Opiniones de usuarios

I've been looking forward to this movie for a while now and I have to say I was a little let down. The action is really good but the plot and script were not so good, especially Wahlberg's character. He wouldn't stop talking in these OCD ramblings as they tried to make him look like a gifted mind that is on overdrive 24/7. He came off like an old Dennis Leary except not funny and more rambling.

Despite some of the over analytical or negative reviews that came before, this is a good film.

Some sharp twists that keep you guessing, with very current story lines & technology for 2018.

A very strong cast, with very strong characters. Yes, Mark W is in your face a lot, but that is the personality of the guy in the film. Kinda reminded me of his brother's character in Blue Bloods.

This kept me & my wife on the proverbial edge of our seats until the very end.

Was it an epic? Of course not - it's an action film.

My only complaint - which is why I didn't give it an 8 - was a somewhat unsatisfying ending. It left too many things hanging. So now I am waiting for Mile 44 - the sequel!

Mile 22 (2.5 out of 5 stars).

Mile 22 is an adrenaline rush action thriller that leaves you feeling a little exhausted from its shaky cam, rushed plot, and poor dialogue. Peter Berg direction is on steroids with his quick fast editing cuts in every action scene that makes Jason Bourne movies or Michael Bay's action seem more still. Which is not a good thing for Mile 22. Peter Berg does build some intensity that keeps your heart pumping in such a short run time with the film. He did great in Lone Survivor, Deepwater Horizon, and Patriots Day. Mile 22 fails to be an exciting great movie.

The plot was convoluted. It follows James Silva (Mark Wahlberg) who is a paramilitary operative in an organization called Overwatch. When his team invades what they think is a Russian KGB hideout house and the mission goes sideways. A year or so later, James and his team are assigned to escort Li Noor (Iko Uwais) 22 miles to the airport for extraction. Cause Li Noor has valuable intel that can be life threatening to the nation. While on their transport they get invaded by assassins, and another paramilitary group that will stop at nothing to kill Li Noor.

I thought the plot and direction of the movie was a little lost on what it was trying to be. Story wise it kind of sucked when there was barely much of a story. You have a fast talking James Silva, who can explode with his mania personality at any given moment. He is hard with his team which they can barely keep up. Especially, Alice (Lauren Cohan) who is struggling with a divorce and custody battle. But James informs her that she is distracted and will lose sight of their job. Then, there is a sub plot of a Russian terrorist that are on a plane with an agenda as they watch surveillance of this escort on Li Noor. And than Li Noor, who has info of the terrorist having a biohazard material that is an attack waiting to happen. The film has a twist that gives you the chills and a cliffhanger ending that leaves for a sequel.

The direction sucked with this movie. The cinematography work was consist of shaky camera movement and fast editing. The fight scene with Iko Uwais attacking others was confusing. The shootouts were loud, and a bang but it gets very repetitive throughout. James and his team are on a long 22 mile journey that is consist of cars blowing up, shoot outs, running into a building with more shoot outs and close combat fighting. And repeat. I like most Peter Berg films. Yes, he does well building up the intensity with the movie. But this one does get a little boring with its narration when it cuts between action scenes to James Silva being interviewed on what went wrong with their mission. Or when it cuts to surveillance videos of the action from the drone or street cameras. It can be annoying.

Mark Wahlberg was great though as the fast talking and maniac character. John Malkovich was okay too with sitting behind the monitors watching the action unfold. Lauren Cohan was okay as well with hands on action. Iko Uwais is like the next Jet Li or Jackie Chan when it comes to fighting. And Ronda Rousey barely had much to do with some brief action scenes.

Overall, Mile 22 is a bad film. Mark Wahlberg was good and yes the film could be a start of a franchise. Peter Berg's fast editing direction that gets lost with its action scenes between quick camera movements to surveillance cameras can be tedious after awhile. The poor plotting that needs to have a twist to make it better just feels like the film did not have a story at all. I was a little left disappointed and the film is forgettable.

