REVIEW: Mickey 17

In 2019, when Parasite captivated both audiences and critics, it became an instant classic. While the film awards season is often unpredictable and sometimes controversial, Parasite triumphed with three Oscars—four if you count the Best International Feature Film award for South Korea—and made history as the first non-English language film to win Best Picture. Director Bong Joon Ho accepted his awards and set the stage for what would come. With this remarkable achievement behind him, Bong faced the daunting challenge of creating a film that could meet the high expectations following the success of Parasite

Enter Mickey 17. The film follows Mickey Barnes (Robert Pattinson), a failed macaron shop owner who escapes his bloodthirsty loan sharks by signing up for a space colonization mission. The expedition, led by failed congressman Kenneth Marshall (Mark Ruffalo), aims to establish a human settlement on an icy planet called Niflheim. With no valuable skills to indicate on his application,  Mickey takes on the role of an “Expendable,” a job where his sole purpose is to die. Again and again. 

Body reprinting technology restores Mickey Barnes (Robert Pattinson) after dying

 

Equipped with technology that allows his body to be reprinted and his memories backed up onto a storage device, Mickey acts as a test dummy for the scientists on board. A rapid-fire montage throws us into the numerous deaths Mickey has undergone with forceful brutality as he repeatedly inhales viruses so the scientists can figure out a vaccine and are exposed to harmful levels of radiation to study how it impacts the human body.  In other words, he’s a lab rat modified with the wonders of technology. It’s with this concept that the movie blasts off, throwing us into the captivating realms of science fiction and the potential future that awaits us. It creates the question of to what extent people in power treat those below them as disposable, all in the name of pursuing a better future that doesn’t encapsulate everyone. 

Another standout thread in Mickey 17 is how it bluntly immerses the audience in the reality of American politics and the distinct privilege possessed by some, even in outer space. With cult-like followers sporting red caps, a flair for bravado, and a close brush with political downfall, Mark Ruffalo’s character, Kenneth Marshall, unmistakably echoes a certain president. Interestingly, the film wrapped production around 2023—meaning that many of its eerily familiar political parallels emerged before some real-world events had even unfolded; Director Bong Joon Ho has stated that Marshall was not explicitly modeled after Trump, yet the similarities are hard to ignore. However, the film’s political commentary extends far beyond American politics. Much like its exploration of humanity, ethics, and mortality through the concept of body printing, Mickey 17 also delves into themes of power, herd mentality, and righteous superiority. History is connected, is what seems to be the theme. 

Kenneth Marshall (Mark Ruffalo) and his wife, Yfla Marshall (Toni Collette)

All in all, Bong Joon Ho takes on a lot with Mickey 17. It’s wholly experimental, blending genres and tackling weighty concepts while maintaining a sharp sense of humor. Yet, rather than fully immersing itself in science fiction, the film uses the genre as a platform for political commentary, often making its speculative elements feel secondary. With so many ideas in play, it can be difficult to focus on just one and they become generalized. In comparison to Parasite, Mickey 17 is more of a chaotic rollercoaster, but one that remains deeply enjoyable in its tumult. It confronts viewers with the darker sides of reality, caricaturing figures and traits in a way that teeters between humor and discomfort. And, like Parasite, it retains Bong’s signature artistic flair. Mickey 17 is not Parasite, and it never will be. But that’s not necessarily a bad thing and I’m looking forward to all the wonderful, thought-provoking films he’ll make. 



REVIEW: The Zone of Interest

[TW: This review contains information and descriptions of film content surrounding the Holocaust.]

Inspired by the 2014 book with the same title, The Zone of Interest  takes us into the political landscape of 1943 Poland. The film follows the journey of Rudolf Höss (Christian Friedel), and his family of six living a seemingly ordinary life inside the walls of the most horrific area on the planet. Framing the film through Höss’ character is an adaptive choice by director Jonathan Glazer and is based on a real person: a high-ranking S.S. Commandant whose contributions to the Nazi regime propelled significant advancements at the concentration camp Auschwitz I. He was the longest-serving commander at Auschwitz, and the film primarily revolves around his family’s life in a villa within the camp.

