MrDHWong
Joined Feb 2008
Welcome to the new profile
We're still working on updating some profile features. To see the badges, ratings breakdowns, and polls for this profile, please go to the previous version.
Ratings4.6K
MrDHWong's rating
Reviews543
MrDHWong's rating
"The Electric State" is a sci-fi action adventure film based on the 2018 graphic novel of the same name by Simon Stålenhag. Directed by the Russo brothers ("Captain America: The Winter Soldier" and "Civil War", "Avengers: Infinity War" and "Endgame") and starring Millie Bobby Brown and Chris Pratt, it squanders every potentially great attribute of its existence in a film that offers nothing worthwhile in return.
In an alternate 1990, a war between humans and robots has left the Earth in ruins, with humanity eventually emerging victorious thanks to virtual technology known as the "Neurocaster" being implemented by Ethan Skate (Stanley Tucci). The rising popularity of the Neurocaster leads to most people choosing to live their lives through this helmet-based VR network, reducing their fleshly bodies to a vegetative state while robotic drones do all the work for them. Four years later, teenaged orphan Michelle Greene (Millie Bobby Brown) meets a sentient robot named Cosmo (voiced by Alan Tudyk) who claims to be controlled by her missing brother Chris (Woody Norman) and decides to run away from her foster father Ted (Jason Alexander) to seek him out. Along the way, Michelle and Cosmo encounter smuggler John Keats (Chris Pratt) and his sarcastic robot companion Herman (voiced by Anthony Mackie), and the four of them decide to join forces to search for Chris throughout the dystopian landscape of West Coast USA.
At this point in their careers, it's becoming harder to say if the Russo brothers are really as great as everyone once assumed they were, with just their Marvel projects being their most notable directorial work to date. Though "Cherry" and "The Gray Man" were moderately successful, neither of them were able to elicit the same amount of enjoyment one could have from the likes of their "Captain America" and "Avengers" films. Regardless, there's no denying that each of their films excel considerably in the action department, something of which the Russos have become best known for. However, in their latest film "The Electric State", no amount of action or effects can salvage what can only be described as their clunkiest, sloppiest, least engaging film of all, an accomplishment that should make them question their future in filmmaking.
Like "The Gray Man" before it, everything about this film feels so cut-and-paste from other better action sci-fi movies. For instance, the whole plot surrounding a robotic uprising is highly similar to what happens in the "Terminator" series, except this time it takes place within an alternate 1990. Granted, the whole "alternate timeline" trope is a decent set-up for an idea like this, except for the fact that it is done so in a rather clumsy manner. As the film begins, we are shown that robots have been assisting humans as far back as the 1950s, with even Walt Disney implementing their usage in his theme parks across the world. Over the course of many decades, robots help people with mundane tasks like serving food at diners and performing shows on stage, that is, until the 90s when they decide that they have had enough of this slave labour and fight back.
The problem here is that because of the film's messy screenplay and direction, at no point do we ever feel immersed in the whole world of humans and robots co-existing with each other before the technological rebellion. What we get instead is the film skimming over important details regarding why a war broke out between the two sides in the first place before moving on to its briskly paced second act. If you can't correctly establish your film's tone and end goal within its first twenty minutes, then that indicates the rest of the movie isn't going to work out. As a result, it's hard to care about anything that happens to anyone in the long run.
Additionally, there isn't a whole lot to say in regards to the film's action scenes, most of which are your standard, run-of-the-mill CGI robot fights. This is especially disappointing considering the film is coming from the same directors who brought us some of the most iconic action sequences in all superhero movies, whereas here I cannot recall anything exciting happening during these moments without having to look them up again online to remind myself. To the film's credit, the CG robots do look decently implemented into the movie but at no point do we ever feel like we're actually there along with them. Then again, I assume this is probably due to the film's ridiculously high budget being spent more on creating visual effects instead of writing a decent story.
Worse still, none of the movie's comic relief is ever funny, which is definitely saying something considering it sure has its fair share of moments that try desperately to make the viewer laugh. In one scene, Keats discovers that his refrigerator in his hideout has been unplugged for some time, rendering all of his food inedible. As he rants extensively about how he now risks contracting salmonella, it is quickly indicated to the audience that Herman is the culprit due to him stealing the fridge's extension cable to charge himself inside Keats's truck. With the bland punchline made obvious almost immediately, the scene goes on much longer than it needs to, only for it to be finally delivered in the worst way possible minutes later. To my dismay, this isn't the only scene with poor comic timing, as nearly every single instance of the film trying to be humorous falls flat on its face before the comedic payoff is eventually revealed.