Mile 22 has a simple goal in its script, maybe too simple, get this man from point A to point B. The script itself has a great twist at the end, but for the rest of the movie it's lazy. We get to know everything about Mark Wahlberg's characters through 2 minutes of exposition, which is Michael Bay-type lazy. And for the rest of the movie he doesn't really change, nor do any of the other characters. The action is entertaining, but it is shaky and quickly cut together, and not like Paul Greengrass, more like Columbiana. I thought Hollywood was done with this trope of cutting quickly to hide the action, John Wick and Atomic Blonde showed us that. But this movie does it again. Overall, the movie is just meh, not great, not the worst, just meh. And I expected better from Peter Berg.

As I read reviews for summer action movies, reviews that position these movies as something that they are not; these are popcorn, leave your brain at the door action movies, I'm left to assume that these less than honest reviews are trolling reviews.

Mile 22, The Meg, John Wick... do what they are produced to do; entertain regardless of physics, gravity or good sense.

Ebert knew this; review a movie for its purpose and audience.

Mile 22 does what it was made to do; to distract you from your everyday life. Serious it is not, full of gun fu, car chases, violence and revenge, it's nothing new, if you're looking for this type of movie you won't be disappointed.

I saw this movie last night, and I was hoping to be entertained, but I walked away disappointment.

I think the acting was a bit too much and strange, especially from Wahlberg. He's a bit too brash and I couldn't connect with him.

Cohan's acting was pretty good on the big screen, quite a difference from Walking Dead.

I am pleased to see that Rousey getting to act and have more lines to work on. I think she has a future.

IF they are going to make a sequel out of it...all I have to say is, Calm down, Wahlberg...

Trailer looked great, but the actual movie is just an awkward disappointment. This was weird, coming from director Peter Berg but I don't completely blame him. The writing is just awkward. Mark Wahlberg plays a super dedicated, grossly over-the-top special ops type guy who is just constantly going on rants to give intensity to the movie but it just comes off as weird, unnecessary, and confusing. Lauren Cohan is the most frustrated divorced mother ever. Finally, they cast Ronda Roussey only to give her ZERO fight scenes and barely any lines....great.

The star of the movie is the Iko Uwais character, with amazing fight scenes with perhaps too many fast changing angles so you cannot exactly follow what's happening. Action scenes were almost decent but the overall plot was so foolish it turned me off.

Overall the movie is a good action movie and I hope the desired franchise happens

At the US embassy in a South East Asian country, a man turns up offering secrets with enormous benefits to the US. Now a crack team of CIA agents must get him out of the city so that he can be extracted by air. The journey will be incredibly dangerous.

Incredibly bad. Plot is very basic and is really just a spine to hang heaps of explosions and action sequences on. Throw in every military and action cliché and now it is very familiar and predictable.

Worst of all, you have a script written entirely to enable Mark Wahlberg to act ultra alpha, complete with trite dialogue, aggressive posturing and basically behaving like a powerful, know-it-all, self-important idiot. His performance and character are off-the-charts irritating.

Avoid.

Well, sure it aint oscar material here, and it won't be getting any prizes for originality, but for what the movie is supposed to be, it is surely not deserving anything less than a 6, i have seen endless 1 -3 star reviews, what's up with that?, i mean seriously? have this people even watched the same movie, or are we just lobbying right now? because you have tones of absolute garbage movies here on IMDB being rated 9 and 10's deceveing people and on the opposite end, you have ok movies being rated 1 and 2's.

The Mile 22 is as expected an action packed movie, it is fast paced, has a decent plot, it is somewhat realistic, (if u compare with the likes of other recent action movies like let us say, Skyscraper) and yet, people are just throwing 1 and 2's like if this was some sort of sharknado B movie of the action movies, Jesus people, rate movies seriously, what is wrong with u people these days???

I thought the film was good! There's a lot of action and that's what matters when you plan to see an action film. Reviewers are hard!

