The Bad Batch (2016) Poster


User Reviews

Review this title
166 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
So much going for it - but painfully slow
thekarmicnomad22 August 2017
This is a dystopian movie about a young woman left out in a lawless desert with some real choice characters.

This film starts off very brutally but calms down considerably after the first few scenes.

The characters, acting, production and filming are really good. The story is adequate for needs. The scenery and leading lady are absolutely gorgeous.

So why the low score? The pace of this film is cripplingly slow. There are tedious scenes that should be time lapsed but are run in real time, there is lots of staring and grimacing in silence. You really can go and make yourself a sandwich during this and be safe in the knowledge that you are unlikely to miss anything.

A lot of potential, I really wanted to like this, but it is just so slow I was fighting to stay awake.
96 out of 115 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Much Ado about nothing......
stephenw-3018023 June 2017
There are three previous reviews about this film ranging from 3 of 10 to 9 of 10. I won't bore you with the lengthily details of the entire film as one reviewer did. (Would not be surprised at all if He/She had some direct connection with the making of the film, etc)

I am always up for cerebral, off color, non conformist, anti-Hollywood type films and praise those who make them. I am not, however, a fan of films that aim high to be recognized as deeply artistic and thought provoking when the film fails miserably in achieving that goal.

There are at least four big name actors in this mess and there is hardly any dialog through almost 2 hours of run time. This is not to say Dialog makes a film great. Often silence and facial expression and body language speaks volumes. Sadly, this is not the case in "the Bad Batch". BORING is the first word that comes to mind to describe this film. The story line and plot are all over the place. Th film is set in a supposed Apocalaptic setting with a two caste system. One being cannibals, the other the privileged, if you can call it that.

To categorize this film as "Romance/ Sci-Fi" is utterly misleading. There is absolutely No romance in this film nor is there any Science Fiction in it anywhere. I would categorize this film as a Dark Drama. The only redeeming quality of the film is the score in my opinion.

None of the story telling is explained or resolved and you meander through the film (as do the characters) with no purpose. Here is my take on the film.....Girl is captured, has her leg And arm amputated barbarically, which is used for food BTW, by a group of cannibals. Girl escapes, finds woman in desert, kills her and takes daughter, head cannibal sets out to find daughter, finds girl sans two limbs, sets her out on a mission to find little girl. Girl finds little girl at another "camp" of the higher caste and recovers little girl, meets Said Gorilla cannibal in desert, film ends!

Two hours of time I'll never recover. Swallowing glass would be less painful then watching this again. Reviewers can wax philosophical all they want, "the bad Batch" is just plain BAD!
158 out of 226 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Desperately trying to be cool
avenuesf23 June 2017
This is another film that screams "I want to be a cult movie!" but just doesn't have what it takes. It starts out promising and then seems to have absolutely nowhere to go; it just becomes long, ponderous and self-indulgent. As someone who grew up going to midnight movies, "The Bad Batch" seems like its taken elements from these films ("El Topo," "Mad Max," "Kill Bill") and stitched them all together in the hopes it'll hit the mark somewhere. The performances in the film are adequate, but nothing in the script really demands much of the characters. Ms. Amirpour obviously had the support of actors like Diego Luna, Jim Carrey and Keanu Reeves, all of whom are seen briefly, but I'm willing to bet they never saw much of a script. At two hours, there's probably half an hour of real material here, the rest just feels like padding.
122 out of 174 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Dreadful stuff
jtindahouse3 October 2017
I went against my instincts when it came to watching 'The Bad Batch'. Every nerve in my body was telling me it would be dreadful, but the words cannibals, Jim Carrey, Keanu Reeves and Giovanni Ribisi kept repeating over and over in my head until I finally gave in and made the fateful mistake of watching it. My god, how is it possible to make a story this boring out of cannibals? Every single thing it tries to make itself interesting with completely falls flat. When you manage to get a completely dull and forgettable performance out of Jim Carrey you know you're doing something terribly wrong.

The film tries to be thought-provoking (at least it seemed like that was what it was going for) but none of the concepts it presents are in any way actually worthy of a second thought. It also goes for a lot of style, however it again falls short. In a futuristic desert wasteland setting there a thousand different concepts you could use to create an interesting story. For some reason 'The Bad Batch' chooses a story that could have been told in any setting and in any time period. That's about as lazy as story-telling gets. If you do make the mistake of selecting this one up on Netflix brace yourself for a long and painful couple of hours.
47 out of 63 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Good opening, then limps to nowhere
keith-benoit14 October 2017
Warning: Spoilers
Jim Carrey is uncredited. I wondered why. Then I watched the movie.

