User Reviews

Tries to be Tarantino in Space, fails miserably. I was checking my watch 30 minutes in. Wanted to walk out, but stayed so I could leave a review. Lacks any real drama or intrigue, and the jokes do not land. Packed theater opening night in IMAX…not a soul was laughing or reacting to this slop.

While the promotional material is deceptively strong, the narrative pacing stalls out in the second act. Burdened by logical leaps and a poorly explained mythos, the film fails to inspire or engage.

I expected more from Mickey 17. The basic idea is genuinely interesting: a cloned human being treated as a disposable resource, used for dangerous tests, suicide missions and everything no "normal" person would want to do. That concept could have opened the door to a stronger story about identity, morality, personhood and the line between a human being and a tool. Unfortunately, the film quickly flattens its own potential. Instead of seriously exploring the dilemma, it seems to push one obvious answer: cloning is wrong because the people who control it objectify human life. That can be a valid theme, but here it never feels deeply examined. The film feels more interested in stating its point than actually wrestling with it. My biggest problem is the political caricature. The main antagonist and his wife feel like a very blunt parody of conservative-religious power: stupid, cruel, morally evil and almost totalitarian. Instead of sharp satire, it often feels like the film is simply hitting you over the head with the message. I had a similar issue with some of the side plots. The relationship between the two women is not the problem by itself, but here it feels like something added mainly to reinforce the film's thesis and create contrast with the "bad conservatives." It does not feel as naturally integrated into the story as it should. The biggest strength is Robert Pattinson. Honestly, he practically carries the whole film. Mickey himself is not a very interesting character, he is naive, foolish and mostly defined by the situation he falls into, but Pattinson gives him more personality and depth than the script does. Whenever the film moves away from Mickey, it becomes noticeably weaker. The sci-fi world also did not impress me much. An icy hostile planet, space colonization, strange alien creatures that humans fear and misunderstand, most of it feels very familiar. The most interesting idea was how cloning could affect the development of a new colony, but the film barely follows that after the landing. The humor completely missed me. I did not laugh or even smile once. The pacing is uneven too: some parts drag, while other elements that deserved more attention are rushed or skipped. The Creepers were fine, though. I like creatures like that, especially when they turn out to be more intelligent and less purely murderous than humans assume. The ending left me with no real satisfaction. It is predictable: good wins, cloning is immoral, end of story. Meh. It is not a disaster, but it feels like a film that wanted to be smarter than it actually is. Pattinson makes it watchable, but for me Mickey 17 remains an uneven, disappointing average film.

Артхаусный и странно завараживающий фильмец, хоть и чутка затянутый но кайф

It is very much a "meh" film, you know that feeling when you've seen worse but also have seen better? That's Mickey 17.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

인간이 소모품으로 반복되어 살든 세상은 여전히 그런 식이지만 봉준호 감독은 그럼에도 언제나 그랬듯이 전형적인 방식으로 시의적절하고 날카롭게 바늘을 찔러댄다. 근데 그것이 단순히 소스였던가.

So much fun! The final act of the film goes on a bit too long for what it provides, which is a bit of ham-fisted allegory, but the rest of the film is good comedic fun anchored by Robert Pattinson's enchanting performance(s).

Mickey 17 is a fascinating and thought-provoking sci-fi film that blends dark humor, stunning visuals, and deep philosophical questions about identity and humanity. Directed by Bong Joon-ho, the movie delivers a unique and compelling story that keeps the audience engaged from beginning to end.

A fantastic movie and one of my favorite Robert Patterson performances. It was refreshing that I could not tell what was coming next, until of course the end, where the movie because very predictable. The worst part of the film was Mark Ruffalo, who couldnt decide if he wanted to make his own character or a bad impression of Trump. Too bad too because I liked him in Poor Things.

La verdadera villana fue la esposa y no Ruffalo; su personaje forzado y hasta cringe. Pero qué bueno es Pattinson en todos los géneros

Mickey 17 kind of peters out in a final act that focuses increasingly on aliens than the more interesting ‘expendable’ premise, but it’s still a decently entertaining piece of sci-fi.