Just got back from the world premiere of Mile 22 in Westwood, Los Angeles, CA, at the Fox Village Theater on August 9, 2018.

Overall thoughts: the action was brutal and fun to watch at times, aside from the direction, which I"ll get to later (special shoutout to Iko Uwais for the fantastic martial arts choreo sequences), and the whole film had a highly rhythmic pace to it that was accentuated by Mark Wahlberg's James Silva's habitual rubber-band-wrist-snapping.

Unfortunately, those are really the only good parts of the movie.

The direction was sloppy; this movie transports me back to those days when "good action" was considered to be the camera being in the cast's personal space and cutting 5 shots in 2 seconds. So many quick shots happen you can't even tell what the hell is going on in a single room because you can't see anything other than some blurry hand rushing across the screen.

There is literally no character development and no resolution to any of the conflicts in the film. None. Every conflict that occurs in the film isn't solved, either because the film is too short to be able to cover any exposition for it, or because the film wants to shamelessly set up a sequel (let alone, a trilogy) to help flesh out this half-assed story that the audience is apparently supposed to care about. The film ends on a cliffhanger (I won't say what that cliffhanger really is, mostly because I'm actually still confused about it) that leaves the fate of some characters unknown and the audience wondering "That's it?" It's like the films thinks that somehow the audience wants more when the characters were barely explored and the action was generic at best.

Our characters begin flawed and end flawed; Mark Wahlberg's witty, brash, and comedic portrayal of Silva stays witty, brash, and comedic throughout the movie; in fact, it seems the character is only capable of responding in that way in the face of adversity and near-death experiences. Lauren Cohen's character, Alice, has a storyline focused on her personal life, evaluating her strained relationship with her ex-husband and her love for her daughter (the latter two have a whopping 5 minutes of screentime) that is never resolved or affected by the storyline of the film, or vice versa. Iko Uwais' character has motives only explored by a single line uttered by him, and nothing else, and we're supposed to accept that and be emotionally invested? The characters are given a backstory but not given the time or investment to tell audiences why they should care about these characters, and so when the cliffhanger occurs we're just left confused and annoyed that no characters learn anything through this 22-mile journey and no conflicts are resolved.

The film is also structured in such a way that it somehow is predictable; interspersed with the action are scenes of Wahlberg's Silva being interrogated during a government investigation, providing narration to the confusing action and even foreshadowing to the "big" cliffhanger and twist of the film, along with the suggestion that "something goes wrong" with this mission. It's been done before, and it makes the film so predictable.

The great thing about watching this on the premiere was I got free popcorn and soda, and I got to hear Mark Wahlberg stand up in the theater and shout "Can we start the movie?"

I actually thoroughly enjoyed this movie. At times it appeared as if they had intended for Tarantino to direct it though, especially in regards to the delivery of many of the lines. From a movie like this, you expect gratuitous violence, but the dialogs were cheesy on occasion. Having worked with some special forces operators in the past, one of their archetypes is someone who takes themselves way too seriously, as mark's character does.

The pacing of the movie was so fast it lent itself to a second viewing, which was more enjoyable than the first. I think this film may have had more success if it was 20 minutes longer or so, to space out the cheesy parts of the script. I do believe that the quick pacingplays into mark's character's ADHD significantly. I thought the action was well choreographed for the most part as well.

Saw the movie tonight and while it was full of action as I was expecting, it left me thinking what the hell?

It had a decent enough plot but I don't know. I can't explain it too well.

Ronda Rousey was underutilized, language was as expected but a little much.

I don't know if I'll see it again. A little bit of a let down

I walked into this movie with no expectations Left amazed on the screen play and the story. The acting was ok. Marky mark Did a Good job.

10 minutes in and mark wahlbergs character has alread spoken more than I have in 42 years , totally confused with what is happening and therefore didn't bother watching it after that , irritating film to say the least

Ok, let me write the good things first.

