At this point in time, details surrounding pretty much anything relating to Wonder Woman 1984 remains a mystery, however, that surely hasn’t stopped director Patty Jenkins from sharing bits and pieces of the film with her social media followers.
Last month, Jenkins shared a first look at Kristen Wiig’s Barbara Minerva (aka. Cheetah, the film’s villain). Prior to that, Wonder Woman herself Gal Gadot shared a sneak peek at the titular character back in her signature suit and ready for action. Now, Jenkins is at it again.
On Monday, Jenkins gave her Twitter followers a first look at a new character in the upcoming film played by Pedro Pascal (Narcos, Game of Thrones). It’s still unclear exactly what role Pascal’s character plays in the upcoming film, but his look gives off a pure 1980s vibe and a total sense of power and wealth. Check out Jenkins’ post below.
— Patty Jenkins (@PattyJenks) July 30, 2018
What we do know about Wonder Woman 1984 is that it is based in the 1980s (clearly, right?) and will see the return of Gal Gadot’s Diana Prince (aka. Wonder Woman) and Chris Pine’s Steve Trevor. The return of Steve Trevor was particularly surprising to fans seeing as how it’s assumed the character is killed in the film sacrificing himself so Diana can save the world. It’s just another mystery surrounding the tightly wrapped film.
In addition to Gadot, Pine, Wiig, and Pascal, the film also stars Natasha Rothwell, Ravi Patel, and Gabrielle Wilde.
The highly-anticipated Wonder Woman 1984 will hit theaters on November 1, 2019!
What do you think about our first look at Pedro Pascal? What role do you think Pascal is playing in the upcoming film? Let us know your thoughts in the comment section below.
A karaoke obsessed, craft beer enthusiast and lover of all things pop culture, Denise enjoys all facets of entertainment from Broadway to box office blockbusters. In her spare time, she enjoys photography, concerts (lots and lots of concerts), volunteering, reading and playing with her rescue kitten, Samantha (who rescued who, right?).