While it doesn’t quite come together in a perfect synthesis of sci-fi, social commentary, and dark comedy, Mickey 17 does a solid job weaving a cautionary story about the dangers of hero worship and how we value life, human and otherwise.
The ever-compelling Robert Pattinson turns in a literal multilayered performance(s) as the titular Mickey. As an “Expendable” on a deep-space colonization mission to the planet Niflheim, his sole purpose is to do all the worst jobs and die for the good of mankind. But fear not! When he perishes, they just print out a fresh copy of him, complete with his previous memories intact. This process provides some of the best sight gags of the movie, as the printer spits out Mickey in the jerky style of an old dot-matrix printer, sometimes straight onto the floor when the compassionless science team is too busy scrolling their phones. The different Mickeys all have slightly different personalities (a fun thought experiment on the question of if clones are the same person), which Pattinson brings to life with distinct vocal and physical performances.
Mark Ruffalo delivers a delightfully bent parody of Donald Trump in space as Kenneth Marshall, the leader of the expedition. Toni Collette complements him perfectly as his vapid scheming wife, who is the true power behind the throne. One of their best scenes together occurs early in the movie when, in an effort to conserve food, they ban sex during the interstellar journey (it burns a lot of calories!). When the crew starts grumbling, they hilariously scramble to reframe it as a glorious campaign to repopulate the species when they finally reach their destination.
Mickey’s disposable purpose as an expendable clashes nicely with Marshall’s bluster and desire to paint himself as the perfect savior/leader/generalissimo . Things kick into high gear when a botched mission results in two Mickeys (a big no-no) and the colonists come into contact with giant caterpillar creatures on their new home. It all drives a solid examination of the social issues of our time, from how the cult of personality influences a population to how we treat those we don’t fully understand and perceive to be our enemies.
It’s an unique story with fun characters. So why did I leave this film feeling conflicted about how much I enjoyed it, especially considering how very excited I was to see it?
The pacing was uneven. After watching the film, I went back and watched the trailer, which is what got me truly hyped in the first place (props to the marketing department). It was the same movie, but presented in a quicker, more madcap style. Even one of the movie posters has these same vibes, with its repeating pattern of Mickeys with their eyes cartoonishly crossed out. It sounds like director Bong Joon Ho got to make the movie he intended, but part of me wonders what the movie would have been like with a slightly more zany tone and edited down a bit. There were definitely scenes that could have been pared down (or even eliminated in the case of a confusing dream sequence that appears near the end of the film). A tighter cut that leaned into the dark humor even more might have been a nice way to keep the story flowing.
In a similar vein, there was too much voice-over narration: I’m a proponent of “show, don’t tell”, but this movie leans heavily on Mickey narrating scenes. Used sparingly, narration can help provide exposition or give glimpses into a character’s thoughts. Here though, it gets to be a bit much and again disrupts the pacing.
Lastly, the sentient aliens were blobby caterpillars. This sounds like a silly nitpick, but it kind of matters. A mild spoiler, but the alien creatures on Niflheim are smarter than they initially appear. The only trouble with big bug caterpillar things is that it’s hard to feel an emotional connection about mass extermination when Mickey is talking to a big mass of rolls and fur. Extreme close-ups on the creature’s eye don’t count as effective facial shots.
What you’re left with is a good movie, just not a great one. If you’ve been intrigued by Mickey 17, chances are you’re the kind of person that will enjoy it. For all its flaws, it’s still unique and interesting. Will it join your “Best of” list for the year? Maybe not, but it certainly answers the question of are two (or more) Robert Pattinsons better than one? Unequivocally yes.
Side Notes
After watching the film, one of the first things I did was look up when the film’s production occurred, providing some fascinating context to Ruffalo’s performance. Filming occurred in 2022, a solid two years before Trump won his return to the presidency. In the film, Ruffalo’s Kenneth Marshall has just lost his second attempt at reelection to public office and is seemingly attempting to maintain a grasp on power (and relevancy) by leading the colony expedition composed of many of his fanatical followers (who, of course, wear red caps). It could easily be interpreted that this film was intended to be released in a world where Trump lost his reelection bid and was scrambling to still matter, making it easier to laugh at the buffoon. Instead, we actually get a movie that is mirroring a lot of recent events, including an eerily similar assassination attempt that bears striking similarities to the actual one on Trump, but was filmed over a year prior. It all still works, but similar to how it was hard to laugh at COVID jokes during the pandemic because of how close we all were to it, sometimes it’s tough to laugh at scenes that feel like they were in yesterday’s news.