I never thought I would say this, but I am now steadily considering watching the Twilight series.
The casting of Robert Pattinson of Edward Cullen (as well as his relationship with co-star Kristen Stewart) was thankfully not the first I had seen or heard of him (he of course was Cedric Diggory in the Potterverse), but it was not until the last few years in films like The Lighthouse (2019), The Batman (2022), and (in voice over) The Boy and the Heron (2023), that I realized the obvious truth: he is a rather proficient actor.
Though not as fierce as he was in The Boy and the Heron, Pattinson still is just as unrecognizable as the titular Mickey 17. Based off of the book Mickey 7 by Edward Ashton, the story is set in the future where humans have basically developed a way of cloning. Those who volunteer to be cloned are called “expendables”, and are able to use their recycled dead bodies, revived with the same memories and personality (via a download). Mickey is one of those volunteers, and we learn quickly he is the 17th version.
Mickey and his friend Timo (Steven Yeun) have their reasons for fleeing earth (where the cloning tech is illegal), as they follow the lead of the kooky Kenneth Marshall (Mark Ruffalo) and his equally insane wife Ylfa (Toni Collete) to a frozen planet called Nilfheim. Along the way, Mickey quickly falls for Nasha (Naomi Ackie).
While the film is not entirely technically original (since it is based off of a book), I still will stray from plot points since there is still enough originality here for the viewer to find out by themselves. Clearly, this is mainly due to director Bong Joon-Ho, whose last movie, the Oscar winning sensation Parasite, did pretty well all things considered. While this is only the fourth movie of his I have seen to date (along with Parasite, Okja, and Snowpiercer), there are still aspects of each film that are similar (not the least of which is that all are purely watchable to some extent).
There is also a sense that the actors (or at least one of them) can have a riot with the material given them. Snowpiercer has standouts like Tilda Swinton and Okja had Jake Gyllenhaal, as well as Swinton (Parasite just had so stellar acting overall that it was hard to pinpoint just one). In Mickey 17, while Pattison is indeed having fun, the clear stand out to me is Mark Ruffalo. It did not take long to realize that he is clearly doing some version of Elon Musk mixed with Donald Trump (two people Ruffalo clearly detests). Toni Collete also has great moments as well (mainly any time she is talking about the “sauce”). I need to see these two in other movies very soon.
While the visuals are obviously compelling (the “creepers” reminded me of a mix between a Roly-Poly and the sandworms from Dune), the film does indeed suffer a bit from its length. The start of the film in particular does spend a little too much time on Mickey (as the narrator) reciting all that transpired before he got to where he is now. Also, while the ending of the film is indeed more action packed, it does drag on for a bit, despite still being endlessly watchable.
Parents, the movie is R for good reason, as there is swearing and violence (most to humourous effect). While there is no nudity in a sexual way (we do see rear nudity,), there is a good amount of talk about it in the film (mainly the part where Mickey and Nasha are “drawing out” their plans for sexual escapades), as well as close ups of their faces when they begin sleeping together.
Rather recently, I was thinking about movies that directors have made following a Best Director Oscar win. It is hard to maintain a level of that excellence, but it has been done (Frank Capra went from You Can’t Take it with You to Mr. Smith goes to Washington, William Friedkin went from The French Connection to The Exorcist, and Francis Ford Coppola was just on a level unheard of with his films in the 1970s). Of course, the opposite is true: I am sure Spielberg had his reasons for going with a Jurassic Park sequel after Schindler’s List, and I have yet to see Cimino’s Heaven’s Gate, despite what I have heard about it being a stone cold disaster.
All of those were just off the top of my head, but I would still bet a shiny nickel that Mickey 17 would be somewhere in the middle. No, it is not as refined or polished as Parasite, but there is still enough pulp, humor, heart, and pathos to make the film gratifying.
Not expendable at all.
Overall:
Nothing else to say 