If the film at least had memorable characters at its disposal, I would be willing to give it the benefit of the doubt, but there isn't a single person or even a robot for that matter that left any lasting impression on me. Millie Bobby Brown's Michelle is a boring and one-dimensional protagonist with a generic character arc involving finding her brother and living in harmony with machinery. I would be hard-pressed calling her a Mary Sue because even those stock characters are capable of contributing something memorable to a story, whereas with her I'm at a loss for why I should actually bother remembering her name. Brown is usually able to inject some peppiness into the characters she plays, as is best indicated by her role as Eleven in "Stranger Things" and the title character in "Enola Holmes", but if you're expecting her to do that with Michelle, you will be majorly disappointed.
Similarly, Chris Pratt is poorly utilised as Keats, whose character is an idiotic waste of his talents both comedically and dramatically. No matter how hard I try, I cannot conjure up anything worthwhile to say about Keats that doesn't involve his physical appearance (he has long hair and a beard) or the fact that it is Chris Pratt playing him. He has no chemistry with Brown or any other robotic character he shares the screen with, and as mentioned earlier his attempts at comedy never land. This is clearly a film that both Brown and Pratt will likely want to forget about in many years time, as I can only guess that they simply did it for the paycheque and nothing more.
Regarding the supporting cast, if the film couldn't care less about getting its lead characters right, then what hope does that leave for everyone else? Actors like Ke Huy Quan, Stanley Tucci, Giancarlo Esposito, and Jason Alexander come and go as they please, almost as though they did this movie out of some kind of contractual obligation. Even the talents of the voice cast, which includes Woody Harrelson, Anthony Mackie, Alan Tudyk, and Hank Azaria, are squandered away in roles that their most ardent admirers will be struggling to find anything worth defending them against valid criticism. Again, it is clear that more focus went into spending this film's finances on effects rather than competent screenwriting.
Taking into account that it cost $320 million to make (the 13th most expensive movie ever made unadjusted for inflation), there is absolutely no excuse for "The Electric State" to have been released to the public in such awful condition. All it does is prove that a bigger budget does not always equal a better film, as a movie is only really as good as the quality of its script and direction. Since I haven't read the original graphic novel from which it is based, I am unsure how accurately the film follows its source material, though it's a safe bet that it is leagues better than this embarrassing failure of an adaptation. Perhaps it would be for the best that the Russo brothers return to what they do best at Marvel, because their independent endeavours are not reaping any real rewards for anyone involved.
I rate it 4/10.
In an alternate 1990, a war between humans and robots has left the Earth in ruins, with humanity eventually emerging victorious thanks to virtual technology known as the "Neurocaster" being implemented by Ethan Skate (Stanley Tucci). The rising popularity of the Neurocaster leads to most people choosing to live their lives through this helmet-based VR network, reducing their fleshly bodies to a vegetative state while robotic drones do all the work for them. Four years later, teenaged orphan Michelle Greene (Millie Bobby Brown) meets a sentient robot named Cosmo (voiced by Alan Tudyk) who claims to be controlled by her missing brother Chris (Woody Norman) and decides to run away from her foster father Ted (Jason Alexander) to seek him out. Along the way, Michelle and Cosmo encounter smuggler John Keats (Chris Pratt) and his sarcastic robot companion Herman (voiced by Anthony Mackie), and the four of them decide to join forces to search for Chris throughout the dystopian landscape of West Coast USA.
At this point in their careers, it's becoming harder to say if the Russo brothers are really as great as everyone once assumed they were, with just their Marvel projects being their most notable directorial work to date. Though "Cherry" and "The Gray Man" were moderately successful, neither of them were able to elicit the same amount of enjoyment one could have from the likes of their "Captain America" and "Avengers" films. Regardless, there's no denying that each of their films excel considerably in the action department, something of which the Russos have become best known for. However, in their latest film "The Electric State", no amount of action or effects can salvage what can only be described as their clunkiest, sloppiest, least engaging film of all, an accomplishment that should make them question their future in filmmaking.
Like "The Gray Man" before it, everything about this film feels so cut-and-paste from other better action sci-fi movies. For instance, the whole plot surrounding a robotic uprising is highly similar to what happens in the "Terminator" series, except this time it takes place within an alternate 1990. Granted, the whole "alternate timeline" trope is a decent set-up for an idea like this, except for the fact that it is done so in a rather clumsy manner. As the film begins, we are shown that robots have been assisting humans as far back as the 1950s, with even Walt Disney implementing their usage in his theme parks across the world. Over the course of many decades, robots help people with mundane tasks like serving food at diners and performing shows on stage, that is, until the 90s when they decide that they have had enough of this slave labour and fight back.
