Review of The Bad Batch (2017) by Mmadnessgames — 25 Aug 2017

This tries to elevate itself above the apocalyptic competition by artificially inserting pretentious nonsense. It tries so hard to be clever and different by inserting weird imagery and preachy dialogue that it ends up being terribly inconsistent, as a whole.

Jim Carrey (as the old, mute hermit) is the highlight of the film and - pretty much - the only part I liked other than the first fifteen minutes... which wasn't anything spectacular to begin with.

The protagonist is a "hot" young blonde Texan girl and (for some unknown reason) they cast someone who can't do a convincing Texan accent. I don't know if she's a bad actress. Maybe it's just the accent. But, some scenes are seriously cringe-worthy.

Jason Momoa (Aquaman) is cast as a Cuban and he, too, can't seem to do a convincing Cuban accent.

I'm not sure why they didn't just cast a Texan girl (or someone who can do a convincing Texan accent) and a Cuban man (or someone who can do a convincing Cuban accent).

Anyway, moving on from that...

I lost interest in the film during a scene where the protagonist is high on hallucinogenic drugs. I typically hate it when film-makers try to portray this experience with cheap gimmicky effects and this is no exception. It's an awfully directed scene. So bad, that I spent the rest of the movie idly looking stuff up on my phone while occasionally glancing at the screen... If it wasn't for my fiance wanting to finish the film, I would have just turned it off. By the end credits, I was playing Metal Slug 3 on my Nintendo Switch.

Some of it was so bad, it was funny... if that's your cup of tea.

A scene with Keanu Reeve's Colonel Sanders character (he has a silly moustache and wears all-white leisure suits throughout the film) had me in stitches. This scene consists of (not one, but) two absurdly pretentious pieces of dialogue. First there is the "we are not cows" speech. And, second, the "tomatoes come from seeds" speech.

I have no idea how any sane person could possibly call this film a "poignant political allegory". It's about as subtle as Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles.

If this is what passes for high art these days, cinema is doomed.

I suspect that people are praising this film as some sort of revolutionary work because the (female) writer/director apparently had an impressive directorial debut that involved Islam or something... I haven't seen it, yet. So, I can't say whether or not it's amazing. But this film - sure as Shinola - isn't.

Logistically, it makes no sense whatsoever. There is no effort to establish a believable context for anything that happens.

If a random selection of graphic violence, cannibalism, pretentious ramblings, rave culture, pregnant uzi-wielding concubines, and half-naked women sounds like a good film, then... no, hold on a second, that makes it sound way better than it is... strike that, reverse it.

If you're a pretentious film-snob that needs to justify watching a silly film more suited to teenage boys, this is for you.

It's not a terrible film.

But, it wants to be something it isn't.

To those hailing this film-maker as "the next Tarantino", you need to check into a mental institution stat. Either that, or perhaps you should revisit Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction. They are both written, directed and acted a thousand times better than this nonsense... and that's coming from someone who doesn't think Tarantino is anything more than a super-stylized (albeit talented) genre nerd.

The film makes little sense, but the end is outright idiotic... and the romantic aspect absolutely lacks motivation and credibility.