Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueDuring a human expedition to colonize space, Mickey 17, a so-called "expendable" employee, is sent to explore an ice planet.During a human expedition to colonize space, Mickey 17, a so-called "expendable" employee, is sent to explore an ice planet.During a human expedition to colonize space, Mickey 17, a so-called "expendable" employee, is sent to explore an ice planet.
- Prix
- 1 victoire et 5 nominations au total
Sommaire
Reviewers say 'Mickey 17' delves into identity, colonialism, and corporate greed with satirical political commentary. Robert Pattinson's performance and dark humor receive praise, while pacing issues and underdeveloped characters draw criticism. Some find the film too lengthy and lacking thematic depth. Mixed opinions exist on political satire and villain portrayals. Despite these critiques, many find the film engaging and thought-provoking, appreciating its unique sci-fi and social commentary blend.
Avis en vedette
Tone, Script & Story: The story is about a human subject who is entitled to study and colonize another planet. The planet here is a freezing one. It's further shown the aliens who look like huge worms inhabit that planet and how they are confronted.
The movie comes from director who has given us gems like Mother, Snowpiercer and Parasite. This fact and the trailer held my hopes in good spirit. Although the hash tag dark comedy killed my hopes to some extent and yes it was correct.
They create clones and eliminate old ones. The movie is slow, the cloning and the gap between fortunate and fortunate ones lay down a terrifying plot. You tend to hate this movie unlike Bong Joon Ho's other movies mentioned above.
Also were there only one species of Aliens?
Direction, Screenplay, Cinematography: The date appears too soon (2054), if that were somewhat comforting, the budget would have been justified. If we oversee that the visuals are justified.
Final Verdict: People will watch it because of names associated. For me it's a one-time encounter.
The movie comes from director who has given us gems like Mother, Snowpiercer and Parasite. This fact and the trailer held my hopes in good spirit. Although the hash tag dark comedy killed my hopes to some extent and yes it was correct.
They create clones and eliminate old ones. The movie is slow, the cloning and the gap between fortunate and fortunate ones lay down a terrifying plot. You tend to hate this movie unlike Bong Joon Ho's other movies mentioned above.
Also were there only one species of Aliens?
Direction, Screenplay, Cinematography: The date appears too soon (2054), if that were somewhat comforting, the budget would have been justified. If we oversee that the visuals are justified.
Final Verdict: People will watch it because of names associated. For me it's a one-time encounter.
Let's start with the obvious-while "Mickey 17" offers plenty of social commentary, it falls short of the sharp satire and intelligent (class) critique that made "Parasite" a modern masterpiece. Instead, what we get is a sci-fi parody that explores humanity's vanity and self-destruction, yet for some reason, it never truly feels like it takes place in a distant future.
*** Robert Pattinson delivers another strong performance, continuing his streak of unique and compelling roles. He has successfully reshaped his career, moving far beyond his early days, and frankly, we prefer him this way. His unexpected comedic side is a revelation, adding a fresh layer to his performance. Mark Ruffalo also shines, delivering a performance reminiscent of his role in Poor Things, with certain expressions and mannerisms subtly evoking Trump.
*** The production is undeniably grand and expensive, evident in its visually striking yet occasionally excessive scenes. The film often gives off a sense of familiarity-as if we've seen these themes before. The idea for example that we are the real aliens and "monsters" is hardly new, and at times, the script leans too heavily on familiar concepts explored already by many movies.
*** While Mickey 17 is a solid film, it's far from a masterpiece. Perhaps the biggest challenge is that Bong Joon-ho has set the bar so high that anything less than exceptional feels like a slight let-down. There's a lingering sense that something is missing-a sharper edge, a deeper impact, or a more innovative twist.
*** Robert Pattinson delivers another strong performance, continuing his streak of unique and compelling roles. He has successfully reshaped his career, moving far beyond his early days, and frankly, we prefer him this way. His unexpected comedic side is a revelation, adding a fresh layer to his performance. Mark Ruffalo also shines, delivering a performance reminiscent of his role in Poor Things, with certain expressions and mannerisms subtly evoking Trump.
*** The production is undeniably grand and expensive, evident in its visually striking yet occasionally excessive scenes. The film often gives off a sense of familiarity-as if we've seen these themes before. The idea for example that we are the real aliens and "monsters" is hardly new, and at times, the script leans too heavily on familiar concepts explored already by many movies.
*** While Mickey 17 is a solid film, it's far from a masterpiece. Perhaps the biggest challenge is that Bong Joon-ho has set the bar so high that anything less than exceptional feels like a slight let-down. There's a lingering sense that something is missing-a sharper edge, a deeper impact, or a more innovative twist.
Mickey 17 is a movie that's not bad but not always good.
Robert Pattinson nails an American accent, which to be honest is totally unnecessary given the amount of different nationalities involved!
British features strongly.
But anyway he does well. And he's always great in the role of all Mickey's.
The supporting cast are fine except for in my opinion a terrible character in Mark Ruffalo's Kenneth Mars and yes I know what he was going for. It's just pretty bad.
The story isn't bad, it's decent enough for a sci fi movie. But it doesn't nail any political or social matters like Parasite or Okja, both of which are absolutely brilliant films.
And therefore a straight sci fi actioner could've been better here.
Although admittedly there's some pretty funny moments.