The movie first depicts the Höss family living a blissful life filled with trips to the nearby lake, picnics in the sun, and small gatherings in their beguiling backyard. His wife, Hedwig (Sandra Hüller), and five children reside in their idyllic house only a 10-foot, barbed wire-lined wall away from unimaginable horrors. Their pristine home is lined with a blossoming garden and filled with a herd of anxious servants attending to their every need. While the family lives in comfort, sounds of screams, trains, and gunshots are consistently murmuring in the background. Hedwig remains dismissive of the disruptions, choosing to ignore the truth behind her privilege, but her guests often question the blazing fires surrounding the sky at night and the smoky cough-prone air. The title, “Zone of Interest”, comes from the German word “Interessengebiet”, which was a term used to depict the restricted zone around Auschwitz. (Much like the family’s eerily cultivated lifestyle.)

The shots in the film are very matter-of-fact. We see moments in their life as they happen naturally, without a direct opinion from Glazer. The audience is fitted as bystanders, set up to observe the observers. We were left to parse through the morally uncomfortable life of the family individually, making the content even more unsettling. Glazer gracefully dances around the known violence that is occurring within the camp, but there is an implication that the audience is aware of the nightmares beyond, limiting the voices of the victims to sounds from outside and alarming innuendos. This choice haunts us and leaves us waiting for the terror that the audience never directly faces. Almost like the remaining five members of the Höss family.

The film briefly features music from the University of Michigan’s own Dr. Patricia Hall’s research, who founded the project “Music From Auschwitz”. Dr. Hall brings to life lost music written and performed by Auschwitz prisoners. The music is accompanied by a deeply painful context, but a firm reminder of history and a memorial to millions of lost lives. Her group has toured Holocaust memorial centers throughout Michigan and New York, and this summer will be traveling to Vienna to perform a concert of her manuscripts.

The film stands as a reminder of the horrors behind violent perpetrators and ignorant familial bystanders, along with all the art-deco bells and whistles. Zone of Interest  is playing in theaters now in Ann Arbor.

 

More on Music from Auschwitz.

105 minutes. Rated PG-13. German and Polish with English Subtitles. 

Image thanks to Cut & Run.

REVIEW: Cocaine Bear

To be completely honest, I was rather disappointed after watching this movie. Perhaps it was because my friends hyped it up so much or the comedy just wasn’t to my taste, but it had too many plotholes for it to be satirically viable. Having a comedy movie be understandable is a personal preference though, so I’m sure a lot of people didn’t mind that. There were certain scenes that I found funny since they caught me off guard (I won’t elaborate much to avoid spoilers), but most of the time I got upset about the character development and storytelling.

They use gore and of course, the consumption of cocaine, as their comedic selling point, so if you’re easily squeamish or not interested in that I don’t recommend this movie. Well, I don’t recommend it in general. There are also lots of jump scares, so beware if you’re startled easily! If I had to rate it on a scale of 1-10, I’d give it a 4.5; that may be a controversial statement though.

I did end up watching this movie twice to show others how ridiculous it is; I guess watching this with others could be a good bonding experience! The second time around I could understand more of what was going on. Many of the characters have Southern accents and there are a lot of characters in general that become hard to keep track of, so if you can watch it with subtitles it’d be super helpful.

To summarize, I don’t think this film was a must-watch.

PSA: I had mistakenly thought and questioned how much of the film was true but none of it is, which may have played a factor in my disappointment. Now that you know what you’re getting yourself into, give the movie a shot! Or don’t, it’s up to you.

PREVIEW: Cocaine Bear

Cocaine Bear is a film notorious for its origin: the true story of a bear having found and eaten cocaine. I personally don’t know much about the movie or how much of it is based on true events, but my friends have been very excited to watch it for its goofy nature.

The genre of Cocaine Bear is thriller and comedy, and it’s a relatively short movie (or at least what I felt was short: 95 minutes). I tend to stay away from both of these genres because I don’t have the confidence to watch thriller movies and lack interest in watching comedies (in theaters at least), so I’m curious about how I’ll feel about this film in terms of quality, history, and personality.