• iko's fights/choreography.
• iko's character, there is still so much to dig in

The bad things :

• the writing/script is awful. Many character isn't convincing or wasted. The only character that is deep enough is only iko.
• bad angle and shaky cam.
• bad editing, really disrupt the flow of fights and story.

So, if you are following iko's film like the raid, merantau etc, you'll be disappointing with this movie. But, actually this movie still have some potensial for a trilogy

Seriously, he just yells. A lot. Really fast. And then you're just like "what?"

What a mess...and a major step down for the Mark Wahlberg/Peter Berg collaborations. This is easily the worst film I have seen in the year 2018. It is a testament to the worst qualities filmmakers can bring to the modern action film, ranked right next to such migraine inducing insults like "Tak3n" and "Resident Evil: The Final Chapter".

The story is very basic and B-grade: an elite team of off the book operatives have to escort a whistleblower 22 miles to an airstrip to escape his corrupt Southeast Asian nation. If they do so, he will provide the location of a deadly weapon the U.S. wants to desperately find. Trouble is that everyone is going to try to kill them along the way. Despite that painstakingly simple premise, they manage to make the expositional buildup overly complicated. You are thrown into a conflict you don't understand over an objective that you don't feel the magnitude of. This is complete with characters referring to things that already happened with a previous mission that failed which we didn't witness. The exposition being confusing is something the filmmakers must have noted themselves because right before the escort begins, John Malkovich's character literally breaks down the entire setup AGAIN to make sure you, in fact, get it. That is lazy writing and shows that the filmmakers think that the audience is either stupid or is a victim of their own storytelling incompetence. The story is also told in "flashback" I guess as it keeps randomly cutting to Wahlberg's character retelling the event (more exposition for those that can't follow this basic premise...again) and also monologuing about random..."philosophical" things about special ops missions. Nothing he says is actually important. I think he is supposed to be trying to give the film a message or something like a wise man. He is no wise man though, he is just the movie equivalent to fortune cookies drunk on Jack Daniels mixed with Gatorade. Actually, this whole movie feels like a "Call of Duty" wet dream... written by those very annoying COD players that are 12 years old and are far too young to be playing a game meant for adults. There is also this constant cutting to some Russian characters. Based on the opening, you know that they have a purpose. The actual outcome of that purpose, however, is sort of like...."oh that's what the deal is....wait why do I care again?"

Then there are the characters: all of them are either unlikeable, uninteresting, or an unholy combination of both. The most consistent example is the film's lead Jimmy Silva as played by the usually reliable Mark Wahlberg. His character is like this super hyper thinking soldier that is way off on the mental spectrum. He is super intelligent and obsessive about everything around him and has to use a rubber band on his arm which he pulls and slaps on his wrist to keep him calm. This is could be interesting, but instead, the character is an awkward embarrassment. He is a complete jerk to everyone around him, talks way too fast, and likes to just get right in everyone's faces to yell and complain like a whiny, little baby that lost his raddle. He is a complete a-hole and I honestly wished somebody would just punch him in the face. But his character seems to get off on violence so...perhaps that could just make things worse. He is a horrible character with an embarrassing performance by Marky Mark...right next to the "The Happening".

Finally, there is the critical sin: the editing and cinematography. This is some the poorest, most incomprehensible action I have seen in quite awhile. Every shootout and fight scene is compromised by ADHD cuts to so many shaky cam angles over and over again. Furthermore, most of the camera work is shot very tight in either close-ups or medium shots. You never get a sense of geography. You never can tell where the "heroes" are in context to the enemy. You get the general sense that people are shooting bullets and that people are getting hit by said bullets. They have the guy from the "The Raid' films in here and they completely waste his talents in his TWO fight scenes. This man can do a whole fight in one shot and they insist on cutting shots every 0.5 seconds as if they are trying to hide poor choreography. But you can tell it's not!! You can tell that in better hands this would be amazing!!! And do not defend this movie's editing and camerawork as being "realistic". There are many directors that can pull this style off well. Heck, Peter Berg is one of them! Go watch "Lone Survivor", "Deepwater Horizon", and "Patriot's Day" because those are great examples done right. "Patriot's Day" contains one the best "realistic" shootouts I can remember in recent years. This is straight up garbage. This is why I praise a movie like "John Wick" for getting the action right. That's why "John Wick' is a 5-star movie in my book. If you think that the way they do the action in this film is good, I am sorry but you might have something seriously wrong with you. Bad taste...very bad. Screw this shaky cam crap! And that makes up half the movie...if not more.