The problem here is that because of the film's messy screenplay and direction, at no point do we ever feel immersed in the whole world of humans and robots co-existing with each other before the technological rebellion. What we get instead is the film skimming over important details regarding why a war broke out between the two sides in the first place before moving on to its briskly paced second act. If you can't correctly establish your film's tone and end goal within its first twenty minutes, then that indicates the rest of the movie isn't going to work out. As a result, it's hard to care about anything that happens to anyone in the long run.
Additionally, there isn't a whole lot to say in regards to the film's action scenes, most of which are your standard, run-of-the-mill CGI robot fights. This is especially disappointing considering the film is coming from the same directors who brought us some of the most iconic action sequences in all superhero movies, whereas here I cannot recall anything exciting happening during these moments without having to look them up again online to remind myself. To the film's credit, the CG robots do look decently implemented into the movie but at no point do we ever feel like we're actually there along with them. Then again, I assume this is probably due to the film's ridiculously high budget being spent more on creating visual effects instead of writing a decent story.
Worse still, none of the movie's comic relief is ever funny, which is definitely saying something considering it sure has its fair share of moments that try desperately to make the viewer laugh. In one scene, Keats discovers that his refrigerator in his hideout has been unplugged for some time, rendering all of his food inedible. As he rants extensively about how he now risks contracting salmonella, it is quickly indicated to the audience that Herman is the culprit due to him stealing the fridge's extension cable to charge himself inside Keats's truck. With the bland punchline made obvious almost immediately, the scene goes on much longer than it needs to, only for it to be finally delivered in the worst way possible minutes later. To my dismay, this isn't the only scene with poor comic timing, as nearly every single instance of the film trying to be humorous falls flat on its face before the comedic payoff is eventually revealed.
If the film at least had memorable characters at its disposal, I would be willing to give it the benefit of the doubt, but there isn't a single person or even a robot for that matter that left any lasting impression on me. Millie Bobby Brown's Michelle is a boring and one-dimensional protagonist with a generic character arc involving finding her brother and living in harmony with machinery. I would be hard-pressed calling her a Mary Sue because even those stock characters are capable of contributing something memorable to a story, whereas with her I'm at a loss for why I should actually bother remembering her name. Brown is usually able to inject some peppiness into the characters she plays, as is best indicated by her role as Eleven in "Stranger Things" and the title character in "Enola Holmes", but if you're expecting her to do that with Michelle, you will be majorly disappointed.
Similarly, Chris Pratt is poorly utilised as Keats, whose character is an idiotic waste of his talents both comedically and dramatically. No matter how hard I try, I cannot conjure up anything worthwhile to say about Keats that doesn't involve his physical appearance (he has long hair and a beard) or the fact that it is Chris Pratt playing him. He has no chemistry with Brown or any other robotic character he shares the screen with, and as mentioned earlier his attempts at comedy never land. This is clearly a film that both Brown and Pratt will likely want to forget about in many years time, as I can only guess that they simply did it for the paycheque and nothing more.
Regarding the supporting cast, if the film couldn't care less about getting its lead characters right, then what hope does that leave for everyone else? Actors like Ke Huy Quan, Stanley Tucci, Giancarlo Esposito, and Jason Alexander come and go as they please, almost as though they did this movie out of some kind of contractual obligation. Even the talents of the voice cast, which includes Woody Harrelson, Anthony Mackie, Alan Tudyk, and Hank Azaria, are squandered away in roles that their most ardent admirers will be struggling to find anything worth defending them against valid criticism. Again, it is clear that more focus went into spending this film's finances on effects rather than competent screenwriting.
Taking into account that it cost $320 million to make (the 13th most expensive movie ever made unadjusted for inflation), there is absolutely no excuse for "The Electric State" to have been released to the public in such awful condition. All it does is prove that a bigger budget does not always equal a better film, as a movie is only really as good as the quality of its script and direction. Since I haven't read the original graphic novel from which it is based, I am unsure how accurately the film follows its source material, though it's a safe bet that it is leagues better than this embarrassing failure of an adaptation. Perhaps it would be for the best that the Russo brothers return to what they do best at Marvel, because their independent endeavours are not reaping any real rewards for anyone involved.
I rate it 4/10.
"I'm Still Here" is a biographical drama film based on the 2015 memoir of the same name by Marcelo Rubens Paiva. Directed by Walter Salles ("Central Station", "The Motorcycle Diaries") and starring Fernanda Torres in the lead role, it tells the rather emotional story of one family's experiences during their nation's political upheaval.
In early 1970s Brazil, the Paiva family consisting of Rubens (Selton Mello), his wife Eunice (Fernanda Torres), and their five children live happily in a house by the beaches of Leblon, Rio de Janeiro. While the family enjoy their time together, Brazil is facing major unrest due to a military dictatorship imposed six years earlier, with Rubens denouncing the current government to his political allies abroad. One day, the Paiva household is raided by the military, with Rubens quickly arrested and taken away without any further information disclosed to his family. As Eunice deals with this sudden change in events, she soon finds herself trying to keep her children in check while also carefully investigating what actually happened to her husband.
