Tag: Chris Pratt

Mercy (2026) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: In a supposedly dystopian future, police officer Chris is on trial for the murder of his wife. He has to prove his innocence to an AI judge in 90 minutes, or he’ll be executed.

Thoughts Going In: This movie is going to be terrible. I’ve not seen a trailer for it; it was dumped in January, and it’s already rumoured to be a surefire bomb.

Films can be bad for different reasons. Sometimes it’s someone involved in it who is just not good at their job, sometimes it’s studio interference, and sometimes it’s just bad timing, and it’s released near something that’s clearly superior. Then you have films like Mercy, films which are so peculiar and flawed that it almost feels like a deliberate attempt to fail. I’m not too big a fan of Chris Pratt as a performer; he’s a good side character, but as the lead, his flaws are exposed, and you realise he is essentially playing the exact same character in every film. He’s not helped by the decision to have him spend most of the film locked in a room, tied to a chair and talking to a computer. You may think my problem would be the “locked in a room” or “talking to a computer” part. I have no issue with that. A guy trying to solve a crime while not being able to physically interact with anything is interesting. My problem is the “tied to a chair” part. If you do that with someone, you need them to have immense screen presence; you don’t need them to have the energy of someone who has just been asked to file a report at work 5 minutes before he’s due to leave. His being tied to a chair means there’s very little to praise in terms of visual dynamics. It’s him talking to a screen, yes, we see things on the screens, but the focus is still on a guy locked in a room ,whilst tied to a chair. He’s not allowed to pace around the room, break things in rage, hold his head in his hands; it essentially robs him of using body language. I’m not sure what the benefit of having him tied to the chair is. Could they not think of another execution method other than “sonic blast to the head”? Could they have not had the room itself kill them with a soundblast? If you want to lean into the computer aspect, have the room change into a 3D reconstruction of the crime scene, and then he can walk through that, have him haunted by the sights, cry at family mementos etc.

In terms of performance; Kali Reis continues to impress. It’s a shame that her performance in Catch The Fair One didn’t lead to the roles she deserves, but I hope if she continues to prove herself, those roles will come. Rebecca Ferguson is a definite highlight, Despite seeming for all intents and purposes, human, there’s something uncanny valley in her performance. Part of that is down to how her character is written. On the subject of characters, Chris is kind of an idiot. He knows he only has a short period of time to prove his innocence, he knows the system will investigate his history, yet he still lies to it. It would have been so much shorter if he admitted things straight up; if he told the system he was an alcoholic who relapsed. Yes, lying to the cops because you don’t trust them is a strategy. But when you’re a cop who’s trying to tell everyone this new AI judge is brilliant, you’d trust it.

A key thing to successful sci-fi is world-building. You need the universe created within to make sense and feel true. Obviously, this is the key to all movies, but sci-fi has it harder because it usually has to introduce its rules first. So how does Mercy fare? Not well. It cuts to occasional riots, but this never really feels like a futuristic LA with a huge crime problem; mainly because they’ve segretated most of the problem people into one area (the ethics of which are NEVER discussed). Outside of that, there doesn’t seem to be much day-to-day crime. The use of hover bikes is a nice touch, though. But they wouldn’t be needed if he was allowed to examine a VR version of the scene himself.

Every time I think of this movie, a new issue I had with the plot rears its head, which is strange as I’ve barely thought of it; I saw it, immediately forgot it until it came time to write this review. It doesn’t bring anything new or exciting to the table. The concept is full of possibilities. Possibilities which the film itself refuses to look at. The problem with AI deciding court cases is one of nuance and human nature; it’s not “if it’s controlled by the wrong people, it may go wrong”, it’s the system itself that is flawed. But Mercy has no interest in discussing that. It also isn’t interested in exploring the guilt he could (should) feel for being responsible for the execution of an innocent man. There’s no “The system I defend executed somebody when it shouldn’t have? Oh no, I caused this!” PTSD, which forces the film to discuss the ethics of this justice. It’s just “this guy died because of me? Ah well. Oooo, is that a sandwich?” Side note: When we see riots in this movie, the police tend to just leave them alone instead of teargassing them. And no children get shot in the face at point-blank range. So in some ways, the “dystopia” America in this movie’s 2029 is less traumatic than actual America in reality’s 2026

This could be great. It could be slick. It could be smart. It’s none of those things. It’s not even passable.

Onward (2020)

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

I was both looking forward to, and slightly apprehensive about this. Yes, it’s Pixar, and if a studio’s worst film is Cars (which, as much as I hate it, is MASSIVE financially) then you know you’re in for a good time, but since this film has been out I haven’t heard a lot of love for it. So maybe it’s just average, maybe it’s another Good Dinosaur, a film that’s perfectly serviceable but nothing special. After seeing the film, I don’t get it, it’s hard to say it’s one of Pixar’s best, but that’s only because their films are such high quality that it’s really hard to rank them. I will say this though: it’s going to take something special coming out for this not to be in consideration for one of the best films of the year.

I mean it could be argued that the plot is kind of generic, it’s essentially a road movie. But a lot of Pixar films are really when you think about it. For every brilliant plot of Ratatouille or Wall-E, you have the simple plot of Monsters University. Pixar are not about the story the telling, it’s about HOW they tell them, and they tell them perfectly. As to be expected it looks gorgeous, and the script and the characters are just as beautiful.

The best thing about this is just how deeply personal you can feel it is to the writer. I often criticise films by saying “I can’t imagine someone feeling they NEED to get this film made”. You could NEVER say that about this. It’s obviously deeply personal and that personal touch permeates every inch of the film.

It’s helped by the performances, Chris Pratt and Tom Holland work incredibly well together and their relationship is the true emotional core this film depends on. It depends on the brother relationship much more than the “sons missing their father” angle that you expect. I mean, the fact that they miss their deceased father is central to the film, and it does provide one or two deeply emotional moments, but the central emotional crux is the relationship between the two brothers. For a story about not-mythical creatures it is incredibly human, but then again that’s always been Pixars strength.

Now the downside: it feels like it doesn’t do enough with the premise. The film has two main concepts:

  1. Magic used to be a thing people could do, but then technology replaced it as it was simpler. Reminds me of the Arthur C. Clarke quote: Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
  2. The legs.  Okay I should mention it: this film is about them trying to bring their dad back from the dead but it goes wrong and only his bottom half comes back (fully clothed thankfully).

I feel it could have done more with those premises, although then I suppose there is a risk that might have taken away from the emotional developments. The legs thing is weird, and should provide very unique scenarios, but it really doesn’t provide that many. It does provide a great moment where the legs realise that his sons are there. One of them lets him know by tapping on his foot like he did when he was a child, after that the legs immediately search for the other son, and press down on his foot with his own. It’s the closest it will get to a hug, and it’s beautiful. As is the moment near the end, when you see it you’ll know.

So yeah, go see it. It’s a great film, and all the cast are brilliant (I haven’t mentioned it but Julia Louis-Dreyfus and Octavia Spencer’s characters are crying out for a spin-off).