Thing is, I watched the first 20 minutes, then put it aside, thinking that my wife's sister's family, who are fans of edgy cinema and were soon to visit us, would be down for an aprés apocalypse mindfock like this.

They, like me, enjoyed the first 20 minutes. Hardly any dialogue (in a good way), some nice directorial flourishes, a more than adequate set up. Lots of promise. A good skeleton on which to put some meat.

A young woman is banished to a lawless territory in the desert, is kidnapped by what turns out to be a community of iron-pumping cannibals, has an arm and a leg amputated (and her wounds cauterized, presumably so that the rest of her can also be eaten or, you know, otherwise put to use), then manages to free herself and find her way to a place called Comfort where the people eat noodles and chicken instead.

I assumed what would follow would be a story of revenge and rescue, the goodies of Comfort taking down the baddies at the Venice Beach barbecue, maybe with some explanation as to how the people of Comfort get access to gasoline, photocopiers, rice noodles and all the recreational pharma you could hope for. (My guess was that there would be some connection to a group outside the lawless land, perhaps some sort of probably not-so-kosher arrangement between Keanu Reeves's Jim Jones knockoff and his inworld suppliers.)

No answers came. None.

Despite a severe underbite, Jim Carrey managed to chew what little scenery there was and he was still the best thing in the film by a long walk. The moment he hands Momoa a snowglobe was when I knew I wasn't coming back. The movie had left me in my own offworld without a clue where I was going or what would happen to me when I got there.

Loooong story short, the girl falls in love with Momoa's Atkins aficionado after eating some Guatemalan insanity peppers and tripping out like she ate a bad oatmeal cookie at a Grateful Dead concert.

There's some other stuff. A kid who likes spaghetti elbows more than actual elbows and who cries when her Daddy and her new stepmom eat her pet rabbit; a homeless philosopher dude played by Ribisi, channeling an amalgam of all those fidgety weirdos that Brad Pitt used to play; and almost no dialogue not spoken by Reeves, whose explanation of where his dookie go goes on for about nine minutes.

But it is bad enough to be a fun watch with friends who like movies made without scripts by people who can't make a movie without a script. Which is most people.

Seriously, I want to know the backstory to this debacle. My guess: Super-talented young director makes great movie, gets noticed, then gets one of those bags with the two dollar signs on it and access to Harvey Weinstein's rolodex while he's in the bath. But the movie has to be made in 10 days because Jim has a showing of his larger canvases at a gallery where people will hand him bags with two dollar signs on them because he's Jim Carrey, not because he's actually a talented sculptor and painter.

Or Jim shook the snowglobe and handed it to the director, saying (with only his eyes), "Before the snow has settled within, the script must be written."
32 out of 42 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
It so desperately wants to be cool, but continuously misses the mark.
bigfatmouth-238835 October 2017
I'm very liberal when it comes to rating movies. Not everything can be "The Usual Suspects" - I understand that.

Holy crap, does this thing drag on and, man, is it trying desperately to be hip, edgy, cool, or something. It's like it comes up to the edge and I think, "Ooh, it might happen here!" and then it doesn't.


It's not fun. It's not even really fun in a bad way. It's just ... bad.
27 out of 36 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Wasted Premise in an acting wasteland.
themwntl25 June 2017
Warning: Spoilers
You'll need to suspend all of your disbelief to close the holes in this movie's plot, starting with the pumping-iron, body-building cannibals, working out and living in aluminum airplane wreckage in the burning desert sun, in the middle of nowhere. Sun block anyone?

Enter Protagonist Suki Waterhouse, 25, acting age 17, cute and lean, and apparently in the eyes of the body-builders, ready for the BBQ- Grill... Fresh Meat over aged, in wings and legs the saying goes? Predictably, escape follows, and Suki finds Keanu's Village of DJ's, Drugs, Dirt. (Keanu at least has a swimming pool and clean towels) That's Not good enough for Suki, She's in love with the Cubano, the "Artist" (and lead cannibal) with the mute daughter. Cubano's Mute Daughter is a MacGuffin.