Horrible movie. Want something similar that is good, check the 2004 S.W.A.T. movie. It has a very similar plot with better characters, buildup, and action. Need something more recent? Try "Sicario".

I'll keep this brief. I don't think people are getting this movie. I think Wahlberg played his part perfectly, when you consider who his character is. The whole cast delivered. Watching them in their moments was effective enough in developing the characters to drive the story. Excellent action sequences. The plot was somewhat predictable, but still satisfying to watch unfold. I'd recommend It. I've seen a lot of garbage lately, after which I felt like I'd wasted my time. This was not one of those cases. Say hello to your mother for me. ;)

In this film you will get acttion to the dime, the are shootouts and helicious fistfights to fulfill the needs of every action nerd. i felt this film ran away from its plot and time line, the editing are great but the scene shifts are like high on ritaline,so when the film is over,you sit there with a startled face...what really happened in this movie. i can recommend this for a nice get together in the couch.

Mark Wahlberg has starred in many fine films. Peter Berg has directed many fine films. Occasionally, the two have overlapped. This action opus is not an example of either. It's a bigger dud than any unexploded bomb Wile E. Coyote ever bought from Acme.

The premise had potential. After an opening SWAT-style raid on Russian infiltrators, Wahlberg and his team of CIA operatives head for Southeast Asia to try recovering stolen nuclear material that could fuel a batch of dirty bombs. When their tip from a local cop (Iko Uwais - Indonesia's Tony Jaa, who is Thailand's Jet Li, who is China's version of what Steven Seagal still THINKS HE IS) comes up empty, they wind up having to get him out of the country ASAP as his price for telling them where it is NOW. The title refers to the distance from the US Embassy to the evac airstrip which they must traverse against overwhelming opposition. The clock is running on that window, while local forces try to wrest Uwais from the Americans, and a big high-tech Russian plane flies above the action with its own mysterious agenda. That's a lot of plotlines for a hectic shoot- em-up flick. Too many.

On the plus side, the script does offer a couple of twists at the end, but one is to set up a sequel that should never be produced; or at least crafted by a new set of writers, editors and director. This one is swamped by dialog so bad that even a whiz like John Malkovich can't make his lines as the head honcho work. Most action sequences are so choppy and/or underlit that they're indecipherable. One should always be able to tell who is killing whom, to know whether each new corpse is a plus or a minus for our heroes. All told, this is one of the most missable films of the year.

Positives: A bit exaggerated but fairly accurate showing of special ops using high tech surveillance & control capabilities in taking out an international (Russian in this case, of course) spy/terrorist safe house in an attempt to stop some radioactive material (as usual or biological) from being dispersed into cities killing tens-of-thousands (why the Russians would be doing this makes no sense, or I misunderstood the storyline). Actually, not sure why anyone group would do this outside of Al-Qaeda, ISIS, etc. Main positives: An, at times, look at U.S. special ops in a not flattering light. Other positive was the twist at the end. Negatives: Killing, around 40 supposed baddies who may actually have been goodies given the twist at the end. Around a dozen goodies dispatched. Unknown number of innocents (as in most movies of this type a young girl is protected from the onslaught). Main negative: The lack of clarity w/possibly editing being a part of the problem, and also the script in delaying the twisty to the end. Conclusion: I think they're going for a sequel, but given the negatives they need to script to viewers who are fast food consumers - no thinking, quick & dirty.