Joseph Moser
Bong Joon-ho’s new film, “Mickey 17,” is very much a mixed bag, and that statement is painful to write. If you’re a science fiction fan, do not hesitate to see this movie at the Savoy.
It effectively conjures two future worlds and deploys some amusing plot twists and gags. It also features strong lead performances from two gifted actors, Naomi Ackie and Robert Pattinson. Unfortunately, fans of Bong, the Oscar-winning Korean auteur, are likely to be disappointed by his latest effort. In “Mickey 17,” I admired Bong’s ambition in writing and directing movies in a second language (this is his third English-language film), but I couldn’t help missing the mastery of tone and the nuanced social and political commentary of his great Korean films: ”Memories of Murder,” “The Host,” ”Mother,” and ”Parasite.”
Based on a novel by Edward Ashton, ”Mickey 17” has an intriguing concept. Gullible but well-intentioned everyman Mickey Barnes (Pattinson) attempts to evade a bloodthirsty loan shark by enlisting in a multiyear space mission as an “expendable,” a peon who can die and be regenerated by a giant printer. When Mickey is left for dead (again) while exploring a new planet, he unexpectedly survives, triggering escalating conflicts that ultimately pit him and his companion, Nasha (Ackie), against the demagogic leader of their mission, Kenneth Marshall (Mark Ruffalo).
What works best in the film are the dynamic performances of Robert Pattinson and Naomi Ackie. Anyone who has endured a dehumanizing job can recognize the dread and resignation in Pattinson’s face and feel the accompanying sinking feeling in the gut. As Nasha, Ackie counterbalances Pattinson’s haplessness with vivacity and resolve. While many of Mickey’s deaths are played for laughs, they nonetheless have an undercurrent of ennui and melancholy, and a scene in which Nasha consoles him during one of his most horrendous ordeals is the most affecting in the film. This kind of emotional stew is Bong’s stock-in-trade.
As is too often the case in “Mickey 17,” however, the inconsistent writing betrays the stronger elements. A mid-film twist involving Nasha’s relationship with Mickey proves unbelievable in the extreme, undercutting Ackie’s performance, and similarly, the extensive use of clunky, pedestrian voiceover by Pattinson hobbles the characterization of Mickey. Furthermore, the estimable Toni Collette and Steven Yeun are mostly wasted in cartoonish roles, and Mark Ruffalo’s villainous turn is far from his best work. At times, his scenery chewing recalls that of Jake Gyllenhaal in Okja — and that’s not a good thing. After seeing Ruffalo lech it up in “Poor Things” and run amok as a tyrant here, I’m ready for him to play another mensch or endearing loser.
Ruffalo serves as the principal vehicle for the film’s political satire, which is about a mile wide and a foot deep. For example, a repeated joke involving Collette (as Yylfa, Marshall’s wife) whispering ideas into his ear, essentially acting as his puppeteer, becomes tiresome the second time Bong uses it, and he doesn’t stop there. We could use more insightful satire during these dark days, but this film does not deliver it.
Another half-baked element is the portrayal of the mysterious worm-like Creepers that inhabit the icy planet that Mickey and company explore. To a large degree, the plot in the second half hinges on the Creepers, which are not particularly scary or compelling. We never get a clear sense of what makes them tick, and they recall similar extraterrestrial beings in better films.
Although my favorite films generally don’t fall into this genre, I enjoy sci-fi with a brain (“2001: A Space Odyssey,” “Solaris”) or a heart (“Blade Runner,” “La Jetée”). Therefore, after I watched “Mickey 17” draw to a close with a final bit of uninspired voiceover, I left wanting more compelling ideas and emotional depth. Bong’s films portray a lot of brutality, but to my mind, his hallmarks are earnest humanism and an abiding faith in the resilience and decency of working people. Those aspects of his work appear only intermittently throughout this plot-driven film, which simply seems like a project beneath his formidable talents.
When he accepted the Oscar for Best Director in 2020, Bong explained that some words from Martin Scorsese had helped mold him as a filmmaker: “The most personal is the most creative.” As one of contemporary cinema’s most famous and renowned auteurs, Bong is expected to put his personal touch on each of his films and reveal himself to us. No doubt, that’s a lot to ask. His fans waited over five years for his follow-up to “Parasite,” however, and from first shot to last, he is clearly not as personally invested in “Mickey 17” as he was in the masterpieces that established his reputation. Although this brilliant director is entitled to a mediocre outing, I’m hoping that “Mickey 17” remains his most expendable work.
“Mickey 17” is playing at the Savoy Theater in Montpelier through April 3.