Lasting from 1964 to 1985, a military dictatorship was set up in Brazil as a way to curry favour with the United States and curb any means of communist ideologies from affecting the country's political landscape. During this time, hundreds of people with alleged ties to communism as well as anti-American sentiment were forcibly accosted away from their homes and "erased" from existence, with most of their identities and fates not revealed to the public until many years later. One person who prominently challenged this tyrannical regime was Eunice Paiva, who, after the arrest and disappearance of her husband, worked to ensure that justice and democracy would be reinstated in Brazil, fighting tirelessly for the rights of her fellow citizens. Adapted from the memoir of Eunice's son Marcelo, the film "I'm Still Here" shows the extent of how far one woman's determination and love for her family prevented her from ever giving up in the face of dangerous oppression.
To help set the tone of familial importance, the film spends its first thirty minutes establishing the tight-knit relationship the Paiva family have with each other. We watch as the Paivas happily share a fun time on the beach playing volleyball and even later adopting a stray dog who interrupts their game. Inter-spliced between scenes like this are shots of army vehicles patrolling the streets in the background, showing that amidst the family's enjoyment of life is the ever-present threat of danger to their existence. Despite this, the Paivas don't seem as bothered since this issue doesn't appear to affect them directly. That is, until it becomes clear that Rubens, the Paiva patriarch, is keeping a dark secret from the rest of his family.
We then learn that Rubens actually holds allegiance towards political factions that go against his country's military regime, which puts him right in the government's crosshairs. Naturally, this soon leads to him being arrested and taken in for questioning, something of which his wife Eunice is completely unprepared to handle. From this point forward, Eunice becomes the sole focus of the film and we watch as she tries to figure out what is happening to her husband that she and her children are not allowed to hear about. Every moment of her frustration for every hardship she faces is at the forefront of almost all the drama that the film depicts, and it is quite sad to see how much poor Eunice endures for things that she absolutely does not deserve. What makes this even more upsetting is that this whole movie is based on a true story, meaning that what we are seeing on screen really happened and isn't being exaggerated for dramatic effect.
Thanks to Walter Salles's assured direction, the film never feels too overproduced or overindulgent. He handles the film's subject matter with just as much modesty and respect as an indie movie director might, never once sensationalising its basis in reality like a major Hollywood filmmaker might have done in his place. This is especially evident during scenes where we see Eunice interacting with her children, knowing full well that their father may never come home again yet keeping up the notion that she can at least get to the bottom of what happened to him after his arrest. I often found myself hoping in vain that Eunice would be able to immediately stand up to the authoritarian figures in this movie, but knowing that this would definitely have resulted in her death, it became far more feasible to me that we should be supporting her in a more practical way; by the book.
In a role that could easily be considered the very best of her career, Fernanda Torres does a fantastic job playing Eunice, not as some aggressive "girl boss" with a contempt for men, but rather as a loving wife and mother who only seeks justice for those who have been wronged by the corrupt government system. Here is a woman who isn't afraid to stand up for what is right, educating herself with all of the legal necessities required to determine what actually happened to her husband, despite there being all opposition against her. However, she never forgets to be a responsible mother for her kids with everything they go through, including disciplining them if they try to act in a foolish manner that would result in them being taken away just like their father. You can really feel the amount of emotional heartbreak that Torres injects into virtually every moment Eunice is on screen, because at her core, she only wants her family to return to how it was before Rubens was taken away, which seems less and less likely as the film continues on.
With a respectable approach to its subject and a great lead performance to go along with it, "I'm Still Here" could very well find itself ranking among the best films that the country of Brazil has ever produced. Then again, aside from "Central Station" (which was also directed by Walter Salles) and "City of God", there aren't that many other Brazilian feature films to have left this much of an impact on an international scale, so there isn't exactly much competition going for it. Regardless, this South American film about resilience and courage is an admirable tale that reminds us of the steadfast nature of the human spirit, especially through one woman's love for her family. With that in mind, I would say that for this reason alone the film is something worth watching.
I rate it a solid 9/10.
In early 1970s Brazil, the Paiva family consisting of Rubens (Selton Mello), his wife Eunice (Fernanda Torres), and their five children live happily in a house by the beaches of Leblon, Rio de Janeiro. While the family enjoy their time together, Brazil is facing major unrest due to a military dictatorship imposed six years earlier, with Rubens denouncing the current government to his political allies abroad. One day, the Paiva household is raided by the military, with Rubens quickly arrested and taken away without any further information disclosed to his family. As Eunice deals with this sudden change in events, she soon finds herself trying to keep her children in check while also carefully investigating what actually happened to her husband.