It is an average movie. Instead of committing to one plot, one approach, it is all over the place, resulting in it not measuring up in any of them. It tries to be political satire(but does not go all the way, like Starship Trooper did), throws in some theological aspects(that go nowhere, they are just added for no apparent reason), some romantic undertone, even with rudimentary love triangle(that also serves no purpose). Then there are some racism and xenophobia themes, with first, yet again, going nowhere and second being attempted from satirical angle, but failing, looking extremely cringe instead. Etc. If movie scripts could have mood disorders, this one would be depression. It cant really commit to anything, play out any angle or deliver results above "meh" level. It is not just movie about Mickey, it is Mickey the Movie - sad, depressed, rudderless, hopeless. Its not that it is bad, but it is like this cashier, after 20 years working 9-to-5 at Walmart. Its empty. It goes thru the motions and that is about it. Death of 18 was only scene that stirred something, but even that one they just had to draw out, resulting in it losing most of it impact.

Mickey 17 was good. Robert Pattinson did a great job. I really liked the futuristic aspect and how it explores what human society might become in the near future. I enjoyed that Robert changed his voice for the role—it really geave the perspective of a new person and showed his range as an actor. Mark Ruffalo did a great job as well. There are also a couple of seasoned actors and actresses in this film. I would recommend this movie.

I just don't like Mark Ruffalo in any movie. He's a poor actor, and an example of failing upwards. How did he ever manage to score roles in "big" productions? Brand recognition? He was awful in Poor Things as well. Also, he's unattractive. Nothing wrong with it, but why do almost all US male actors have to be unattractive? Back to the film, the gore and disgust put me off right away. The severed hand flying by the spaceship, that's been done before. If you have absolutely nothing better to do and you only have Amazon Prime Video, sure, watch it.

I was generous to give it 2 points and only did because it was unique. However, it's a typical 2025 movie preparing the kids for the terrible world to come... Normalizing and making bad politics look fun. We're so doomed.

Mickey 17 is definitely an interesting sci-fi movie. The starting is good, middle part were exciting & the ending was just average. Robert pattinson did good acting, mark ruffalo & other co-actors did a decent job too. Good direction, visuals, background music & production design. Moderately recommended. It'll be nice if you watch this one but not a must watch movie.

Me encantó la película, es una sátira futurista, bizarra, divertida, original y bien lograda, la actuación de Robert es fabulosa.

Vonnegut vibes. Political satire by the path of a leashed Verhoeven, Starship Troopers but not as provocative. It has things to say, but the approach might be too didactic. The script lacks the confidence to go completely wild and dive into the more profound discussions the central premise suggests. The multiples dilemma is reduced to a sex punchline, avoiding any further exploration. The universe is interesting, but its themes could have been better explored instead of relying on the obvious. There are hints of great ideas in the background, like the connections between authoritarianism and propaganda, populism and the appeal of strong leaders who promise salvation in times of crisis. But none of these are further developed, remaining only as mere thematic citations. Its deeper development remains on the central 'exploration of expendables under capitalism' thread, which becomes redundant once we are familiarized with such premise by the halfway point. It had the potential to say much more, but chose not to. Fortunately Mickey 17 has other things going for it, especially in terms of blockbuster entertainment. Performances are amusing to say the least, even if the Trump-coded Ruffalo was a tad bit much. Pattinson once again proves his chops as an actor, interpreting two characters who can be distinguished by body language alone. The world of Niflheim is inhabited by an interesting alien species, the creeper design is just cool. Some set-pieces stand out as very well executed (the dinner scene and Ruffalo's speech come to mind), and the dark humor works for the most part. It's a fun film, bit I expected more out of it, at least in terms of thematic exploration. There was no need to spell things out so much.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

"Mickey 17" offers an absurd plot, where the main character constantly dies and is reborn, showing how a person is used as a consumable. Initially, it seems like a comedy, but as it develops, a dystopian message is felt. Pattinson plays convincingly, perfectly distinguishing his doubles. Visually, the film is weak - the spaceship and the colony look modest, limited to corridors and several rooms. A black comedy with an unnatural Happy End and an antagonist, exaggeratedly greedy, but an interesting idea.

This could of been a TV streaming movie from the onscreen production level? Not enough cutting wit, biting satire or effective comedy. Regretting the disc purchase. I should of just waited for it to hit the small screen. It's not even a great movie made for TV. The Micky actor performance elevated this movie for sure. Everyone else just no. Miscast or badly acted.

