Mickey 17

Mickey 17 is a movie that's not bad but not always good.

Robert Pattinson nails an American accent, which to be honest is totally unnecessary given the amount of different nationalities involved!

British features strongly.

But anyway he does well. And he's always great in the role of all Mickey's.

The supporting cast are fine except for in my opinion a terrible character in Mark Ruffalo's Kenneth Mars and yes I know what he was going for. It's just pretty bad.

The story isn't bad, it's decent enough for a sci fi movie. But it doesn't nail any political or social matters like Parasite or Okja, both of which are absolutely brilliant films.

And therefore a straight sci fi actioner could've been better here.

Although admittedly there's some pretty funny moments.

I sound disappointed which is probably the right emotion. I was expecting something really good but this had too much of Okja and Snowpiercer type action and acting to be unique.

I don't want Bong Joon-Ho to become a parody of himself like Wes Anderson. I believe he's capable of much more.

I have absolutely loved all of his past efforts even Barking Dogs Never Bite, which I think is hilarious.

So that's 3 American made movies all very similar in tone. Definitely time for something more.

Anyway it's worth a watch but this is not a classic.

Nothing incredibly groundbreaking, and a little heavy handed with the satire, but a fun ride and well shot, with all of the "I shouldn't laugh at this but I am" that you'd expect

I am guilty, as many others will be, of comparing this to Parasite. Doing so is doing the movie a disservice. From Bong Joon Ho I was not expecting a silly black comedy that would have the whole theater laughing. Accept and enjoy it and you'll have a great time.

Although I felt like I was getting slapped in the face with the Trump satire, it still hit pretty well and got a good few laughs out of me.

After all this, I'm still wondering what the sauce is about...

I saw a preview for this a while ago and it prompted me to read the book, Mickey 7, before seeing the movie. Generally, I like to have my own vision while reading instead of having the movie playing in my head. This was a mistake. Not only is the book waaaayyy more fluid, in depth, and loyal to the sci-fi genre, but it was actually enjoyable to consume. The movie, notsomuch.

Beginning with the title, Mickey 17. I don't know why they felt they needed to add TEN extra iterations of Mickey Barnes, but yknow, Hollywood or whatever. Fine. The movie starts basically as the book does, for about five minutes. It then starts to stray away from the original story in ways that absolutely baffled me. The commander in the book is an ACTUAL military commander and so the adversarial relationship between him and Mickey makes sense because of that. This whole religious nut senator bit played by Mark Ruffalo is so cringey and even Toni Collette along side him can't save the scenes they manage to over and under act at the same time. Robert Pattinson is good as Mickey 17; however, his relationship with self isn't as antagonistic as the movie plays it, and you end up losing sympathy for him when it gets downright mean for no reason.

Other reviewers have complained about the "expendable" angle (ethics, morals, possible usefulness to society, etc) not being explored enough... for some reason this is where the writers decided to stay true to the book - the colonizer plot line. It played out better in the book; here, it just feels meh.

Point being, I probably would have enjoyed this more if I hadn't liked the book so much and went into viewing it with above-average expectations. Not awful by any means, but definitely didn't live up to its potential.

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.

Mickey 17 is such a wasted opportunity and for me the first big disappointment of 2025. It's 140' of nothing! A movie that constantly talks but doesn't actually say anything of value. It just has all these big ideas that end up nowhere and at times its only saving grace is some moments of levity that are really funny.

It's a science fiction movie that never explores its themes. What does it say about cloning? About colonization? It touches these subjects, sure, but it's so shallow.

Robert Pattinson is fine but I think he's wasted in this. All the different versions of Mickey are also supposed to have different personalities but aside from 17 and 18 (as seen in the trailer) the previous 16 all act the same, even though the movie says that have different characteristics. But even that doesn't matter because we never get to see all the different Mickeys aside from a quick montage.

Also, let me say that the use of narration in this movie is egregious. It doesn't enhance the experience, it's just filler to cover the silence.

Finally, it's so boring! Boring visuals, boring sci-fi elements, boring creature designs, no unique aesthetic, no nothing.