The movie starts off "OK", with a good pace, and despite poor acting skill (Suki is mostly eye-candy, with a squeaky voice to match), it maintains an interesting premise. But then dramatically FIZZLES after Suki revenge kills Cubano's girlfriend. Then the "distopian love story" plot takes over and the movie is just embarrassing. There is zero chemistry between the actors, the writing is hideously awkward, and the location seems impossible. Grade F.

I would recommend the movie: "A boy and his Dog" for a successful example of this kind of Protagonist Survival in a post-apocalyptic world (with cannibals.)
62 out of 92 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
What did I just watch.....
rhardy-390-70134123 June 2017
Where to start.

AMAZING cast, high hopes, good direction, TERRIFIC cinematography and a Dystopian future to boot....What else can you ask for????

A script that does not read like a bad night of binge drinking.

The storyline was horrendous. The female lead acts like she does shoe commercials. WORST "Essay" accent EVER from Momoa. Keanu looked like he had studied for the role of John Holmes, complete with just BAD dialogue. Ribisi.....screaming at the sidewalk crazy, not cool crazy. Albeit, Jim Carry was perfect in his part.

This viewed like a kid's idea of the future. Confusion, dead end scenarios, lopsided and pointless plot and to me it was like that silly acting joke " Do the Oscar-worthy film, then the artsy film, to keep safe" for...everyone involved. It's like someone said " Hey! I have a breakout idea along the lines of Robert Rodriguez's Mariachi, that's going to be BIG once it's made!...and laughed when someone fell for it.

Wait for this to be on youtube, for the love of God. Do not spend a SINGLE penny to see this. Hell, the effort of turning the thing on, even on youtube, may be a reason to sue them for a loss of personal energy, in the effort of clicking, to be subjected to the most amazing cinematographic pile of refuse....I mean, the camera man was a God and the only praiseworthy participant in this entire debacle

My title is EXACTLY what I said out loud, when the credits started to roll. Proved to me that a great line up does not always equate to satisfaction....or even something considered to be worth watching for free....Yeesh. The 3 star rating was for the scenery and camera work. The movie is a dead in the hole 1, on it;s own
61 out of 94 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Walking around, more walking, oh and did I mention walking?
andrew-marks5925 January 2017
I was excited to see this movie after reading the synopsis a couple of days before the screening. As the title of this summary suggests, there is a lot of walking in this movie. The story starts out semi promising with you wondering what happened to the earth but ends up being the walkiest and least talkiest movie I've ever seen. I know those aren't words but goddammit they get my point across.

The main actress is forgettable, Jason Momoa, Jim Carrey, and Keanu Reeves were miscast or maybe it was just the bad script? Possibly both? Back to the walking part, with minimal dialogue and no action whatsoever, this movie becomes a student film really quick. What I mean is that they don't cut out all the walking around and other useless scenes that should have obviously been taken out.

There isn't really a story, it's sort of tried to take elements from Mad Max and other post apocalyptic films that are much better than it and hope the audience notices and doesn't care or doesn't notice at all.

My suggestion: don't see it unless you want to be bored to death.

Seen at TIFF 2016.
153 out of 263 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Did they spend all the money on getting actors and could pay a scriptwriter?
neil_j_harper20 September 2017
No exaggeration 90% of this movie is people walking in silence, staring in silence or sitting in silence.

It's excruciating.

It's grind house trying to be "arty" and failing at both in the process.
24 out of 35 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
A true "MUST-SEE" Movie!
hellhound830 September 2017
I STRONGLY recommend everyone watch this.

Is it good? No. Is it coherent? Hah! Is it the worst movie ever? Quite possibly.

So why would I recommend anyone watch this steaming pile of incoherent garbage? To come back and read the IMDb reviews after.

There's something cathartic about seeing the immense anger of all the other poor viewers who survived this experience. Their frustration, their rage, their inability to comprehend the world any longer... after you watch this "movie," you too will understand that sensation. And it is truly uniting.

