict between the mother and her daughter – is absolutely artificial and unviable, more precisely, it is extremely illogical and absurd in the universe of the film. Such a violation of cause and effect links highlights the reasons why this conflict woven into the plot: once again show the negative image of parents, bringing to the young spectators the idea of the need to ignore the parental authority.
Conclusion: “Wonder Woman” has typical problems of the movie about superhero women, but the level of feminism, in comparison with many other films and cartoons is very low, and in some moments, the gender theme even has positive images. Many feminists considered the film almost “betrayed their interests.”
Good and evil
The main theme of the film boils down to the fact that the naive Diana considers Ares guilty of humanity’s aggressiveness. Ares’s story slightly corrected, and from the god of war of the Greek pantheon, he turned into the likeness of Lucifer, which inspires people with evil feelings.
As it was clear from the first shots, Diana has to learn the terrible truth: people are fighting because they are full of evil and aggression in themselves, at least this is twisted by Ares, who honestly admits that he does not force anyone to do evil (the subject is given enough ambiguously, since Ares’s words imply that he does not force at all, but at least motivates people to commit evil deeds). But, having communicated with different people, Diana comes to another conclusion – people are full of evil, deceit and aggression, but also full of kindness, light and love, and it depends on them, for what ideals they will fight and how they will behave.
Actually, this is a simple idea, which is at the head of many parables, including the famous parable of the two wolves, but it can rarely seen in modern cinema, especially in the comic book.
An old Cherokee chief was teaching his grandson about life…
“A fight is going on inside me,” he said to the boy.
“It is a terrible fight and it is between two wolves.
“One is evil – he is anger, envy, sorrow, regret, greed, arrogance, self-pity, guilt, resentment, inferiority, lies, false pride, superiority, self-doubt, and ego.
“The other is good – he is joy, peace, love, hope, serenity, humility, kindness, benevolence, empathy, generosity, truth, compassion, and faith.
“This same fight is going on inside you – and inside every other person, too.”
The grandson thought about it for a minute and then asked his grandfather,
“Which wolf will win?”
The old chief simply replied,
“The one you feed.”
As the tendencies of modern Hollywood are more often set to show good and evil not as a personal choice, but as something that guides a person, and what is not to blame for, this idea can be put into positive meanings of the film “Woman Woman”.
Another positive meaning of “Wonder Woman” is that the complex of chosenness is not so strong in it, and it said that any person can do the right things. This shows the moment when Diana leaves her mother for war:
- “Do you understand that you cannot return?”
- “Who will I be if I stay?”
Or as Steve explains:
- My father told me: “If something is wrong in the world, then neither you can do nothing, or do something.” I choose the second.
Thus, the film shows enough conscious heroes who rushed to save the Motherland and the world, and not the infantile “elite” as is customary in modern teenage movies.
The big drawback of the film is its vulgarity, which significantly increases the age limit. Diana and Steve often talk, including about the intimacy, then she sees him naked, and in the direction of her gaze, it is clear what she looks.
Diana – How typical you are for the members of your gender.
Steve – I … I’m more than average.
Talks about 12 volumes of Clio, dedicated to the “bodily pleasures” that Diana read at home, and according to which, “men are suitable for conceiving children, but not carnal pleasures.”
Also worth noting is mentioned Diana costume, not particularly suitable as an armor, but emphasizing her figure, and making her in the frame more undressed than dressed.
Since the film tells about an important historical period, it is worth noting that the events shown in the film are a very alternative story, and in general an alternative reality.
Multiculturalism revealed in the film (like the Scotsman, Arab and Indian, whom Steve recruits in London), has nothing to do with the reality of that time, real historical characters and real stories taken as the basis of the film’s military line can not withstand any criticism. Diana kills completely historical person named Erich von Ludendorff in 1918, although he lived until 1937 and was approximate to Hitler.
“Father” of chemical weapons for some reason changed to “mother” – Dr. Poison, still to please feminism. On the other hand, they showed the men who see Diana even near the front and immediately arrange indicative tantrums, although the plot was already the end of the war, and women in the First World War have already distinguished themselves not only as rear workers but also as direct participants in the fighting.
And most importantly – although the whole story revolves around the theme of the First World War and its main participants, the creators have managed to never mention Russia.
In general, according to its historical outline, the Wonder Woman is strikingly similar to the “First Avenger”, from the viewing of which one gets the impression that exclusively brave American soldiers fought against fascism, which were sometimes helped by individual Europeans.
A few words should be said about those who help Miracle Woman and her “boyfriend” to defeat the Germans. It is gradually becoming a tradition that in the detachment of superheroes recruit characters exclusively from marginal personalities, at least, if we take into account their official history, appearance and manner of behavior.
This time, a similar honor was awarded to: spy and outlandish liar Samir, alcoholic and part-time sniper Charlie and smuggler Chief. The main thing that interests them at the moment of “recruitment” is not the defense of the Motherland and the cessation of the war, but the amount of payment. The main character very deservedly at the moment of acquaintance so comments this trinity “a liar, a murderer and a smuggler – charming!”. Simply to understand the pattern of the destructive plot moves of Hollywood, we bring the analogous phrase of the main character from the recently released film “xXx: Return of Xander Cage”: “Good, bad, extreme and completely nuts – that’s whom I can work with!”.
In the future, of course, it turns out that in the soul of each of them is hidden a good nature, that they are ready to fight without money, and it’s just an unfortunate fate made these characters become what they are. Thus, the film continues the steady tendency of depicting good in the image of evil, which imposes a stereotype of positive perception of outwardly negative heroes.