By Thomas H Cullen (UK)

 

It’s when Steve Trevor chooses to make the ultimate sacrifice, and in the process incapacitates his connection to Diana Prince that the meaning of Wonder Woman becomes less obscured. Steve’s choice is part of an experience in which possession gets attacked – Diana is unable to hear what Steve tries to tell her before vacating the area – which in itself is a vital aspect of the movie’s overall theme.

Wonder Woman, directed by Patty Jenkins and starring Gal Gadot, is the overall theme that evolution is the absurdity that despite being its own outcome, the basic notion of possession is meant to serve the outcome which preceded its own state. Possession and evolution are synonymous, which is why the story of evolution has no choice but to be an astronomical miscalculation.

The allegorical underpinning, of the fourth DCEU instalment, is that it makes no sense for possession to have an origin. The origin has to emulate the possession, thereby forcing the possession to understand itself as a pointless type of progression. However, what prevents the false story from deserving obliteration is the necessary link between the basic notion of possession and history. In the absence of history, the basic notion of possession loses any chance of logic.

The annihilation hasn’t sufficient merit, but the absence of any change hasn’t sufficient merit either. Possession needs to gain logic, and it also needs to become incapacitated from an origin. The story of Diana Prince is the story of this balance coming into being.

Wonder Woman is the story of Diana’s history with Steve Trevor. Which is what makes the climax all the more crucial; when Steve addresses Diana, just before his sacrifice, the loss of connection that Diana feels is the representation of the story that possession needs in order to acquire logic. To make the basic notion of possession valuable, possession has to be connected to choice, but the consequence of the value of the link is the inability to copy.

If the worth of a possession is the result of choice, that has to mean the unfortunate outcome that the history of the possession has to be destroyed. It’s a brilliant and genius nature of the script that possessions get destroyed only after they become possessions. Diana leaves her mother and her homeland of Themyscira “after” her adolescence. She loses the village of Veld “after” having rescued it. She loses Steve Trevor “after” having rescued him. And finally, she loses her brother Ares “after” having had the opportunity to learn who he is.

In order for possession to have value, tyranny has to be inevitable. If tyranny is disconnected from possession then that obviously renders tyranny into something which can’t be prevented. However, the odd nature of Diana’s story is the value of peace in the face of the inevitability of tyranny. The tyranny is the means for evolution to gain momentum, yet peace – another value – is only logical if it’s a reaction to tyranny.

Failure creates evolution, and does so on the condition that the evolution is the previous state to the failure. Learning from past mistakes is off the table, and at the same time the source of wisdom is to destroy: the point of evolution is to inflict destruction and to do so without any kind of blueprint to determine where and when to strike. The opposite of this is to inflict peace with the help of foreknowledge.

And it’s when equipped with this juxtaposition, that the principle of aimless destruction can actually make sense. The notion of foreknowledge is the true illness of evolution, as foreknowledge would forever be destined to mean separation, therefore the pointlessness of violence is the answer.

For the sake of its deep metaphor, Wonder Woman is the tragedy of being part of a shared universe

Rating: 4/5

BEST QUOTES

 

Page   <<     1   2   3   4   5   6

 

Return to Movie Reviews

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This