... but from the perspective of a good use of time, no, don't watch this. It has no plot, horrible acting, and dialogue written by (and likely for) a 4 year old. It did have one incredible accomplishment though - the director managed to turn $6 million into $100,000 box office gross. So it has that going for it.
35 out of 54 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
The Really Bad Batch
ikeybabe22 November 2017
Warning: Spoilers
Boring. Slow. A. Waste. Of. Time. I love apocalyptic genre films. I am intrigued by the what if aspects of how one survives the end. But this movie is a gigantic bore. There is barely any dialogue. The scenery is bare and there are all these long sequences and panoramic shots of walking, someone in the distance wandering, yada yada. I am baffled why Jim Carrey, Giovanni Ribisi and Keanu Reeves would be part of this train wreck. The description states this is a romance - nope! There is zero romance going on here. There's nothing thrilling either. The actions of the main character - who is unimpressive - is questionable at best. And the ending makes no sense whatsoever. Again, a huge waste of time. This is definitely one of the worst films I've seen (and I have seen some really bad movies before).
23 out of 35 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Director's sophomore effort is definitely a slump
Mfbarry-90-77350725 June 2017
Warning: Spoilers
I was really looking forward to the director's follow up to "A Girl Walks Home Alone At Night" but after seeing it I'm incredibly disappointed. There are a lot of things that work here;the direction and pacing of the film are spot on with some nice cinematography and some interesting choices along the way. Likewise, most of the actor's contribute some nice work here including the much lauded cameos by Jim Carey and Giovanni Ribissi and the high profile appearances of Jason Momoa and Keannu Reeves. (None of whom did this film because they "needed a paycheck" by the way but was a chance to work with the Sundance Institute and/or an up and coming director they wanted to support.) Carey was really surprising, it took me a few minutes before I even realized it was him and Momoa shows he's got real acting chops but it was Keannu Reeves who really stole the show for me. He goes against type and really brings the creepy to his role of a "Jim Jones" type cult leader. It would be interesting to see him play an out and out villain in a future role. As for Suki Waterhouse, I honestly have no idea whether she can act or not because the script is so bad, littered with wooden dialogue and bad choices throughout, that it's impossible to tell. The characters consistently make decisions or take actions that make absolutely no sense whatsoever. We are not talking your typical Hollywood tropes either (Going down to the basement alone, saying "I'll be right back," know the drill)NO, we are talking actions and decisions that are so wrong they are insulting to the viewer. Example, after narrowly escaping from a group of cannibals and finding safety in a small town, our hero, sans two limbs mind you, immediately wanders BACK OUT into the desert right back towards the cannibal community.She then, over the course of the rest of the movie, proceeds to fall for the head cannibal. A man who participated in a barbecue involving her arm and leg!! I kid you not. I actually found this offensive. And I'm not offended easily. I am baffled as to how the director even considered this line of action for the character or even what the point was. I'm totally mystified as to how anyone could have thought this was a good idea. I found myself very irritated with Ms. Waterhouse's character, to the point that I yelled at the screen several times during the film, so annoyed was I at the character's stupid decisions and at the creators themselves for letting this character be such an idiot. It was like a roll back to before Buffy, when women in horror or sci-fi were nothing but mindless eye candy. You'd think Ellen Ripley had never happened. And this during the week "Wonder Woman" came out. So, there you go. I hate to be so harsh but I have no idea what Ms. Amirpour was going for here and in the future suggest she stick to directing, for which she is quite capable. Just do us all a favor and leave the screenplay to someone else.
28 out of 47 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Slow, Minimal Dialogue, Meandering
PyroSikTh7 November 2017
Warning: Spoilers
Two of those things were good to see.

Arlen is cast away into the desert, branded a member of the bad batch, implying a dystopian society on the outside that locks away it's undesirable members. Unfortunately we don't get to see any of that at all, and the most we get is odd little references dotted about. She's caught by a group of cannibals who cut off and eat her arm and her leg, before she manages to escape. After finding a place named - without subtlety - Comfort, she goes out into the wilderness again to seek revenge on those who took her limbs from her. She finds a kid, has a badly- narrated drug-trip and bumps into "Miami Man", a great hulking figure, head of the cannibal settlement, looking for the girl she took to Comfort. The second half of the movie becomes Arlen and Miami Man trying to get the girl back.

The story isn't particularly great, I'll be honest. The revenge plot is completely forgotten about in favour of trying to get the girl back. In fact the whole cannibal thing doesn't play too much of a part after the drug trip either. It also never seeks to answer any questions, which is fine, but when the world this all takes place in is far more fascinating than the actual story, the lack of answers becomes frustrating. Where does Comfort get all of its comforts from? Who is The Screamer? Why does no-one kill The Hermit while he's just wandering around the wasteland? If Comfort has access to food and water, why are the Cannibals cannibals? If all of The Dream's women are pregnant, but there are no children, what happens to them? Or has The Dream only been in power for less than nine months? If Comfort has guns and ammo aplenty, why are the Cannibals still alive at all?