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 **** 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.

the rise of robert pattinson in the best film of the year? 'mickey 17' presents an intriguing plot that echoes, in some ways, happy death day, yet manages to forge its own identity thanks to the unique dynamic between its protagonists. the relationship between the two mickeys, marked by a blend of rivalry and friendship, provides essential momentum that keeps the viewer engaged and prevents the narrative from lagging at any point. the script, although not in my favorite genres, completely won me over with its originality and depth. the direction is outstanding, reflecting careful and technical work that, while not relying on spectacular visual effects, conveys quality and precision in every shot. regarding the cast, mark ruffalo delivers a performance that evokes mixed feelings; his acting reminded me of his role in 'poor things', showing a complex side that adds layers to his character. meanwhile, robert pattinson reaffirms his acting growth in this film. despite the criticism he faced with 'twilight', i have always considered pattinson one of the best actors of his generation, and in 'mickey 17' his talent shines strongly, consolidating his status and elevating the film. in my opinion, 'mickey 17' stands as one of the best science fiction films of the modern era and a strong contender for the oscars, even surpassing other notable productions like 'sinners'.

"I'm not you, i'm not going to live like you"En un futuro, un experimento fallido se con su siguiente versión. Irónica. Surreal. InfravaloradaBuen ambiente y actuaciónes, una alta sensibilidad de la dirección. Personajes tontos y sacrasticos, en una futura realidad absurda no muy lejana. Una extraña sensación de locura. Un espejo de nuestra propia realidad, y la decadencia de la sociedad. Propone un interesante y polémico hipotético debate filosófico y moral. Segunda vez aquí ¿Que se siente morir?Somos irreemplazablesTécnica: 7.2Expresión: 7.2Efecto: 7.2Experiencia: 7.2Calificación: 7.2/10R: 2P: 2

The pace in the second half of the movie slows down, and the story starts to lose coherence. Because of these two reasons, I honestly got bored and was waiting for it to end.

Em Mickey 17, Bong Joon-ho aplica sua mistura de humor e crítica social a um enredo de clonagem e exploração corporativa. A direção é afiada, as cenas de ação são embaladas por um ritmo bem calibrado, e Robert Pattinson demonstra versatilidade ao diferenciar cada iteração de seu personagem.Tecnicamente, o filme é sólido, mas não apresenta grandes ousadias visuais ou narrativas. A sátira à classe alta, característica do diretor, permanece confinada ao microcosmo da história. A trilha sonora auxilia a imersão, mas poderia ter tido um protagonismo **** sci-fi competente que pede envolvimento do espectador para que suas camadas sejam percebidas — e, sem essa entrega, corre o risco de passar batido.

Similar in concept to Tom Cruise’s Edge of Tomorrow, Mickey 17 takes the idea of a real-life respawn and applies it to the bottom-dwelling janitor caste. Memory backups and exact physical clones are cutting-edge techniques in this timeline, albeit ones fraught with ethical concerns, but progress doesn’t make its omelettes without sacrificing eggs. Besides, young Mickey seems thoroughly relieved to trade his terrestrial worries for a series of lab rat speed runs in outer space. As his new handlers are equally thrilled by the chance to poke, prod, poison and play with their new toy. This makes for an über-entertaining first act, as the limits of the concept (not to mention those of the human body) are stretched and exploited in a series of darkly hysterical scientific experiments. We get to know Mickey very quickly - nothing like a string of painful death throes to reveal one’s character - and, likewise, learn to recognize the dismissive, inhumane attitudes of the men and women behind the needles. Robert Pattinson is everywhere in Mickey 17, playing all seventeen versions of the ill-fated title character. Only two appear concurrently, but the movie magic Xerox effect is seamless and convincing in that extended case. Possibly even moreso than with Michael B. Jordan’s twin roles in Sinners - and how odd that there have already been two such performances in 2025’s major release calendar. Mark Ruffalo plays the primary foil: an impossibly ramped-up Trump caricature that doesn’t even try to mask its real-world inspiration. The film makes a big point of mocking him for losing back-to-back elections and rushing off-world on a rocket stuffed with cheering devotees, which really doesn’t seem all that impossible as an alternate real-world timeline. Ruffalo is funny in the role, a big ball of tacky smugness and selfish opportunism, but it does seem exceptionally easy and tasteless and his introduction leads us away from the story’s more enjoyable bits. The film’s back end abandons the madcap humor of the cloning machine to pursue more traditional science fiction points. Humanity as the invading alien, corruption at the top of the food chain, broad social critique; these are handled well enough, but they represent a departure from what the audience was sold and lack the freshness factor that made the first half so different and exciting. By the end, it’s become an entirely different movie, about entirely different things. I loved it while I loved it, I just wish I’d loved it longer.