Lasting from 1964 to 1985, a military dictatorship was set up in Brazil as a way to curry favour with the United States and curb any means of communist ideologies from affecting the country's political landscape. During this time, hundreds of people with alleged ties to communism as well as anti-American sentiment were forcibly accosted away from their homes and "erased" from existence, with most of their identities and fates not revealed to the public until many years later. One person who prominently challenged this tyrannical regime was Eunice Paiva, who, after the arrest and disappearance of her husband, worked to ensure that justice and democracy would be reinstated in Brazil, fighting tirelessly for the rights of her fellow citizens. Adapted from the memoir of Eunice's son Marcelo, the film "I'm Still Here" shows the extent of how far one woman's determination and love for her family prevented her from ever giving up in the face of dangerous oppression.
To help set the tone of familial importance, the film spends its first thirty minutes establishing the tight-knit relationship the Paiva family have with each other. We watch as the Paivas happily share a fun time on the beach playing volleyball and even later adopting a stray dog who interrupts their game. Inter-spliced between scenes like this are shots of army vehicles patrolling the streets in the background, showing that amidst the family's enjoyment of life is the ever-present threat of danger to their existence. Despite this, the Paivas don't seem as bothered since this issue doesn't appear to affect them directly. That is, until it becomes clear that Rubens, the Paiva patriarch, is keeping a dark secret from the rest of his family.
We then learn that Rubens actually holds allegiance towards political factions that go against his country's military regime, which puts him right in the government's crosshairs. Naturally, this soon leads to him being arrested and taken in for questioning, something of which his wife Eunice is completely unprepared to handle. From this point forward, Eunice becomes the sole focus of the film and we watch as she tries to figure out what is happening to her husband that she and her children are not allowed to hear about. Every moment of her frustration for every hardship she faces is at the forefront of almost all the drama that the film depicts, and it is quite sad to see how much poor Eunice endures for things that she absolutely does not deserve. What makes this even more upsetting is that this whole movie is based on a true story, meaning that what we are seeing on screen really happened and isn't being exaggerated for dramatic effect.
Thanks to Walter Salles's assured direction, the film never feels too overproduced or overindulgent. He handles the film's subject matter with just as much modesty and respect as an indie movie director might, never once sensationalising its basis in reality like a major Hollywood filmmaker might have done in his place. This is especially evident during scenes where we see Eunice interacting with her children, knowing full well that their father may never come home again yet keeping up the notion that she can at least get to the bottom of what happened to him after his arrest. I often found myself hoping in vain that Eunice would be able to immediately stand up to the authoritarian figures in this movie, but knowing that this would definitely have resulted in her death, it became far more feasible to me that we should be supporting her in a more practical way; by the book.
In a role that could easily be considered the very best of her career, Fernanda Torres does a fantastic job playing Eunice, not as some aggressive "girl boss" with a contempt for men, but rather as a loving wife and mother who only seeks justice for those who have been wronged by the corrupt government system. Here is a woman who isn't afraid to stand up for what is right, educating herself with all of the legal necessities required to determine what actually happened to her husband, despite there being all opposition against her. However, she never forgets to be a responsible mother for her kids with everything they go through, including disciplining them if they try to act in a foolish manner that would result in them being taken away just like their father. You can really feel the amount of emotional heartbreak that Torres injects into virtually every moment Eunice is on screen, because at her core, she only wants her family to return to how it was before Rubens was taken away, which seems less and less likely as the film continues on.
With a respectable approach to its subject and a great lead performance to go along with it, "I'm Still Here" could very well find itself ranking among the best films that the country of Brazil has ever produced. Then again, aside from "Central Station" (which was also directed by Walter Salles) and "City of God", there aren't that many other Brazilian feature films to have left this much of an impact on an international scale, so there isn't exactly much competition going for it. Regardless, this South American film about resilience and courage is an admirable tale that reminds us of the steadfast nature of the human spirit, especially through one woman's love for her family. With that in mind, I would say that for this reason alone the film is something worth watching.
I rate it a solid 9/10.
"Mickey 17" is a black comedy science fiction film based on the 2022 novel "Mickey7" by Edward Ashton. Written and directed by Bong Joon-ho ("Parasite", "Okja", "Snowpiercer") and starring Robert Pattinson in the title role, it cleverly plays into its interesting concept with a nice mix of humour and social commentary.
