The movie James Cameron called a step backwards for women: “Self-congratulatory back-patting”
Over the years, many conversations have revolved around a similar question: can traditionally oppressive female roles be transformed into progressive characters? The release of She-Hulk (with its somewhat heavy-handed name for what is essentially a female version of the Hulk) and Black Widow sparked heated debates about whether rebranding historically male characters as women was genuinely progressive or merely superficial lip-service. Following the mixed success of the 2017 Wonder Woman film, one director in particular had a great deal to say on the matter.
James Cameron holds significant influence in the film industry as one of the most commercially successful directors of all time and is never shy about voicing his opinions on contemporary cinema. With a body of work that includes Titanic, Avatar, and The Terminator series, Cameron has established himself as one of the defining filmmakers of the 21st century. He has also earned acclaim for creating modern, complex, and multi-dimensional female characters, further cementing his reputation as a trailblazer in cinematic storytelling.
However, the director revealed that he was not a fan of the Wonder Woman reboot, a retelling of the original comic book character, directed by Patty Jenkins and starring Gal Gadot. Cameron explained, “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!”
The film faced criticism for similar reasons, with detractors pointing to its weak script, subpar special effects, and the clumsy, overly politicised reversal of gender roles. It became yet another example of comic book giants Marvel and DC trying to “keep up with the times” by rebooting old stories without addressing the narrative elements that truly matter.
Cameron expanded on this statement, saying, “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!”
Director Patty Jenkins has since responded to these criticisms, saying, “I get frustrated by people who think that they’re defending [Wonder Woman] by trying to make her lesser. When people get super critical about her outfit, who’s the one getting crazy about what a woman wears? That’s who she is; that’s Wonder Woman. I want her to look like my childhood fantasy.”
However, this raises an intriguing point. Reviving an old character inevitably creates a clash between the values of the era in which they were originally created and the modern context they’re being adapted to. Simply rebooting these characters or opting for a gender flip on beloved male heroes like the Hulk often feels like an outdated and superficial attempt at progression, lacking the depth needed to resonate meaningfully with contemporary audiences.
Cameron has touched on something vital, and he is absolutely correct in his criticisms that Hollywood is creating stories like these for lip service, with no real intention of making something genuinely feminist or subversive. What would be revolutionary is an entirely new and original female superhero with a well-written script and a team of people that can think critically about what they’re putting out into the world.
