Bong Joon Ho’s latest film, “Mickey 17,” adapted from the novel of a similar name (Mickey 7) stars Robert Pattinson as an endlessly dying clone. With a star-studded cast, including Mark Ruffalo, Naomi Ackie and Steven Yeun, the film offers a strong blend of dark humor and sci-fi adventure. But before we dive in, let me ruin something for you: no, that’s not Steve-O you hear as Mickey’s internal monologue, it’s Robert Pattinson performing a Steve-O impression (yes, he discussed this in an interview). Now that you’ve noticed it, you won’t be able to un-hear it. You’re welcome.
The film follows Mickey Barnes (Robert Pattinson), an “Expendable” worker who is endlessly cloned with his memories intact after each death. To escape a collapsed and dying Earth and a relentless loan shark, he volunteers to become an Expendable, joining a mission to colonize the ice world of Niflheim. There, he is repeatedly sacrificed under the rule of the fascist cult and mission leader Kenneth Marshall (Mark Ruffalo). However, when a cloning mistake leaves two versions of Mickey alive at once, “a multiples problem,” chaos ensues.
At its core, Mickey 17 blends existential dread and corporate satire with a level of dark humor that only Bong can create. His signature class commentary remains intact here, with Mickey’s “expendability” mirroring how the working class is often treated as replaceable. While the film is thematically rich at times it does feel like Bong has explored similar class commentary in previous films.
Pattinson gives a genuinely standout performance, subtly distinguishing between the two versions of Mickey through little personality traits and mannerisms. While he could have easily played exaggerated dual roles, Pattinson gives each Mickey distinct but subtle differences, reminiscent of Nicolas Cage’s Oscar-nominated dual performance in “Adaptation” and Adam Scott’s performance in “Severance.” In addition, his physical comedy, particularly in Mickey’s numerous painful deaths and cloning, is also a highlight and works well, balancing out the more dark and satirical comedy throughout.
Ruffalo plays Marshall as a power-hungry fascist whose absurdity teeters the line between funny and genuinely menacing. His performance is overall effective, at times a little cartoonish, although intentionally so. But let’s be honest. It’s impossible to talk about his performance without acknowledging the current political similarities. Not to get political, but … I don’t care. Walking out of the theater, I was genuinely convinced Ruffalo had modeled Marshall after Trump. The plot and performance parallels felt too obvious. So, naturally (and apparently like most), I Googled it, only to find out the movie was shot in 2022, and the similarities are supposedly just a coincidence. In an interview with Entertainment Weekly, Bong Joon Ho had to clarify that Marshall wasn’t based on Trump but was “a mix of many different politicians” and “dictators that we have seen throughout history.” That doesn’t mean Ruffalo didn’t pull from Trump and his first presidency, but apparently, the main inspiration was just … another fascist. Honestly, isn’t it kind of depressing that my first instinct, and many others, was to assume that the film’s cartoonish dictator villain was modeled after a real one from our own country, our president? This is to say, however, that I found the Trump parody to be extremely funny yet also a little unsettling in how real it felt.
The supporting cast, including Naomi Ackie, a security agent and Mickey’s partner, and Steven Yeun, a drug dealer and shuttle pilot, add depth but aren’t given as much to do as Ruffalo and Pattinson. While Ackie’s performance is strong and grounds the film emotionally, her character feels, at times, underwritten and left me wishing for more.
“Mickey 17” is striking visually, too. Working with acclaimed and previous collaborator, cinematographer Darius Khondji (“Uncut Gems,” “Seven,” “Lost City of Z”), Bong creates a cold and sterile world that only enhances the film’s corporate themes. The contrast between the colony’s dark and dingy interiors, the icy wasteland and Niflheim caves only serve to make Mickey feel even smaller. The film’s color palette, with its primarily washed-out blues and grays, only adds to Mickey’s bleak world and parodies our own world’s corporate landscape and future.
While the first half of “Mickey 17” is well-paced and engaging, the film loses momentum in its second half. The initial setup and introduction are well-paced and engaging and the film effortlessly balances its humor with the tension of the “multiples situation.” However, as the conflict between the Mickeys and Marshall escalates, the pacing does start to fumble. Some scenes linger a little too long on exposition or moments that could have been shortened, while at other points, it rushes past moments that could have added to the emotional stakes for Mickey and the creepers.
Additionally, while “Mickey 17” is thematically rich, it does feel like a rehash of Bong’s previous works. The class struggle of “Parasite,” the dystopia of “Snowpiercer” and the corporate exploitation of “Okja” are all present, but without doing anything new. I agree with the film’s commentary and core message, and it’s not that the message isn’t necessary; instead, Bong doesn’t enter new territory with his commentary as much as one may wish for something new.
Despite its flaws, “Mickey 17” is an entertaining and thought-provoking ride. Pattinson delivers one of his most unique performances to date, and Bong’s satire is as good as ever. While it doesn’t reinvent the sci-fi genre or Bong’s filmography, it offers enough humor and political commentary to make it a worthwhile watch.
To quote Bong on the film’s satire: “When we showed the film in Berlin and talked to people from many different countries, it seemed like people were projecting the most stressful political leader onto the character of Marshall.” That alone, to me, speaks volumes. When authoritarian figures in real life feel indistinguishable from our exaggerated movie villains, our world may not for much longer be different from films like “Mickey 17.”
