Mickey 17

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.

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.

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.

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.

Mickey 17 had the potential to be an innovative sci-fi/comedy film, and it starts off in an engaging and original way. However, as the story progresses, it loses focus and ultimately turns into something generic, with an uninspired and rushed conclusion.

Robert Pattinson delivers a solid and well-rounded performance, proving his versatility even in a film that leans more towards comedy - something outside his usual genre. Despite the lighter tone, Pattinson brings depth to his character, making the story feel more grounded and adding an emotional layer to the film that otherwise would feel empty.

Cloning is a fascinating subject for a sci-fi movie because of all the moral and practical dilemmas it presents. Mickey 17 introduces these ideas but doesn't fully engage in them, shifting focus to a less compelling storyline midway through - the Creepers.

It feels out of the place compared to the film's promising start and even the trailers- The initial mix of humor and originality is lost, and by the end, the movie feels like it was hurriedly wrapped up just to deliver something, lacking any real creativity or impact.

That said, the film excels in its production design. The setting and character outfits are well-crafter, adding to the immersive sci-fi atmosphere. Additionally, the visual effects are compelling, bringing the futuristic world to life in a convincing and visually stunning way, which helps maintain engagement even when the story fails to do so.