I sound disappointed which is probably the right emotion. I was expecting something really good but this had too much of Okja and Snowpiercer type action and acting to be unique.
I don't want Bong Joon-Ho to become a parody of himself like Wes Anderson. I believe he's capable of much more.
I have absolutely loved all of his past efforts even Barking Dogs Never Bite, which I think is hilarious.
So that's 3 American made movies all very similar in tone. Definitely time for something more.
Anyway it's worth a watch but this is not a classic.
Robert Pattinson nails an American accent, which to be honest is totally unnecessary given the amount of different nationalities involved!
British features strongly.
But anyway he does well. And he's always great in the role of all Mickey's.
The supporting cast are fine except for in my opinion a terrible character in Mark Ruffalo's Kenneth Mars and yes I know what he was going for. It's just pretty bad.
The story isn't bad, it's decent enough for a sci fi movie. But it doesn't nail any political or social matters like Parasite or Okja, both of which are absolutely brilliant films.
And therefore a straight sci fi actioner could've been better here.
Although admittedly there's some pretty funny moments.
I sound disappointed which is probably the right emotion. I was expecting something really good but this had too much of Okja and Snowpiercer type action and acting to be unique.
I don't want Bong Joon-Ho to become a parody of himself like Wes Anderson. I believe he's capable of much more.
I have absolutely loved all of his past efforts even Barking Dogs Never Bite, which I think is hilarious.
So that's 3 American made movies all very similar in tone. Definitely time for something more.
Anyway it's worth a watch but this is not a classic.
Mickey 17 is like strictly okayish and that's a huge disappointment given the expectations!
Bong joon-ho returning in director's chair after an Oscar, with Robert pattinson, a sci-fi genre and huge budget, it could have been so much better! But this is just okay.
Pattinson's acting is great, even the premise and structure were very juicy. But for some reason Bong joon-ho doesn't fully capitalise it. Atleast the crazy energy of Okja would have elevated the screenplay, but it was mostly bland and trying to be politically aware.
Especially with that trailer being so much fun, the bar was really high, but this doesn't even comes close.
Bong joon-ho returning in director's chair after an Oscar, with Robert pattinson, a sci-fi genre and huge budget, it could have been so much better! But this is just okay.
Pattinson's acting is great, even the premise and structure were very juicy. But for some reason Bong joon-ho doesn't fully capitalise it. Atleast the crazy energy of Okja would have elevated the screenplay, but it was mostly bland and trying to be politically aware.
Especially with that trailer being so much fun, the bar was really high, but this doesn't even comes close.
For being a sci-fi flick it does ok. It doesn't introduce anything groundbreaking but it is something different. Does it hold up to other sci-fi films? I'd say no, but if you're looking for an average film to burn 2 hours with this does the job.
I will say that considering who it was written and directed by, there was a much higher expectation. After watching a film like Parasite, which was very well done, this was rather tame. I think part of it is the narration and the other part was the writing. Acting wise I think everyone did a fine job, there were themes that were put out there that didn't quite hit or didn't really matter as the story unfolds, and while I could sympathize with the characters and the situations, the actions and consequences of them didn't carry much weight.
This didn't seem to be set up for a sequel and probably for the best, but I'd be curious to see if a part 2 would have more to offer. Overall I gave it a 6 and likely wont see it again.
I will say that considering who it was written and directed by, there was a much higher expectation. After watching a film like Parasite, which was very well done, this was rather tame. I think part of it is the narration and the other part was the writing. Acting wise I think everyone did a fine job, there were themes that were put out there that didn't quite hit or didn't really matter as the story unfolds, and while I could sympathize with the characters and the situations, the actions and consequences of them didn't carry much weight.
This didn't seem to be set up for a sequel and probably for the best, but I'd be curious to see if a part 2 would have more to offer. Overall I gave it a 6 and likely wont see it again.
New and Upcoming Book-to-Screen Adaptations
New and Upcoming Book-to-Screen Adaptations
From literary classics to graphic novels and more, see what books have recently made, or will be making the leap to the big (and small) screen in 2025 and beyond.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesThe planet is called Niflheim. In Norse mythology, this is a realm in a permanent state of Winter, the afterlife for those who do not die a heroic death.
- GaffesThe red MR2 from his memories has only 2 front seats, so he couldn't have chosen to ride in the front as opposed to the back.
- Citations
Mickey Barnes: Our entire life is a punishment.
- Générique farfeluThe title doesn't appear until around the 33-minute mark.
- ConnexionsFeatured in WatchMojo: Top 10 Best Movies of 2025 So Far (2025)
- Bandes originalesTerra Lontana
Written and Performed by Nino Rota
Courtesy of CAM
Under license from Universal Music Operations Ltd
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et surveiller les recommandations personnalisées
- How long is Mickey 17?Propulsé par Alexa
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Site officiel
- Langue
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Mikki 17
- Lieux de tournage
- sociétés de production
- Consultez plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Budget
- 118 000 000 $ US (estimation)
- Brut – États-Unis et Canada
- 46 047 147 $ US
- Fin de semaine d'ouverture – États-Unis et Canada
- 19 002 852 $ US
- 9 mars 2025
- Brut – à l'échelle mondiale
- 133 047 147 $ US
- Durée2 heures 17 minutes
- Couleur
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant