James Cameron Calls ‘Wonder Woman’… a Step Backwards?

Director James Cameron poses for a portrait in Manhattan Beach, California April 8, 2014. Cameron, best known as director of blockbuster films "Titanic" and "Avatar", has appealed to well-known Hollywood actors to act as correspondents for new Showtime documentary "Years of Living Dangerously", which chronicles the human impact on the global climate and the consequences for humans of climate change. Picture taken April 8, 2014. To match story TELEVISION-CLIMATECHANGE/ REUTERS/Lucy Nicholson (UNITED STATES - Tags: ENTERTAINMENT ENVIRONMENT PROFILE PORTRAIT) - RTR3KPA9

Today’s irrelevant, out of touch opinion is brought to us by director James Cameron (“Titanic”), who really dislikes “Wonder Woman.” In an interview with The Guardian promoting his latest film, “Terminator 2,” Cameron took a stab at “Wonder Woman” in a comparison to his own female “Terminator” character, Sarah Connor:

All of the self-congratulatory back-patting Hollywood’s been doing over Wonder Woman has been so misguided. She’s an objectified icon, and it’s just male Hollywood doing the same old thing! I’m not saying I didn’t like the movie but, to me, it’s a step backwards. Sarah Connor was not a beauty icon. She was strong, she was troubled, she was a terrible mother, and she earned the respect of the audience through pure grit. And to me, [the benefit of characters like Sarah] is so obvious. I mean, half the audience is female!

I would like to know when exactly Wonder Woman had a Cover Girl moment during her recent film. Was it that time the Amazonian princess saved Steve Trevor from drowning? What about that time she told her entire male posse to wait while she dealt with some Nazis? It must have been that time she snuck her sword into a fancy Nazi party in the back of her dress. Oh wait, that was just smart.

When asked why the film industry is still so terrible with depictions of strong female characters, Cameron didn’t have an answer:

I don’t – I don’t know. There are many women in power in Hollywood and they do get to guide and shape what films get made. I think – no, I can’t account for it. Because how many times do I have to demonstrate the same thing over again? I feel like I’m shouting in a wind tunnel!

Helpful. In reality, “Wonder Woman” has been wildly successful, becoming the highest grossing live-action film helmed by a female director (Patty Jenkins), with critics and fans alike loving Gal Gadot as the Amazonian hero. The film may break another glass ceiling during awards season this year, as Warner Bros. contemplates an Oscars campaign for Jenkins as Best Director and the film for Best Picture.

Cameron is known for helming several film franchises that do, admittedly, feature several strong female characters. He’s written and directed all of the “Terminator” films, the “Alien” films and “Avatar,” which reportedly has four sequels planned for future release. They all feature badass Sigourney Weaver (“The Defenders”) in prominent roles. He’s also known for directing and writing “Titanic,” a 1997 romantic classic starring Kate Winslet (“The Reader”) and Leonardo DiCaprio (“The Wolf of Wall Street”).

You can catch the sequel to “Wonder Woman” Dec 13, 2019.

What do you think of Cameron’s comments about “Wonder Woman”? Let us know in the comments below!

  • Reece

    dayum Selina, you slamming hard

  • Phill Milner

    95% of the people who paid to see Wonder Woman did not care about a female lead or a female director. Wonder Woman was, and always will be, an icon. She is a part of an expanding and VERY successful universe. Not sure why people were so surprised it made money. It’s a D.C. movie about a very popular super hero.

    Crediting the success of the movie to having a female director IS a step backward. It’s a step backward in the same way as saying “Terminator is only good because it had a male director.”

    Saying that Wonder Woman would not have been good if a male directed it is the same thing as saying Spider-Man would not have been good if a female directed it.

    Wonder Woman needs to stand on its own as the great movie that it is, but the loud people who have a voice don’t talk about that. They talk about Gender.

    While poorly spoken, I think what Cameron is trying to say is that the Terminator movies are classics and have stood the test of time and no one has ever attributed the movies’ success to its strong (one of the best) female leads. It’s simply a great movie that isn’t classified as a gender thing.

    Wonder Woman is falling very hard into a gender thing, and while it is a great movie, that’s not what people are going to be talking about 25 years later… and that’s too bad.

    • Mike

      VERY successful universe? Seriously? Batman V Superman should be one of the highest grossest movies of all time. It should be in the top 10, maybe even top 5, combining the two most popular and well known super heroes ever. Yet it couldn’t even get past 875 million worldwide, and it was destroyed critically. That movie should have been able to sail past 1.5 billion without breaking a sweat.

      Suicide Squad made money, but again was a failure critically. Man of Steel got mediocre reviews and couldn’t even go past 700 million. Plus there’s uncertainties about actors ever playing some of the characters again and which movies are actually going to be made.

      This is not a VERY successful universe. At all. Those three movies have all been major let downs in some way. So it is surprising Wonder Woman has made so much money because so far two of the movies in the universe didn’t make anything close to what they should have made and this was the first solo movie for Wonder Woman, which tend not to make as much.

      Batman Begins made less than 400 million. Spiderman, Captain America: The First Avenger, Thor, and Iron Man all made less than Wonder Woman. So did Iron Man 2, Thor 2, and Winter Soldier. So have every single X-Men movie. And most of the movies I’ve mentioned had great movies in the series that were successful to give them a boost. Wonder Woman had to deal with two laughingstock movies lead it in, and the best reviewed movie in it’s universe was only 55%. So yeah, it’s amazing and surprising it made over 800 million despite having to deal with a crap universe, while movies in actual VERY successful universes couldn’t even come close in some cases.

      The gender of the director and title character does matter. It’s 2017 and this is the first time there’s ever been a female super hero and the first time a studio super hero movie has ever had a female director. That shouldn’t be true. So gender does matter because it needs to be clear that hey, woman can direct and star in super hero movies, and they can actually make tons of money and get great reviews. Most people aren’t saying, “Wonder Woman is only good because a woman made it!”. They’re saying, “Wonder Woman was a great movie, it’s great to see a woman director and super hero have so much success, hopefully it leads to more opportunities”.

      People will be talking about Wonder Woman being a great movie. And they’ll talk about it was the first female super hero movie. It’s not one or the other. You can, and will, talk about both of those things. Because you’re insane if you think people would be talking about it just as much if Wonder Woman sucked. Absolutely insane. The only way itd be talked about is if it was being mocked. It would still be a milestone, but people would still recognize that it sucked. In reality, it’s a milestone and people recognize that it’s great.