I wanted to like it for basically everything going for it - premise, Pattinson, Bong, sci-fi, ā€œoriginalā€ film - but came out pretty much as bitter as I have ever after a film. Iā€™m not one to do it, but I was close to walking out on it.

There are some touches of what the film could have been, some moments maybe. But on the whole it felt like a train wreck where Iā€™d bet that people knew on set that it just wasnā€™t going to work.

At some point I noticed there was a good amount of yelling from the actors (Iā€™m wondering if thatā€™s just me) and canā€™t help but suspect it was the director or actors trying to find energy in scenes that were struggling. Or maybe that happened in the edit. Then thereā€™s Ruffulo and Colletteā€™s satirical characters that just didnā€™t land and felt dumb and amateur (along with Poor Things, Iā€™m thinking Ruffulo is just not good and ā€œoriginalā€ film makers would do well to stay away)

All up, I think itā€™s embarrassingly bad, or ā€œobjectivelyā€ bad. No real depth, no coherence or pacing or well directed momentum, much of the comedy doesnā€™t land, characters and plot often feel like afterthoughts, and it got boring too.

I think this movie review (from a pleasantly non-hype yt channel) says it better than I can.

Whatā€™s funny is I think a lot of people want this to be good. For the sake of original, fun, quirky, satirical films (and honestly, me too). But are stuck confronting a film thatā€™s only making that situation worse not better and which represents the risks that studios need to accept not the successes they donā€™t understand).

Am I off here? I was pleased to find the review I linked as it seemed to match my thoughts.

EDIT - epilogue

And on the point about the fate of films ā€¦ I saw this in the cinema (somewhat in support of original films) and dragged a friend too.

It was expensive. There was bad behaviour in the cinema (people taking photos with flash of each other!). And the film was bad, IMO, in a way that I feel people should have been more honest about (like I said, I think people wanted this to be good). Plus my friend doesnā€™t trust my choice in movies any more.

Itā€™s really put me off going to the cinemas TBH. Iā€™ll see how I end up feeling over time, but I think this might have been the straw that broke my back on the whole cinema thing. In part, sadly, because I donā€™t get how the film was that bad.

  • ApollosArrow@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    Ā·
    1 day ago

    Echoing others that this isnā€™t a horrible movie. I enjoyed the ride. If you want to watch a better version of this movie, maybe try Moon.

    • rezz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      Ā·
      2 hours ago

      I struggled with Moon and actually thought it didnā€™t live up to the word-of-mouth hype at all. 6/10 for me.

      I think it was probably more momentous at the Sundance debut.

      • Ilandar@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        Ā·
        1 hour ago

        Yes I think itā€™s a much more impactful film if you watch it totally blind. Itā€™s a shame you didnā€™t get to experience that.

    • maegul (he/they)@lemmy.mlOPM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      Ā·
      23 hours ago

      Interesting comparison. I think Mickey 17 is trying to be something different from Moon, with some overlapping themes. Iā€™d say itā€™s more Starship Troopers and fifth element with moon-like themes.

      • ApollosArrow@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        Ā·
        22 hours ago

        They are definitely different movies. I find Starship Trooper and Fifth Elementā€™s humor to be a bit more of their time. The best thing I can compare it to quality wise would be like some of the Netflix movies that have come out in the last few years.