Wonder Woman Is Not a Feminist Movie
Like many people (I think?), I was kinda shocked by the rave reviews and 92% “fresh” certification on Rotten Tomatoes scored by Wonder Woman. In the weeks leading up to its release, media coverage of the movie was dominated by headlines on the “big gamble” Warner Bros. was taking by putting a female director at the helm of a major superhero franchise, let along the big bet they were making that the 18–49-year old male demographic would turn out to see a “nasty woman” kick ass, particularly in this political climate. But it seems all the handwringing was all for naught. Men loved her! (I’m sure the outfit helped.) Women loved her! (Duh.) And the industry finally had the proof they needed that female directors could be trusted to handle a big budget action flick and the overwhelming expectations of Comic-Con goers!
Everyone seems convinced that the success of Wonder Woman had finally broken the glass ceiling for women film leads and women in the film industry, more generally, and that this has ushered in a new era of feminist film-making. The Guardian declared it “a masterpiece of subversive feminism.” Over at Vox, Caroline Franke called Wonder Woman “not just the superhero Hollywood needs. [But] the one exhausted feminists deserve,” calling the film “a great [emphasis hers] example of how filmmakers don’t have to resort to the usual problematic tropes to keep their biggest, splashiest movies glued together.”
Maybe so. But the film is riddled with sexist clichés. Some of these are inevitable given Wonder Woman/Diana the confines of the new world to which she has been transported — turn-of-the-century America, in the last days of World War I. We can forgive, then, her dependence on a group of men to tell her where to go, what to wear, how to behave, though it’s a bit harder to stomach the “shush”-ing she gets from the British generals and her own love interest, who frequently cuts her off and tells her it’s “not the time” to talk about certain things. Kamala and Ariana, I see you.
But the presence of some of these clichés was not inevitable, and reflect conscious choices made by Patty Jenkins or industry executives (with or without her consent). Choices like the one to have Diana’s primary female-to-female interaction be with a secretary in a department store, trying on dresses. Choices like the one to make the only other strong female character, Dr. Maru, disfigured and unwaveringly loyal to General Ludendorff (lest we have two strong, intelligent, attractive females with wills of their own and frighten away the male moviegoers). Choices like the one to have Diana’s full power unleashed as a result of her love for a man, rather than her mother or her aunt, Hippolyta, with whom — while training for battle — Diana gets her first glimpse of the depth of her power.
Wonder Woman is a product of her creator (William Moulton Marston) and the era in which she was created (World War II America). And, in this first installation, homage had to be paid to those sexist roots. It’s a part of her personal history, as it is a part of our collective female history, one that we still reckon with at home, at work, on the streets, and in almost every aspect of our daily lives. Where Wonder Woman disappoints is not in those aspects where the film’s creators had no choice, but in those moments where they did, and still managed to drop the ball.
If a sequel is in the works, let’s hope for more substance and fewer stereotypes.