In the year 2054 AD, Mickey Barnes (Robert Pattinson) and his friend Timo (Steven Yeun) decide to leave Earth to join the crew of a space ship set to colonise the distant ice planet Nilfheim. Timo decides to sign up as a pilot while Mickey chooses to become an "Expendable", whose job involves working dangerous tasks that will almost certainly kill him, with the catch being that his body will be "reprinted" later using cloning technology with most of his previous memories intact. Shortly after arriving on Nilfheim, the 17th version of Mickey, dubbed "Mickey 17", falls into a large ice crevice where he is quickly swarmed by alien lifeforms known as "creepers". Assuming he is good as dead, Timo reports Mickey 17 as deceased and heads back to the ship, unaware that the creepers actually saved Mickey 17's life and later pushed him out of the crevice to safety. Sneaking back on board the ship, Mickey 17 returns to his sleeping quarters where he discovers his replacement, Mickey 18, already there lying in his bed. Since multiple Expendables are forbidden, the more aggressive Mickey 18 tries to take out Mickey 17, but during the scuffle the two clones soon come to an agreement; they rotate their duties while keeping this entire dilemma a secret from the rest of the ship's crew.
Considering many of the problems we currently face here on Earth, it seems the logical choice for us to explore other planets that could serve as new locations for humanity to call home one day. Since we are unaware of the levels of hostility that certain alien worlds could harbour, it is necessary to experiment on how we could go about investigating appropriate living conditions if we are to form colonies for human habitation. The lethal nature of such experiments naturally means that there would be very few people out there willing to be the guinea pigs in this scientific undertaking, halting the progress of our desire to set up new communities in extraterrestrial environments. The idea of creating cloned expendable humans tasked with carrying out some of these lethal missions on distant planets is at the forefront of the 2025 film "Mickey 17", which treats this intriguing notion as both an amusing theory and a somewhat plausible option.
As the film begins, we watch as our protagonist Mickey 17 is seemingly about to be devoured by a large group of worm-like, tentacled lifeforms at the bottom of an icy fissure. While Mickey 17's friend Timo looks on in a nonchalant manner, the former soon disappears from view and Timo uses this opportunity to recover any dropped weapons from the scene and return to his duties as a pilot. It is then revealed to us via a voiceover from Mickey 17 that this isn't the first time he has been involved in a fatal situation, as he has "died" sixteen times previously. The film then flashes back years earlier to show us that the original Mickey had consensually signed up for this job that necessitates him going on deadly missions that would kill any normal person. Whereas most people would be put off by a literal suicide mission like this, the beneficial aspect of this job is that you will always be brought back to life through a cloning procedure. This means that though Mickey's physical body will die constantly, his memories and conscience will be preserved and placed into a new body to be printed out after each time he is killed.
However, Mickey 17 actually survived his encounter with these lifeforms known as creepers, lifting him to safety rather than eating him as he and Timo assumed was going to happen. Mickey 17 then makes his way back to the ship where he believes that everything will carry on as per usual, but it soon becomes clear that will never happen. Upon arriving in his quarters, Mickey 17 is shocked to discover that his replacement Mickey 18 has already set himself up ready for his next task, meaning there are now multiple iterations of him on the ship, something that was declared illegal many years earlier. The pair of clones eventually learn to use this conundrum to their advantage, with the two Mickeys rotating their responsibilities to draw attention away from the unsuspecting crew. From this point forward, the film shows us the conflicting personalities of the two Mickeys, with 17 being the calmer, more sensible one and 18 being the impulsive, angrier of the two, hinting that with each newer clone, the Mickeys become far less similar in terms of demeanour. It's a great way to keep the audience invested into what will happen to each of these Mickeys by the end of the movie, especially considering how distinct from each other the two become as the story progresses.
Six years after making the Oscar-winning "Parasite", Bong Joon-ho returns to direct yet another film that critiques class structure, albeit, in a far more futuristic setting. This time, Joon-ho features the Earth's overpopulation and abundance of unemployment as the backdrop of this film, inevitably requiring many people to seek opportunities off-world. During an early flashback, we see Mickey and Timo leaving a crowded, crime-filled Earth to pursue their chosen career paths in outer space. While aboard the space ship, Joon-ho shows the contrast between the different social classes, with the lowly workers always engaged in important tasks and the leader of the whole expedition, the wealthy politician Kenneth Marshall (Mark Ruffalo), who is viewed as a cult of personality among his lesser admirers.
What I liked here was how Joon-ho helps his audience determine the pecking order by frequently referencing their usefulness on their journey. For instance, despite their importance, Expendables like Mickey are ranked at the very bottom due to their disposability while famous celebrity figures like Kenneth Marshall are regarded highly among everyone on board, even though they have others doing all their dirty work for them. This mirrors what is still happening in modern society today, with the large separation between the hard-working bourgeoisie contributing everything to our way of life and the blue-blooded elite taking all the credit. It can be assumed that Joon-ho is saying here that even though humanity continues to advance technologically, our divide between social structure will always remain the same.
