Black Widow (2021) - Review (with Spoilers)

Can you imagine how excited I was to see this movie? I loved most of the superhero films, starting from Batman (well, technically, I only liked The Dark Knight, but I watched the entire trilogy because I thought I'd appreciate all of it together). And I really, really enjoyed Wonder Woman, and how I could actually see her be a person in all the action - something that not many characters get. If you are doing an origin story, you will need to put the character's personality into it, but for "classical" action, where you just turn your brain off, it isn't really required.

I didn't really enjoy Captain Marvel, though, and I'm sure it wasn't because the main character was a woman. I just felt like I couldn't connect with her the same way I could, for example, with Iron Man, who's basically the least similar person to me. I believe that was because of writing. I have seen many arguments saying that her movie is actually good precisely because it's not excellent, since it provides space for movies to star women in "unconventional" roles and not be under all the pressure on the planet to actually be perfect in every regard.

I also didn't enjoy Black Widow, so I'm starting to think that Marvel just sucks at writing women.

I did go in with the expectation of seeing an origin story, which this movie was not. I was expecting to learn about Natasha as a person, about her past and motivations - as her future I already know. I feel like I didn't. She was very focused on the identity of her parents, and then later leaned into wanting family. Let's say I can work with that, even when it isn't a desire of my own. But this is literally the only trait she has outside of being an assassin/spy.

To me, it feels like her entire identity is solely built around what has been taken from her: she didn't have a family, she cannot, in fact have one, and so she's sad (and, in Endgame, becomes the "team mom", I guess); and she feels guilty for killing people - for the wrong organization.

And now I'd like to highlight what seems to me like the largest, stupidest inconsistency in her character: she is regularly referred to as a world class assassin, a super spy, a standard metric for SHIELD - and in her initial mission, in Budapest, she makes one of the dumbest mistakes on the face of the goddamn planet! After years of Red Room training, that actually turned her into who she is, and also a bit of SHIELD influence, that showed her how to be a less-bad guy; and not, in fact, at the start of her career. You see, her initiation to SHIELD was the task to kill the guy who leads the program that created her - so she rigs a five floor building with bombs, and waits for the guy's daughter to confirm he's in there, at which point she blows them up. They don't die - which is very good for the plot of this movie, but also, as Nat's sister, Yelena points out: she didn't confirm the death, "because there was no body left". This is a gaping plot hole, in my opinion, that could have easily been solved by pulling a Peter Pettigrew. It would still have been cheap, but it wouldn't have set up Natasha, Clint and basically the entirety of SHIELD as incompetent. They would have had a good enough reason to believe D. was dead. Hell, it could have been his entire hand that he lost there, and that would have enhanced the final confrontation! Why do I have to write this movie?

And no, I didn't retain D's name.

And what's even better, Natasha doesn't even kill D. in this movie either! Her sister does - well, she causes an explosion, but for the second time, D's death is not confirmed at all! We're just supposed to believe that ah, he really is dead right now, it's not like he could have survived that. Suppose he'd been snapped...and then unsnapped.

All the characters are flat. Natasha has been a concept of a femme fatale, with her only trait being that she cannot have a family. She's been an excellent background/episode character, a nice foil to whichever hero she accompanied on his journey, but didn't get her own journey until this film. Now she's the main character, and she's still a concept. The most depth I can squeeze out of this film, for her, is also a Your Mileage Might Vary situation. Yelena asks her why didn't she go looking for her - a legitimate question on her part. The viewer and Natasha were shown how the two sisters were separated in the time skip intro, and shown how cruelly the girls were being treated. This implied that Yelena might not have made the cut and was actually killed. I genuinely had the impression she was dead until the two started talking to each other in Budapest. I did not recognize her when she got her own story-catalyst moment. So, the great depth I can squeeze from this is: Natasha didn't go looking for her sister, because she was so afraid she'd find out Yelena was dead. Denial, basically, ever since they got separated. She doesn't open up about this at all, though, so I am genuinely grasping at straws trying to make her a more interesting character.

Yelena is basically the same as Natasha. She doesn't want a family, though, she wants a dog, which to me is genuinely the same longing for unconditional love. I have to project into these characters, because they are so flat. She might not even have emotions. She might just want a fluffy thing that also has a heartbeat. She shows exactly the same emotions and behaviors as Natasha - might be fitting, since they were conditioned to be super spies, but it's very boring to see two of the exact same character interact with each other. Sure, they make for good banter - but differing characters create excellent banter.

Alexei, the girls' father is supposed to bring comedy, in most aspects, so he's big and dumb, and also self-absorbed. That's already more traits than our main character! Unfortunately, his daughters cannot stand speaking to him, so most moments we get are very dry - with an aspect of sadness that we as viewers don't really notice at first. He genuinely seems to have enjoyed the team's time as family, and gives the impression that he wants to emotionally connect with his daughters, but is just disregarded. He won't even get to explore this in any more depth, as Natasha dies in a few films - well, in fact, she's already dead... I am actually somewhat fine with him being a simple character, as he seems to have been intended for comedy, but in his comedic simplicity I actually see more depth, than in his daughters, who are the main protagonists here!