There are other questions too, that pose more as plot holes than straight-up world building cock-blocks. Like why is Arlen so accepting of Miami Man despite him being responsible for her lost limbs? Why does she willingly help him when she could just go back to Comfort and stay there where he can't get her? And why is there a subtle romance hinted at between them? I mean big props to Momoa and Suki Waterhouse for managing to get across a sense of desire and affection between them without a single word - and I really liked it for that - but narratively it made no sense (or maybe that was the point, hurr hurr).

Acting is a mixed bag in all. Suki Waterhouse is at times great and at times awful. The movie's lack of dialogue definitely works in her favour, as she gets to look pretty in the desert in skimpy shorts the whole time. The emotions and feelings she manages to convey without words is good, but as soon as she opens her mouth I couldn't help but cringe. Bad accent, badly delivered, and badly written. Momoa manages to encompass the more brooding side of his musculature quite well, and the chemistry he shares with Waterhouse is commendable for sure. Giovanni Ribisi is criminally underused. He appears about twice, muttering about some "thing" that he can't find. That's it. Keanu Reeves gets a potentially tantalising role as The Dream, but it's never capitalised on by the story. Nonetheless what we see of The Dream is a man of wisdom who abuses his power just enough not to be an antagonist. Jim Carrey is unrecognisable. Didn't even realise it was him until well after the movie finished, but his character was definitely one of the biggest highlights of the entire movie, despite not uttering a single word.

Stylistically The Bad Batch is a winner through-and-through though. It's a slowly paced movie that prefers to sit in the moment. There's a lot of desert-scape shots, as we watch people walk around the desert (or drive golf carts), but even from the confines of Comfort and the Cannibals there's some interesting cinematography. With dialogue to a minimum, it's down to the cinematography to tell the story, and it does a brilliant job of conveying who's who, what they stand for, and what's going on in the story, and ultimately that's the most important thing for cinematography to get right. It's use of practical effects throughout deserves mention as well. While most the time it can make it feel like a cheap student film, they somehow managed to make the amputation clean and believable without the use of CGI, and for that I only have endless praise.

Sonically the movie is really good as well, barring that terribly narrated drug trip. The use of ambient sound really brings the otherwise vacant world to life, from the sound of things to the subtle white noise of the wind. The music is also surprisingly good too. The selection of popular and dance music is an odd mix that somehow works. From the synthwave-influenced Black Light Smoke and Chilled by Nature, to more pop-y Federale and Culture Club, it creates a sonic identity to the movie that makes it stand out and be individually enjoyable as well.

The Bad Batch is not a movie for everyone. It's extremely slow-paced, with a story that meanders around aimlessly in order to pretentiously tell us something about the world that we already knew. I saw it described somewhere as like if someone went to Burning Man and thought 'I want to make a movie of that'. It has some great cinematography and some great music, and some surprisingly good acting from the big name stars, but it's not particularly a movie I'd ever opt to see again. I give it a middling 5/10.
8 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Slowly but surely: one of the most original films of the decade.
alihandemiral6 February 2018
If I was asked to describe The Bad Batch in a classic Hollywood motto, I'd have to go with "Mad Max meets Jim Jarmusch". I only began watching because I am a fan of Jason Momoa, but after the ten minute mark, I knew this film was going to be good. First off all, this is not for people who want constant action and a fast plot. The film progresses slowly but surely; there are scenes that do not contribute to the main plot, and characters whose developments are left incomplete. Moreover, Both the directing style of Amirpour and the plot suggests spontaneity. Therefore the whole film may be described as "a post-apocalyptic ramble".

The remarkable cast is led by the amazing future star Suki Waterhouse, Jason Momoa, Giovanni Ribisi, Keanu Reeves and an uncredited Jim Carrey as "The Hermit". The leading cast's portayal of their rambling characters blends perfectly with the spontaneous plot of the film.

Lastly, the soundtrack of the film is one of the most beautiful I encountered in a long while. Great work.
14 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Lil_Git1 October 2017
Warning: Spoilers
Wow, where do I begin? The first 20 minutes or so were promising but then the movie starts to fail fast and never recovers. I only watched it because of Keanu but right now Keanu you've betrayed me man, it's a total mess of a movie.

It seems like it desperately wants to be Mad Max with a touch of Beauty and the Beast, and most definitely it wants to be seen as a "cult classic" but it never will be.