Playing multiple versions of himself, Robert Pattinson is a lot of fun to watch as the various Mickeys and all of the fatal situations he is put through. Of course, since the original Mickey was aware of what he signed up for with this job, you ultimately don't feel too bad for the misfortunes he experiences. One other thing I particularly liked was this recurring joke throughout the film where Mickey is often asked by others what it is like to die, to which Pattinson always responds with a funny look of annoyance on his face. It's also pretty amusing to watch as Mickeys 17 and 18 are forced to work together despite their differing personalities, and Pattinson convincingly plays each of them individually. As a whole, this movie is actually a good showcase for the range Pattinson has as an actor, with 17 being a more level-headed protagonist and 18 the more wildcard supporting sidekick.
Concerning the supporting cast, the film is a bit of a mixed bag overall. Steven Yeun felt somewhat underused as Timo, Mickey's childhood friend. Most of the time, Timo only really shows up whenever the plot requires him to contribute some kind of complication in the two Mickeys' plan, later disappearing until the next scene where he is needed for other similar circumstances. As Nasha, Mickey's love interest, Naomi Ackie has decent chemistry with Pattinson and I did like their romantic scenes together, but she doesn't really do much else in the story until the film's final act, which to be fair, is handled reasonably well. I only wish their collaborative process was more streamlined throughout the whole film, as waiting until near the end for Nasha to come into her own was one of the film's weaker efforts. The film's antagonists, Kenneth Marshall and his wife Ylfa, were fairly interesting villains and Mark Ruffalo and Toni Collette are clearly having fun playing them. Without spoiling the ending, I was mostly satisfied with what happens to them during the film's well-earned climax, even if it was an otherwise predictable outcome.
As both a social critique and a sci-fi comedy, "Mickey 17" combines each of these aspects together in a way that only a filmmaker like Bong Joon-ho could ever pull off. It's easy to feel drawn in by the film's sense of humour as well as its timeless analysis on one's placement in the corporate food chain. According to some research, there is a sequel to the original novel titled "Antimatter Blues" which at the time of writing this, has no plans for a film adaptation. After seeing what Bong Joon-ho was able to do in adapting "Mickey7" into this film, my fingers are crossed that he will be able to work his magic once again with a potential cinematic follow-up.
I rate it 8/10.
In the year 2054 AD, Mickey Barnes (Robert Pattinson) and his friend Timo (Steven Yeun) decide to leave Earth to join the crew of a space ship set to colonise the distant ice planet Nilfheim. Timo decides to sign up as a pilot while Mickey chooses to become an "Expendable", whose job involves working dangerous tasks that will almost certainly kill him, with the catch being that his body will be "reprinted" later using cloning technology with most of his previous memories intact. Shortly after arriving on Nilfheim, the 17th version of Mickey, dubbed "Mickey 17", falls into a large ice crevice where he is quickly swarmed by alien lifeforms known as "creepers". Assuming he is good as dead, Timo reports Mickey 17 as deceased and heads back to the ship, unaware that the creepers actually saved Mickey 17's life and later pushed him out of the crevice to safety. Sneaking back on board the ship, Mickey 17 returns to his sleeping quarters where he discovers his replacement, Mickey 18, already there lying in his bed. Since multiple Expendables are forbidden, the more aggressive Mickey 18 tries to take out Mickey 17, but during the scuffle the two clones soon come to an agreement; they rotate their duties while keeping this entire dilemma a secret from the rest of the ship's crew.
Considering many of the problems we currently face here on Earth, it seems the logical choice for us to explore other planets that could serve as new locations for humanity to call home one day. Since we are unaware of the levels of hostility that certain alien worlds could harbour, it is necessary to experiment on how we could go about investigating appropriate living conditions if we are to form colonies for human habitation. The lethal nature of such experiments naturally means that there would be very few people out there willing to be the guinea pigs in this scientific undertaking, halting the progress of our desire to set up new communities in extraterrestrial environments. The idea of creating cloned expendable humans tasked with carrying out some of these lethal missions on distant planets is at the forefront of the 2025 film "Mickey 17", which treats this intriguing notion as both an amusing theory and a somewhat plausible option.
As the film begins, we watch as our protagonist Mickey 17 is seemingly about to be devoured by a large group of worm-like, tentacled lifeforms at the bottom of an icy fissure. While Mickey 17's friend Timo looks on in a nonchalant manner, the former soon disappears from view and Timo uses this opportunity to recover any dropped weapons from the scene and return to his duties as a pilot. It is then revealed to us via a voiceover from Mickey 17 that this isn't the first time he has been involved in a fatal situation, as he has "died" sixteen times previously. The film then flashes back years earlier to show us that the original Mickey had consensually signed up for this job that necessitates him going on deadly missions that would kill any normal person. Whereas most people would be put off by a literal suicide mission like this, the beneficial aspect of this job is that you will always be brought back to life through a cloning procedure. This means that though Mickey's physical body will die constantly, his memories and conscience will be preserved and placed into a new body to be printed out after each time he is killed.
