Dr. D. joined me at the last minute for this 7 pm showing at The Bagdad. The theater (part of a brewpub empire) was reasonably well attended. Folks lined up for brew and 'za. Outside it had turned cold. Keeping this place well heated has gotta be one of the number one expenses.
Previews: remake of Superman coming; rectilinear brainwashing ala MineCraft Movie coming too. That'll be good for our own PR as we promulgate the IVM in contrast to XYZ, so we need XYZ to stick around. Never mind if that's over your head jargon. Poke around.
My practice was to avoid all YouTube or other reviews of this movie until after watching it. I'd seen the previews several times. I've been going to films more in recent weeks, as well as using my home theater. Then right after the film I came home, hooked the iPad to the HDTV and we watched reviews by deepfocuslens and Critical Drinker, both of whom found it disappointing.
I'm not so down on it, but then I liked Joker 2.
I guess a question is how tight and in control of itself we found the movie to be. In terms of reality construction, I think it did well. The movie created a believable world, by science fiction standards, in which "expendables" might be 3D printed and with memories restored, shades of Avatar 2 more than anything. The associated props developed over time. Especially strong: allusions to Covid. Mickey goes through like nine lives being a guinea pig for the mRNA vax they'll all need, to survive their new home planet.
The new home planet is inhabited by an intelligent life form that's half tardigrade (but bigger) and half potato bug. They’re both cute and terrifying at the same time, like this movie (both a comedy and horrific). The scientists, per stereotype, are starting to work out a translator and are on the brink of establishing a dialog, while the militarists are (again per stereotype) looking for opportunities to chronicle themselves being heroic, striking courageous postures (like a general on a rearing horse).
Probably where I part company from the reviewers, and maybe even from the actors and script, is I didn't see the preacher pair, the Jim and Tammy Bakker cult leaders, the evangelists, as trying to parody Trump, let alone Trump and Melania. If we insist on presidential parallels, I'd say the Tammy Bakker character, the Lady Macbeth (into sauces, a cooking show maven) is more of a Jill Biden, with Jimmy a younger Joe. But why push either analogy? The stereotype these two present is more culturally ingrained than specific politicians, in my experience.
That we're looking at two consecutive Mickeys, printed the same way, with memories from the same brick, leads to a meditation on how they're nevertheless completely different personalities. One seems more meek and mild, the other more temper driven and self protective. Their attitude towards one another forms a kind of internal monolog made public. They want to kill each other at first, but their shared anima (soul figure) unites them as allies and friends in the end. The more selfish one turns altruistic. Together they usher in a new era.
I thought having a black African heritage female cop excited for sex with two white guy twins was a comment on science fiction's role in pushing the envelope. A first famous "inter-racial" kiss on TV was between Captain Kirk and Lieutenant Urhuru on Star Trek, a sensitive moment (a risk) for the network and somewhat uncomfortable on the set (Kirk insisted on several rehearsals). "How far we've come" this movie was saying, in having its women so aggressively (and jealously) interested in the Mickey bros.
That's what the critics didn't like: science fiction that takes on too many social issues is too hard to follow and think about. But I'm thinking its satirical flavor extends to making fun of how science fiction is expected to tackle social issues, by tackling them all. It reminds me of The Good Place in being almost academic about the ethics issues. That transparency to philosophy in the background, the plot little more a thin veneer, is characteristic of comic book works, catering to young readers coming to grips with their own values, whatever these turn out to be.
Dr. D. pointed out a paradox in that Mickey is always being asked what it's like to die, but at no point would the memory brick be refreshed enough to remember dying, so he's really as clueless as anyone about what it's like in the rear view mirror. He simply has the cognitive security of knowing (because of affirmation from others, and because of accumulating memories with gaps) that he's exceptional in being an expendable. What might seem an especially lucky outcome (immortality of sorts) comes across as anything but.
Another factor that maybe colored my experience was the "laugh track" provided by the living theaters; the two guys sitting behind us, that one guy in particular, laughed loudly and riotously, and as the credits scrolled they expressed delight with the movie. Their enthusiasm was quasi-infectious, boosting the comical quality of the film. The potato bug monsters, both cute and ugly, were alone worth the price of admission (with a senior discount, admittedly).