There are parts of Wonder Woman 1984 that are very, very good.

But the second WW film has more problems than positives ... the biggest of which is the pacing. The movie plods along at a snail's pace for much of the 2 1/2-hour run time; a solid 30, maybe even 60 minutes could have been cut without hurting the plot.

It's a colorful film with some excellent cast members and the nut of a good story, but director Patty Jenkins -- who exceeded all expectations with the previous Wonder Woman film -- fell far short this time around.

The positive aspects of the movie include its stars, Gal Gadot as Wonder Woman and Chris Pine as the resurrected (sort of) World War I pilot Steve Trevor. Gadot in particular was born to play the role; Pine is good, as always, but his part in 1984 is more comic relief than serious protagonist, which is a letdown after his grittier turn in the first movie.

A special nod to the Amazons, who are featured only in the opening scene. Robin Wright and Connie Nielsen return as Antiope and Hippolyta, respectively, but special mention goes to Lilly Aspell, who at age 12 convincingly performed her own stunts in an American Ninja Warrior-style obstacle competition.

Kristen Wiig is really good as scientist Barbara Minerva, in both her mousy and bombshell phases, but doesn't really sell the "apex predator" supervillain she becomes. And Pedro Pascal is a pretty good Maxwell Lord, but the character spirals out of believability as his powers grow. A subplot involving his estranged son produces absolutely no development for either of them.

And, in a film where the supervillain's schtick involves granting wishes, there is a lot of imprecise wording that should -- in true "monkey's paw" fashion -- have led to disaster for the wisher. The villain himself wishes to "become the stone," which he uses to gain the stone's mystical powers but just as likely could have transformed him into a paperweight. Another villain wishes to become "an apex predator" -- it would have been pretty funny if she'd turned into a shark at that moment and flopped helplessly to the floor.

There are some obvious plot holes -- for instance, how does Trevor, who has only ever flown World War I-era planes, instantly figure out how to pilot a jet from 1984? -- but hey, I guess we can simply overlook them because it's a comic-book movie, or something. (Plus, correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think the movie understands how radar works.)

Problematic, too, is the decision to give Wonder Woman the ability to develop new powers -- in this case, flight and turning things invisible -- simply by deciding it's time to learn them. She also now overuses her magic lasso, using it to swing through the air, a la Spider-Man, as well as deflect bullets and, in one over-the-top scene, lasso a bullet inches from hitting its target.

I'm also curious what the moral implications are when someone's dead lover is resurrected in someone else's body. Is it OK, while the new consciousness is in control, to have sex with that body without the host's consent? How about putting it in mortal danger, by fighting with supervillains and their minions? Or even about continuing to use it without wondering where the original consciousness has gone, or if he minds being supplanted? Did his family and friends ever wonder where he was?

I watched WW84 fully expecting to love it as much as the first. Perhaps that's why I feel so let down by the colorful mess that Jenkins cobbled together. Let's hope the franchise -- currently, the best hope the DC cinematic universe has going -- is able to come back with a strong third movie that washes away the bad taste this one left behind.

(Oh ... kudos for the mid-credits scene, which gives the audience a wink with a short but nifty cameo by Lynda Carter.)