The movie is soon to stop showing, so either check it out yourself or wait to see if it’s worth based on others’ or my review!

REVIEW: Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania

Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania is the 31st film in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, and it is only one of two MCU movies to receive a rotten score on Rotten Tomatoes. While it is fair Quantumania was rated rotten, I would argue there are MCU films that deserve to be rated more rotten. 

The film follows Paul Rudd as Scott Lang/Ant-Man, who is now famous for saving the world alongside the Avengers, and has written a biography about his experiences. He has lost five years of time with his daughter – played by Kathryn Newton reprising her role from Big Little Lies – during the events of Avengers: Infinity War and Endgame, and is doing his best to reconnect with her. Cassie reveals that she has been working on a device that allows her to study the Quantum Realm – where Michelle Pfeiffer’s Janet van Dyne was trapped for 30 years – from Earth. However, Janet immediately tries to shut down the device, causing it to malfunction, sending Scott, Cassie, Janet, her husband, and her daughter down into the Quantum Realm. There, Janet reveals a dangerous threat looms in the form of Kang the Conqueror, played by Jonathan Majors. 

The stakes in the film are almost ridiculously high with how powerful Kang is, however the film is very much not serious. Scott and Cassie befriend an ensemble cast of gooey, blobby, and strangely proportioned supporting characters, and Michael Douglas clearly wanted to be on set as little as possible. It would be safe to assume that when Douglas’ character shows up after not being in the film for a bit and says “Sorry I’m late,” that is simply footage of him showing up to set every day. There is an interview of Douglas at the premiere of the film, where he states he would come back for a fourth Ant-Man film only if they kill his character off. 

On the other hand, Jonathan Majors and Michelle Pfeiffer seemed to be in a completely different state of mind, demonstrating such careful and expert acting. I would have much preferred a film just about their characters, because every time Kang and Janet were on screen together, I was enthralled. What kept me going throughout the rest of the lackluster film was the anticipation of their characters interacting again. I am not sure what kind of spirit possessed them on set. Majors was so charismatic and suave while harboring a deep sadness that came through the look in his eyes and the myriad facial expressions he was able to portray. Pfeiffer was mysterious and anxious, yet warm, and these two forces on screen together seemed to be acting in a completely different film. 

Ultimately, Quantumania is an enjoyable popcorn movie, but it is probably only enjoyable if you do not go in with a serious mindset. The comedy in the film was weaker than in the first two, however what made this movie funny was probably not intentional. The film is ridiculous in tone, premise, and writing – and also how good Majors and Pfeiffer are. I hope they’ll star in a different, better film together sometime. 

Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania is playing at the State Theater.

PREVIEW: Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania

Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania is the newest installment in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. This is the third of the standalone films with these characters, and it has been promised to be the biggest one yet. The film follows Scott Lang and Hope van Dyne as they are sucked into the Quantum Realm along with their families. There, they come face-to-face with Kang the Conquerer, played by Jonathan Majors – who we know from the Creed III trailer to be someone even Michael B. Jordan doesn’t want to mess with.

I grew up watching and loving the MCU, but the superhero fatigue is definitely settling in. The newer MCU films have all been just fine, and they all end the same way when you think they might be finally changing it up. That being said, I have found some of the new installments to be entertaining – those that embrace the goofy nature of adapting a comic book on screen. This is what I particularly enjoyed about the first two Ant-Man movies – Paul Rudd is always hilarious and a joy to watch, the ensemble cast fully embracing their ant leader often lets the weaker parts of the films slip by under the radar. I am curious to see how this new film will stand, as it seems to be the most related to the greater MCU and is promising to kick off the next phase of the world. With Quantumania being seemingly so pivotal, I wonder if the balance of comedy and setup will come at the cost of the spirit that made the first two films enjoyable.

Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania will be playing at the State Theater at the end of this week, with advance screenings starting on Thursday, February 16.