Meh. It wasn't terrible, but it wasn't good. Pattison did a great job, and it was pretty cool visually, but that's about it. A little quirky like "Life Aquatic" at times, which I appreciated. At other times the writing was just cringe, especially the overdone "leader" who was an obvious poke at Trump by the director. The pacing seemed off, in a way that seemed like they just skipped a bunch of stuff but the movie was still too long in the end.

Um filme lixo woke, ruim, tedioso e suas satiras políticas de merda, certamente acharam que o laranjão nao ganharia as eleições hahahahaha ..............

An engaging addition to the sci-fi genre, Mickey 17 maintains a steady rhythm, unfolding seamlessly at its own pace. Bong Joon-ho’s signature storytelling—blending sci-fi with philosophical undertones—feels refreshing on the big screen. Robert Pattinson delivers an engrossing performance, making his character’s simplicity a perfect vessel for navigating the film’s intricate dystopian concept of cloning. The supporting cast, each with their own distinct traits, harmonizes effortlessly, adding depth to the narrative. Bong masterfully balances a familiar premise—humanity’s survival on a new planet—with a layered yet accessible take on identity and replication, making Mickey 17 not only thought-provoking but also thoroughly entertaining and unexpectedly humorous.

Satirical, weird, and existential, Mickey 17 is a standout hit, with Robert Pattinson delivering an incredible performance.Watched the Mickey 17 With Robert Pattinson(Tenet, The Batman) as Mickey Barnes/Mickey 17/Mickey 18 , Naomie Ackie(Star Wars: The Rise Of Skywalker,Blink Twice ) as Nasha Adjaya, Steven Yeun(The Walking Dead) as Timo, Mark Ruffalo(Poor Things) as Kenneth Marshall, Toni Colette(Hereditary,Knives Out)as Ylfa Marshall, Anamaria Varolomei(Happening) as Kai Katz ,Holliday Granger(The Borgias) as Gemma.Satirical, weird, and existential, Mickey 17 is a standout hit, with Robert Pattinson delivering an incredible performance. The film explores themes of identity and expendability against the backdrop of humanity's colonization of the planet Niflheim. Blending sharp satire with high-concept sci-fi, it positions itself as 2025's answer to Dune: Part Two, offering a thought-provoking take on survival, repetition, and the cost of expansion..I know Bong he said he used. Nasha serves as a stand-in for a leader like Kamala Harris, representing a polished yet constrained figure within the political landscape, while Kenneth Marshall embodies a counterpart aligned with the establishment's opposition-perhaps a figure akin to Ron DeSantis or another right-leaning populist. Their dynamic reflects the broader tensions within American politics, where the two dominant parties perpetuate an oligarchic system that limits genuine alternatives. This contrast reinforces the film's satirical yet timely critique of political stagnation, manufactured division, and the struggle for meaningful reform.,Amazing Score from Jung Jae-il(Gremlins ) and, Cinematography By Darius Khonji(Uncut Gems) Direction from Bong Joon-Ho(Parasite). Satirical, weird, and existential, Mickey 17 is a standout hit, with Robert Pattinson delivering an incredible performance. 9/10.

This movie had so much potential but squandered it on cringe political messaging and an unbelievable story line that contradicts itself constantly. It was extremely evident that this entire movie was derailed by poor writing and political bias. The movie is not about characters or plot or story line, but is basically a thin-veiled 2-1/4 hour anti-trump ad with some Robert Pattinson sprinkled in. Don’t waste your time, poor writing and dialogue combined with an increasing unbelievable storyline make this movie a hard watch. The movie drags on for about 2-1/4 hours longer than it should have.

The news of the absolute landslide election saving us from an unelected despot tyrant hadn't reached Hollywood by the time this was made. The politician character is disturbing and obviously a fever dream for the **** actor, but way off. And just, ew. Maybe he was playing himself. The story had promise at the beginning but the movie was so bleak, it **** my will to live. It was unwatchable. We turned it off.

