One of our most anticipated films of the year is Mickey 17, largely due to the fact that this is Bong Joon-ho’s most recent film after his Oscar sweep for Parasite. An acclaimed auteur, Joon-ho has become a celebrated auteur in his own right, delivering films such as The Host and Snowpiercer. So naturally, we were excited for Mickey 17, a film that stars Robert Pattinson in dual roles in a sci-fi dystopia. But does the film warrant your time and money? Let’s find out.

The year is 2054, and humanity is in the middle of colonizing space. Due to a lone shark being on his tail, Mickey Barnes (Pattinson) signs up as an “expendable”, a process that will reprint his body in the event of his death. The technology is illegal on earth, but out in the fringes of space, it can be exploited for cheap labour and for undertaking dangerous tasks without harming regular workers. Mickey ends up as the sole expendable on board the ship en-route to Niflheim, and over the course of his four-year voyage, he dies a whole bunch of times and also falls in love with Nasha, the ship’s security agent.

Then, while working on Niflheim in the early days of the project, Mickey takes a stumble and is left behind to be eaten by aliens. He survives his encounter, only to return home to discover they’ve printed Mickey 18, believing him to be killed yet again. What follows is a satirical take on class structure and mortality, using some wildly absurd scenarios and situations to get the point across. Results varied.

Mickey 17 I thought was a very inconsistent viewing experience. The visuals were great, and the film certainly had a lot to say about politics, class structure, social contracts, and mortality. It did a great job of exploring these themes, enough so that you could really dive into the weeds and write an essay about what the film is saying. There’s a lot to ruminate on and ponder, even if some of the messaging is a bit heavy-handed, such as Mark Ruffalo’s Kenneth Marshall. He’s a failed politician spearheading the Niflheim expedition who has developed a cult personality. His rabid fanbase are prone to wearing red baseball caps. Get it?

But the film is also a victim of its own talent. Mickey 17 boasts a pretty impressive cast, but almost everyone -including Pattinson- feels like they’re leaning too far into overacting. This is a strange movie about satire and absurdity, so I can understand why everything is cranked to 11 on a thematic level, but it results in a disjointed viewing experience. Ruffalo and Toni Collette, in particular, go pretty over the top, but so does Pattison’s distracting accent at times. But the most overexaggerated aspect of the film is Joon-ho’s directing, which while expertly shot, can feel chaotic at times.

Unless you’re a die-hard fan of absurdist sci-fi and/or Boon Joon-ho’s filmography, this one’s a lot harder to recommend. Not because it’s bad, it’s not, but because it’s so particular that it’s definitely not for everyone. Maybe you won’t find the acting so overdone due to the very nature of the film, but I did, and it did detract from the experience, as did the chaotic and bizarre nature of the film. Yet it still has interesting themes and concepts, making it an interesting watch. So, overall, it’s a fine watch, but not one I’d recommend you rush out to see.