The whole movie could have been done in 20 - 30 minutes. Take the first part of the movie, up to where she does that thing that causes Jason Momoa to come looking for her, delete the rest...The End..that would have been a great movie.

The acting skills seem off, the lead actress has the personality of a tissue, no one really seems to sound convincing when they deliver their lines, if they even have lines because there really isn't that much dialogue, which would be fine but they don't convey anything via body language or facial expressions either...I didn't care about any of the characters..well maybe the little girl but even then not really....the only good thing about this movie was Jason Momoas gorgeous physique. Just film that dude for a couple hours, walking round the desert without the pretend story line and it would be loads better than this movie.
14 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Defiantly a movie you must see for yourself to decide.
sredwards-5261724 June 2017
Excellent sound track to this mostly non violent dystopian tale of a girl out of place amongst the out of place. Fans of the genre who enjoy a break from standard box office type fair should enjoy this film, thou it may disappoint some. Defiantly a movie you must see for yourself to decide. Avoid if you expect an action packed blood thirsty movie.

With almost a touch of misanthropy Arlen (Suki Waterhouse) navigates her way around a sparsely populated desert type area after an unfortunate event. We are not quite sure if she wants love or revenge. Keep your eyes peeled for Jim Carrey if you can recognize him.
33 out of 61 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Slow even when watched on Fast Forward
mzand-751-53957226 June 2017
The negative reviews of this indulgent, self-important drudgery of a film are all accurate. Don't waste your time watching this even for free. Unsympathetic characters acted badly in a visually static hellhole are add up to nothing.

Save your attention and precious time for something more worthwhile, like re watching the latest Mad Max film. Now that's genius.
22 out of 39 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Close to the worst ever? Yeah pretty close
Spunnrecord29 June 2017
Anyone rating this over a 4 is involved with the film. It's just not a good movie, the acting isn't acting and the script was most likely written on dennys napkins at 3am. People claiming there's an age correlation, saying the younger viewer explains the terrible reviews. Much like your fat body is what makes u look fat and not the dress ('you', in a general sense), it's just plain a bad movie. Age has zero to do with it, taste however is a factor. This just another nonsensical self indulgent rubbish where hipsters claim "if you don't like it then you don't understand it". No, no, we fully understand it and we understand it's terrible lol. I'm sure the writer and director is a great and talented person and hopefully her next venture will be better. I'd be extremely surprised if the director or any of the actors believe this to be a quality film. This is the type of film where in a few years actors will magically not have it listed on their IMDb page. Take Carry for instance, do you think he'd be rolling the same if the movie was actually good? If it was even mildly good he'd be all over the show making sure everyone knew he was dbag#13 in the film. I mean this is one those films that's so bad in every single aspect that anyone giving marks above 3-4 is related or a part of the film. It's so transparent it's not even cool. Please, we the community of actual viewers beg you to stop skewing the stats for personal gain. To be the best you have to beat the best. Fake reviews, not cool man. Not cool at all. P.s. I do subscribe to the reality that one or two of the positive reviews are legit but c'mon, let's get real here. That is all, please carry on.
48 out of 95 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Most boring movie to come out in a long time
diggler_inc25 June 2017
I decided to check this out only because Keanu Reeves was in it. It wasn't worth it.

This movie is just gross and puts out negative vibes but worst of all, it is extremely boring.

It does a poor job of ripping off other movies and tries really hard to be "art" but comes off as dull and pretentious.

This is possibly the worst movie I have ever seen.

Do yourself a favor and skip this garbage.
26 out of 48 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Fantastic Light Displays, Beautiful People and other Charms
Raven-19692 October 2016
Desert exile, a cult leader with an armed and pregnant harem and roaming gangs of hungry cannibals, are only some of the worries for solitary Arlen. She is very resourceful and open minded though. She manages to make her way on a gnawed leg, to a frontier settlement of free dealing outlaws. Arlen attempts to lay low in this town with an apparently abandoned little girl and her pet rabbit. With the cult leader showing interest in the pair and a burly cannibal searching for his little girl, Arlen is faced with some difficult choices. There are truths she needs to find for herself.

