Mickey 17

Bong Jongho's next wide-screen project since his historic win at the Oscar's is rather a big let-down.

For such an intriguing premise, we should have been promised a story with colorful development and of gray morality, and yet were presented with such an obviously black-and-white good-triumphing-over-evil Hollywood movie.

The morality of science? The definition of one's self? The Ship of Theseus paradox? Like, such a wasted opportunity to explore the multitude of questions. I guess it's my fault to expect too much.

Robert Pattinson and Toni Collette are amazing, though. Brilliant camera work and visual effects.

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.

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.

I saw a preview for this a while ago and it prompted me to read the book, Mickey 7, before seeing the movie. Generally, I like to have my own vision while reading instead of having the movie playing in my head. This was a mistake. Not only is the book waaaayyy more fluid, in depth, and loyal to the sci-fi genre, but it was actually enjoyable to consume. The movie, notsomuch.

Beginning with the title, Mickey 17. I don't know why they felt they needed to add TEN extra iterations of Mickey Barnes, but yknow, Hollywood or whatever. Fine. The movie starts basically as the book does, for about five minutes. It then starts to stray away from the original story in ways that absolutely baffled me. The commander in the book is an ACTUAL military commander and so the adversarial relationship between him and Mickey makes sense because of that. This whole religious nut senator bit played by Mark Ruffalo is so cringey and even Toni Collette along side him can't save the scenes they manage to over and under act at the same time. Robert Pattinson is good as Mickey 17; however, his relationship with self isn't as antagonistic as the movie plays it, and you end up losing sympathy for him when it gets downright mean for no reason.

Other reviewers have complained about the "expendable" angle (ethics, morals, possible usefulness to society, etc) not being explored enough... for some reason this is where the writers decided to stay true to the book - the colonizer plot line. It played out better in the book; here, it just feels meh.

Point being, I probably would have enjoyed this more if I hadn't liked the book so much and went into viewing it with above-average expectations. Not awful by any means, but definitely didn't live up to its potential.

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.