The Smashing Machine

The Rock makes a decent performance compared to other things I've seen him in. But it's far from award winning. I feel this is massively over hyped. It barely has a plot which is it's biggest flaw! It's not a patch on a film like The wrestler. I viewed it at the cinema with friends and we all came out disappointed. I'm glad I watched it as it has been spoken about so much pre release. The place is slow and respectfully the main characters back story wasnt interesting enough. It was a great effort by the director but being based on a true story is no good, if the true story is pretty boring. No amount of poetic licence could bring this film to life. I enjoyed the odd cameo and the soundtrack was pleasant.

The movie has the frame of a good biopic but never quite lands. The Rock pushes himself more than ever, yet the story doesn't feel worthwhile.

There's a thread about two best friends in a fighting league, but it gets sidelined for a tired relationship arc we've seen countless times.

Ironic, really, for a film built around the idea of never achieving greatness.

Expect a sad, bad edited, and strange movie. It is not about fighting, but about the relationship between Mark and his girlfriend, and between Mark and his addiction to opioids. There is absolutely no happy moment in this movie. No build up towards an epic moment. It was very flat. On the other hand, acting was great.

OK, I just got back from seeing it. Overall, I think it's alright

The movie definitely has some upsides. The most obvious is that The Rock gives a solid performance. The best-acted scene is the one where he consoles his suicidal partner in the bathroom of their home. Emily Blunt never looked sexier; she reminded me a bit of Marissa Tomei here. The fight scenes, which occur mostly in Japan, are well-done. The in-ring action looks real; the setting and props look visually aesthetic and authentic. An MMA fan would likely devour those parts. Additionally - I like the closing scene, involving the real-life Mark Kerr.

But many problems remain ... the most obvious flaw, which lingers from start to end, is the movie's presentation doesn't fit. The color and filter give the sense that the movie takes place in the 1960s or 1970s. In truth, the events of the movie occur from 1997 - 2000. I must say: this movie does not look like the late 1990s at all

The movie's pacing is quite slow. The first hour feels closer to 2 hours. The movie doesn't include a rising action and climax like a regular story. Rather, the movie leans more into a straight historical telling. An accurate description is that the movie feels kinda like an academic piece. I think a bunch of viewers might find themselves yawning during the movie

There is a lot of mundane content. We watch his wife when she enjoys an amusement park ride; we watch The Rock buy a gift in a Japanese store; we watch The Rock make a smoothie in his kitchen; we watch The Rock look at a sunset through an airplane window; we watch The Rock trim a cactus plant and clear his pool of leaves etc. Kerr also doesn't have a charming or interesting personality to liven these scenes ... the harsh impression is that Kerr probably didn't have a story worth telling on the big screen

The Rock and Emily Blunt, again, exhibit good acting. But the domestic bickering scenes get so repetitive, as some critics have noted. Some areas of the film could have been covered more, such as Kerr's friendship with his trainer, his drug addiction, and his rehab recovery efforts.

6.5/10.

• Rating: 7/10
• Watched on Friday, Oct. 3, 2025 (first watch)
• Format: regular theatre

I really enjoyed how raw and authentic this movie feels, so much so that at times it feels more like a documentary than a film. The cinematography is framed to capture every moment, especially the fight sequences, in a way that makes you feel as if you're right there in the arena, weaving through the crowd to get a glimpse of the action.

This is easily Dwayne Johnson's best acting performance. Nothing more needs to be said. Emily Blunt and Johnson also share great chemistry, which makes their portrayal of a fighting and complicated couple feel believable. Casting the two of them together was a brilliant choice.

That said, the story itself felt like it was missing something. Even though it's based on a true story, which naturally limits how much can be changed or dramatized, it didn't quite work as a fully fleshed-out narrative. It almost felt like the film was less about telling a story and more about recognizing Mike Kerr and his influence, which is admirable but didn't fully land as a movie. That's why it felt like there was lots of filler sequences that had nothing happening in them that would push the plot somewhere or benefit the plot somehow.

On the other hand, the jazzy, drum-heavy soundtrack was a fantastic choice. It reminded me of Spencer (2021) in the way it mirrored and enhanced the protagonist's emotions, calm yet angry, distracted yet driven, slow yet fast-paced.