Next I should mention the mother, Melina. First, I really like her name and that she's into science. If you're a brunette in a Marvel movie, you have to know your science. Beyond that, I don't even see if she has any loyalty to any side. She, by her own admission, had been through the Red Room program four times, and when the family shows up at her house, she just reports their presence and stalls. We could work with that - what makes her so loyal to the Red Room? Is it a place to explore her curiosities without any moral constraint? Never mind, Natasha convinces her to defect, basically off-screen. So what brings her to be loyal to this family? They were only a spy project for a few years, the daughters aren't biologically her own (which would stir feelings a bit), and for some reason, she's attracted to Alexei but also named a pig after him because there's resemblance. She was very cool and collected during the intro, even when wounded. She tells her daughters that pain makes them strong. She spends three or so years with them and then goes back to do science projects for the big bad - what, then, changes her mind? Is she genuinely interested in the mind control technology, to the point of being a possible danger? Or is she just a plot device?

So, here we have three awesome character ideas, basically wasted.

The plot isn't too twisty, in fact there is basically zero mystery, you're just here for the action.

The action is the same as it's been the past few years: unstable camera, quick, close cuts, groans and VFX. Knives change positions mid-fight, which generally shows the character's skills with knifework, the sole problem being: when the change is intentional, it is emphasized. Any time a character's skill or wits are demonstrated by quickly changing how they hold a knife, it's a dramatic show of skill, never a quick cut. So even the editing is questionable? I also heard the scene where Yelena kills D. has lower quality VFX, and a badly used green screen. I personally did not notice this, because I was so busy being upset at how it wasn't Natasha killing him.

Back to the plot, though, for a second: because all characters are so flat, the plot drives them. Yelena just gets exposed to some random chemicals that break her dependence on D., then Taskmaster is sent after (technically the chemical, but in effect) Black Widow, who will just follow this rolling ball of events, but none of it seems driven by her personal motivation. Especially since she doesn't "get" to kill D. She doesn't get to make any choices that impact the plot, the plot makes the choices for her, via a sibling, a parent or an accident. We don't even see her learn that kills should be confirmed, and then at least trying to look for D's remains before SHIELD arrives! The more I think about this movie, the more upset I am!

Let Natasha make a choice to characterise her, for fuck's sake! For example, her sister triggers an avalanche for an awesome escape scene and a quip. She doesn't express any feelings of guilt! Okay, she's fine with people being needlessly killed, because they are prisoners? Then why is it so important to free the Widows from D's control and programming? Why not just shoot the base? Just so that we can be informed that millions of these women exist, just so we can learn how Taskmaster is D's daughter, and even she didn't have choice... It's not like the other Widows were innocent. They did commit the same crimes as Natasha or Yelena. They were being controlled, sure, but they would have ended up in prison the exact same way.

I'm starting to think this movie is really deep, and about how women are still confined to work under a very specific narrative because of the patriarchy. I might be able to support this reading, but it'd be giving the movie way more depth than it has.

Turning our brain off for action might be fun, but it wasn't what I was looking forward to have to do to a film about this awesome concept of a character. During her history in the MCU, Natasha has been an awesome woman with extensive knowledge (super spy) and a desire for connection, who also happened to be slightly avoidant and very hot. This has not been expanded upon. She has been a background character, a companion at best, who's awesome, sure, believe us - and then she was killed. She remains exactly the same person in this movie, that would give time for her personality to shine, that would give fans even more reasons to miss her (and, therefore, buy merch), and might convince "antis" that she is, indeed, awesome, more than just the eye candy she'd been introduced as. No, we cannot have that. We cannot give her an ice cream moment, or a baby moment, or literally any moment other than sarcasm, asskicking or hysterectomy. This person whose adventures we've accompanied her on for... well, I believe, more than ten years, has the same amount of personality as the Jason Statham character in the trailer ad right before this movie.

Finally, let me complain about the writing - well, the artistic licence in the writing. It is established that the Widows are sterilized (which might have many implications), and here, the sisters tell Alexei how their uterus, fallopian tubes AND ovaries are removed. The film did have a woman writer. So, my question is: are these women actually postmenopausal at the age of twenty or so? Or are they taking hormones? The physiology of the body changes with menopause, and that isn't mentioned at all. I believe if they go through the trouble of saying that even their ovaries were removed (for... what reason?), they should also establish that they need some sort of hormone replacement. Because they would! They would have a postmenopausal body, which would increase their risk for osteoporosis, cardiovascular disease, depression and mental illness, and also vaginal dryness. This last one doesn't factor into the action hero lifestyle, but it is a thing that might happen. The other three would, however, greatly inhibit any action hero/assassin/spy in their career, so if I were to try to create these, I'd make sure the risk is lowered, not raised. Obviously, these weren't considered, which is visible in how durable all these women are in combat, but it just begs the question: how, if they should be more fragile? Of course, hormone replacement would lead to other risks (blood clots, cancer and stroke) so just... why not leave the goddamn ovaries where they are? I see, the movie just wanted to inflict unreasonable trauma upon these characters, but writers should research what they're going into! Melina could have given an explanation on the fake endocrine gland they had implanted to keep their youthfulness, for fuck's sake! Why do I have to go and fix this movie?

I'm not sure why in some places, this is called an origin movie - it is not. We never got an origin movie for Black Widow (well, unless we just take the Red Sparrow movie and decide it's the same thing, as it does have aspects we could hang onto). This is her Iron Man 2, this is (quite literally) her Winter Soldier. But we never got to see Black Widow Begins. We might say it's for the better, as prequels can be underwhelming in so many ways, and we might even be able to piece together some fanmade prequel from all the flashback footage in the MCU, but it is a fact that we did not get any of it. I'm just wondering, did no one see her as a person? Has Natasha always just been a plot device / quip generator with boobs?