There are glimmers of Amirpour's amazing previous film, A Girl Walks Home Alone at Night, including funky music, fantastic light displays, beautiful people, charming spontaneity, skateboards, gorgeous hot pants and grisly encounters. Keanu Reeves makes a delightful appearance as the harem loving cult leader and Jim Carrey as an impulsive and sunburnt hermit. I wish there was more depth to the dialogue. Long pauses work better with excellent actors, and the stars of the film do not have this range yet. Seen at the 2016 Toronto International Film Festival.
66 out of 138 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
ffs-9365723 October 2017
Truly dire movie. The first 10 mins are shocking and quite gripping, but after that it loses the plot - only that there is no plot to lose. Seriously, there is nothing in terms of a story. Instead, there are aimless wonderings around the dessert by characters, and long, long shots, and long scenes where very little actually happens. There is no proper dialogue to speak of, and the one conversation that the film has is about sh*t....literally it's about sh*t. How? Why? What was the purpose of this movie? How did anyone actually think this would be a good idea?

The only good thing, is the main actress, who is quite cute and watchable.
12 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Wow could have been so much better
kaefab24 June 2017
There are 4 big name actors in this movie first off Jim Carey who back in the 90 along Tommy Lee Jones where big, they where everywhere and they won pretty much everything and now he is reduced to playing small part in movies like this what happen to him? Keanu Reeves ? the matrix speed John Wick what are you doing in this? honestly.........

Jason Momoa conan aquaman but he is known for doing a few awful b movies i guess a paycheck is a paycheck still he is super fit in this movie an inspiration for me at 45.

Diego Luna starting to make a name for himself star wars rogue one, elysium but man what where you thinking taking a role in this awful movie.

There is almost no dialogue in this movie, if it was handled correctly it could have been great, a good story and script.

The base story was a great ideal poorly executed. Its walking and more walking useless talk then more walking and so on.... it makes no sense at all.

Skip this one even arrow in the head gave it a 3 so you know its bad.
19 out of 35 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Burning woman.
js-6613017 July 2017
Hoo boy. This movie requires some effort. What starts off as a brutal exploitation flick, surely to weed out the meek, evolves into an absorbing treatise on primal human conditions in a barren, deserted wasteland.

While Ana Lily Amipour's sophomore effort contains pulpy roots, littered with outrageous characters and circumstances, it also tackles some grand topics. Our white trashy heroine Arlen is unceremoniously turfed out of society to fend for herself behind a Texan fence, where lawlessness and depravity are the rule of the day. She is soon captured by a tribe of cannibals, and mayhem ensues.

Dystopian futures as these don't seem all that far fetched any more. "The Bad Batch" may serve as a warning, but chiefly it serves as dusty entertainment. Much like the "Mad Max" franchise, it is a world full of crazies scrambling to survive in glorious sunbaked vistas.

Sporting a primo porn stash, Keannu Reeves pops up as a bizarro, robe clad cult leader. Giovanni Ribisi slips in several rambling, asylum escapee diatribes, but it is an unrecognizable Jim Carrey who absolutely steals the movie as a wizened bag man.

"The Bad Batch" has the art junk, lost inhibition, drug and music orgy feel of Burning Man, and because it's stealthily asking tough questions, has much more going for it than the cheap veneer may indicate.
33 out of 67 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Criminally underrated cannibalism and murder.
erwinh99326 June 2017
Ever since I've watched "A Girl Walks Home Alone at Night (2014)" this movie has been on my radar. Ana Lily Amirpour is clearly one of the most interesting new directors out there and her next projects should be anticipated. I'm glad to see big name actors like Keanu Reeves and Jim Carrey in her movie, they play their parts brilliantly and will pull a bigger audience. Suki Waterhouse and Jason Mamoa are the main characters and keep you interested the whole way through, but the star of the show is director Ana Lily Amirpour. Her visuals and world creating are definitely the biggest pull of the movie.

This movie will probably be watched by the wrong audiences, because of famous actors in it. It's a visual art movie which can be enjoyed by anyone, but is definitely not mainstream. A lot of reviews I see about the movie being to slow are clearly that mainstream voice. It's kind of funny that the people who love "slow" artsy movies have to get through the gory cannibalism and murder scenes. You can see how that can split audiences.

The style reminds me of Quentin Tarantino in the sense that the art-house and exploitation genre are combined a little. The big difference between Ana Lily Amirpour and Tarantino is that Tarantino can catch that mainstream audience as well. If I knew more about why movies are successful I could tell you why, but I can't help but feel that it has something to do with the fact that this movie has a female director. At least fans of good movies will make this a cult movie, but I really think it deserves more.

I cant wait for the next movie Ana Lily Amirpour makes.

(9/10) Would recommend.
68 out of 153 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews

Recently Viewed