Mickey 17

First, the film is beautiful and enjoyable to watch. They did a good job in terms of cinematography, music, and acting. All the actors were good, especially Robert Pattinson, but they failed in several aspects, which led to a lower rating and a decline in quality.

To be honest, I had difficulty understanding the film's story and message because it dealt with several topics, such as political rulers and how they are controlled, the meaning of cloning, and whether it is ethical or not, and several other topics. However, as the film progressed, we were unable to focus on all the topics and finish it.

There are so many characters in the film, and if you can remember more than three names, I salute you. I only remember Mickey, his girlfriend Nasha, and his dirty friend Timo. To be honest, we weren't given enough time to get attached to the characters and see their development throughout the film. Most of them, if not all of them, are the same from beginning to end, except for the few.

Director Bong Joon-ho presented a very impressive Skyfall atmosphere mixed with Dark comedy, and it was good.

Robert Pattinson excels in every film and shows his talent for acting, and the two characters he played were wonderfully portrayed.

Finally, the film is very entertaining, but the negatives affected the final rating. However, the film is worth watching.

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.

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.

Mickey 17 is like strictly okayish and that's a huge disappointment given the expectations!

Bong joon-ho returning in director's chair after an Oscar, with Robert pattinson, a sci-fi genre and huge budget, it could have been so much better! But this is just okay.

Pattinson's acting is great, even the premise and structure were very juicy. But for some reason Bong joon-ho doesn't fully capitalise it. Atleast the crazy energy of Okja would have elevated the screenplay, but it was mostly bland and trying to be politically aware.

Especially with that trailer being so much fun, the bar was really high, but this doesn't even comes close.

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.