turnmaxw

Body horror is a genre that can be difficult to nail. At its best, it is anxiety-inducing, disturbing, and off-putting, often beyond the point of enjoyment. It is horror, not because of the scary monsters or hidden nightmares, but because of the natural human unease towards bodies being bent and broken in ways they shouldn't. As a horror genre fan, I have become desensitized to most of the tactics used to scare in movies, but body horror, done right, never fails.

Together is almost that movie. It builds anxiety both through body horror and simple awkwardness, but just as it rises to the point of being unbearable, it breaks the tension, either with humor or romance. It does this well, but I was left feeling too comfortable, too comfortable for a movie purporting to be a genre based on the opposite. If they had leaned into the body horror more, unwilling to break, this could've been exceptional, but as it stands, I was left wanting.

For someone who is easily scared or is new to body horror, this film could be great. The humor and romance make it more approachable, but it also detracts from the horror. Certainly not a waste of time, but it sucks to see a film come so close only to miss the mark.

Who is the viewer to trust? Who can we believe? Everyone remembers something their own way, and yet, without direct testimony, we can never know who to believe in. What is the role of the law? Is it to find the truth or to find what can be proven with certainty? The film challenges it all...

This film blends reality and fiction in a beautiful way. It may be impossible to prove innocence, but guilt should (shouldn't it?) require the same burden of proof. I suppose I don't know, this film doesn't let you know.

There are many films that question the nature of memory, truth, and reality, but this film stands out because it isn't about truth, it is about who to believe and how far we are willing to go to support our basic instincts, instead it is about how we prosecute the law, what level of guilt deserves punishment, and all the consequences that result from getting caught up in it.

An excellent watch for people looking for a film that explores the nature of truth and memory within the context of law and justice.

I went into this movie with close to no expectations other than the fact that it was a Bong Joon Ho film. I refused to watch the trailer, I did next to no research, and actively avoided any mention of it. I did this because I respected Bong Joon Ho as a director and trusted the film to be good. I mention this not to preach my love of his films or to make myself out to be something special, but because this film was exactly what I expected, an extremely solid film, just in line with Bong Joon Ho's style.

The most similar film I can think of is another film by Bong Joon Ho, Snowpiercer. It features a similar theme of a class struggle in a dystopian future, but where Snowpiercer remains serious, leaning into the action elements, Mickey 17 turns to moments of levity. Mark Ruffalo's character is not only an effective villain, but a humorous one. This works because the film doesn't take itself too seriously. It's a little abstract and not entirely realistic (even accounting for it being set in the future), but it doesn't need to be to be a compelling and relevant film.

This of course does not make it perfect. I felt certain characters were never fully developed, even Mickey himself. The film is also struggling between two critical plots, the complications of human cloning, and the broader plot of trying to colonize a planet (I would give more details but I'm trying to avoid spoilers). Both of these plots are compelling, but some moments feel like the film gives up one in order to explore the other. I'm not sure what the solution to this is exactly, I think it was just a classic struggle of trying to condense too much into one film. I wouldn't be surprised if the original book it is based on can handle both these plots and expand on more characters in the exact way I craved. Nonetheless, I appreciate it not being split into 2 parts, too many films do that today.

As a final note, Robert Pattinson absolutely nailed his role in this film. He's one of those actors who seems to often get bogged down by the impression people have of him from his most prominent role, but this film, and the range that he shows, demonstrates how good of an actor he is. I'm convinced that he could play almost any character you give him.