However, Mickey 17 actually survived his encounter with these lifeforms known as creepers, lifting him to safety rather than eating him as he and Timo assumed was going to happen. Mickey 17 then makes his way back to the ship where he believes that everything will carry on as per usual, but it soon becomes clear that will never happen. Upon arriving in his quarters, Mickey 17 is shocked to discover that his replacement Mickey 18 has already set himself up ready for his next task, meaning there are now multiple iterations of him on the ship, something that was declared illegal many years earlier. The pair of clones eventually learn to use this conundrum to their advantage, with the two Mickeys rotating their responsibilities to draw attention away from the unsuspecting crew. From this point forward, the film shows us the conflicting personalities of the two Mickeys, with 17 being the calmer, more sensible one and 18 being the impulsive, angrier of the two, hinting that with each newer clone, the Mickeys become far less similar in terms of demeanour. It's a great way to keep the audience invested into what will happen to each of these Mickeys by the end of the movie, especially considering how distinct from each other the two become as the story progresses.
Six years after making the Oscar-winning "Parasite", Bong Joon-ho returns to direct yet another film that critiques class structure, albeit, in a far more futuristic setting. This time, Joon-ho features the Earth's overpopulation and abundance of unemployment as the backdrop of this film, inevitably requiring many people to seek opportunities off-world. During an early flashback, we see Mickey and Timo leaving a crowded, crime-filled Earth to pursue their chosen career paths in outer space. While aboard the space ship, Joon-ho shows the contrast between the different social classes, with the lowly workers always engaged in important tasks and the leader of the whole expedition, the wealthy politician Kenneth Marshall (Mark Ruffalo), who is viewed as a cult of personality among his lesser admirers.
What I liked here was how Joon-ho helps his audience determine the pecking order by frequently referencing their usefulness on their journey. For instance, despite their importance, Expendables like Mickey are ranked at the very bottom due to their disposability while famous celebrity figures like Kenneth Marshall are regarded highly among everyone on board, even though they have others doing all their dirty work for them. This mirrors what is still happening in modern society today, with the large separation between the hard-working bourgeoisie contributing everything to our way of life and the blue-blooded elite taking all the credit. It can be assumed that Joon-ho is saying here that even though humanity continues to advance technologically, our divide between social structure will always remain the same.
Playing multiple versions of himself, Robert Pattinson is a lot of fun to watch as the various Mickeys and all of the fatal situations he is put through. Of course, since the original Mickey was aware of what he signed up for with this job, you ultimately don't feel too bad for the misfortunes he experiences. One other thing I particularly liked was this recurring joke throughout the film where Mickey is often asked by others what it is like to die, to which Pattinson always responds with a funny look of annoyance on his face. It's also pretty amusing to watch as Mickeys 17 and 18 are forced to work together despite their differing personalities, and Pattinson convincingly plays each of them individually. As a whole, this movie is actually a good showcase for the range Pattinson has as an actor, with 17 being a more level-headed protagonist and 18 the more wildcard supporting sidekick.
Concerning the supporting cast, the film is a bit of a mixed bag overall. Steven Yeun felt somewhat underused as Timo, Mickey's childhood friend. Most of the time, Timo only really shows up whenever the plot requires him to contribute some kind of complication in the two Mickeys' plan, later disappearing until the next scene where he is needed for other similar circumstances. As Nasha, Mickey's love interest, Naomi Ackie has decent chemistry with Pattinson and I did like their romantic scenes together, but she doesn't really do much else in the story until the film's final act, which to be fair, is handled reasonably well. I only wish their collaborative process was more streamlined throughout the whole film, as waiting until near the end for Nasha to come into her own was one of the film's weaker efforts. The film's antagonists, Kenneth Marshall and his wife Ylfa, were fairly interesting villains and Mark Ruffalo and Toni Collette are clearly having fun playing them. Without spoiling the ending, I was mostly satisfied with what happens to them during the film's well-earned climax, even if it was an otherwise predictable outcome.
As both a social critique and a sci-fi comedy, "Mickey 17" combines each of these aspects together in a way that only a filmmaker like Bong Joon-ho could ever pull off. It's easy to feel drawn in by the film's sense of humour as well as its timeless analysis on one's placement in the corporate food chain. According to some research, there is a sequel to the original novel titled "Antimatter Blues" which at the time of writing this, has no plans for a film adaptation. After seeing what Bong Joon-ho was able to do in adapting "Mickey7" into this film, my fingers are crossed that he will be able to work his magic once again with a potential cinematic follow-up.
I rate it 8/10.