I spent a good deal of time wondering...what is this? Visuals were nice. Various scenes were so-so. Acting wasn't anything special. Story was confusing and not well constructed. Our view is: "leave the popcorn in the cupboard or find something else to watch."

."Mickey 17" (2025) is a movie directed by Bong Joon Ho, who previously made the brilliant "Parasite". "Mickey 17" is nothing close to "Parasite" in terms of story or overall quality of the film. Its more in common with "Snowpiercer" (2013). "Mickey 17" isn't a great movie by any means, its not even particularly very good one either - its just, fine one. Strengths of this film is acting by Robert Pattinson - he is really good here in a dual role. Mark Ruffalo clearly had fun at poking at Trump - its on your nose parody. And speaking of a parody - this film has a heavy political agenda, its a political satire but not a particularly clever one. This film also is a science fiction story, but it doesn't take itself to serious. Its also has commentary on cloning. So as you can see, it has a lot of things going on, but sadly it doesn't do neither one of them very well. Overall, "Mickey 17" is a very mixed bag. I did enjoy it mostly because its not a predictable by the numbers flick, but its originality isn't done very good either. It's a fine movie to see it once.

Visually polished but emotionally hollow, Mickey 17 is a sci-fi film that struggles where it matters most. The only interesting part was the beginning — it hooked me at first, but things went downhill fast. The story quickly lost momentum and just kept dragging. It felt stretched for no reason, padded with scenes that added **** direction and cinematography are decent, but they can't save a boring, increasingly frustrating narrative. Acting is passable, but with such a weak script, there's not much for the cast to work with. Emotional impact? Close to zero. I was just waiting for it to end.Stylish but empty — a promising start that fades into a forgettable mess. *C*

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

Honestly, there’s no need to shout genius with every Bong Joon Ho film. It’s still a social and societal critique, like all his previous movies (The Host, Okja, Snowpiercer, Parasite). It’s kind of like watching the same film over and over. We’re not just talking about similar aesthetics, but really the exact same theme, which gets tiring, because if you take that away from the film, there’s not much left. Bong Joon Ho is basically Mickey 17 himself — a continuous copy of himself, always serving us the same thing without trying to reinvent, without trying to become his Mickey **** initial theme had potential, but in the end, it’s just a backdrop. The film is long. Very, very, too long. Beautiful but boring, basically saved only by a typically Korean humor and style that excuses its empty moments.

there is something missing here. dont know what it is, there are parts where the plot is startign to get interesting and then just HUH?

There's some entertaining characters but overall it's a pretty boring movie that tries to address many ethical issues, but drowns those issues in poorly delivered comedy and pointless side stories that add nothing to the overarching story. It feels like they edited down a much larger movie and removed the wrong parts. The result is just a dead average movie.

its a very weird and missplaced at times film but in its creazyness its very fun and enjoyable to watch

Worth a watch! Pattinson gives a great performance, good enough in fact to forget his "Twilight" past. The concept is intriguing however, it can feel a little bit slow at times.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

Mickey 17 has got that spectacular cinematography, great acting and director’s vision as it is one you will be blown away by.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

Good science fiction. I recommend it, and if possible, avoid watching the trailer so you don't find out what the movie is about.

I am not sure why this movie bombed as badly as it did. I watched it last night and it was thorougly enjoyable. It poses the existential questions about life, death and does it all have meaning if you can be "reconstructed" and have your most recent memories restored. Pattinson is great, but Mark Ruffalo provides most of the comic relief as a wannabe dictator. Go watch it. Cheers.

Mickey 17, the return of Academy Award-winning director Bong Joon Ho. What was expected, due to the marketing, was another "Groundhog Day," reimagined. However, that is not the case in the slightest. With some very powerful political messaging, Mickey-17, despite its strong start and interesting idea, falls apart with a way too long third act, creating somewhat of a mess.

This is for sure, a movie. It is not a funny movie, or an interesting movie. It's not a groundbreaking or life-changing movie. It is not exciting, heart-warming, or laugh-out-loud funny. It is a solid 5. It was and is a movie. If you ever wanted to watch a movie, Mickey 17 is one of them.