Human beings are unoriginal

Because what is effective sci-fi, if not an allegorization of the times, of a world being utterly controlled under the stupid whims of a billionaire, or the exploration of the final frontier—space.

By Amartya Acharya

There is something to be said about a filmmaker identifying the base patterns of capitalistic gluttony, fascistic overtones, and general megalomania to such an extent that interpretations of such broad yet accurate archetypal characterizations would automatically invite real-life allegories. The truth is something far too simple, yet insidiuous —human beings are unoriginal.

Behavioral patterns are cyclical, and capitalism in the garb of corporate greed would always look down upon the workforce as expendable. 

Thus, taking Edward Ashton's own premise of his source novel, Mickey 7, of describing a form of "crap immortality," lends itself forcefully to Bong Joon Ho's own anti-capitalistic worldview, further highlighted by Bong increasing the number of multiples of 7 to 17, both to heighten the comedy and to hammer home the horror of insinuations within the allegory.

Because what is effective sci-fi, if not an allegorization of the times, of a world being utterly controlled under the stupid whims of a billionaire, or the exploration of the final frontier—space—being led by the entire opposite of Heinlein's ‘Competent Man,’ who would be the usual protagonist of similar media like Star Trek?

But that is the intention of the protagonist being the underdog expendable, of each aspect of the character being loved for its overall whole, of the importance of nuance and communication—sci-fi tropes explored perhaps in the wackiest way imaginable.

And wackiness demands a lack of subtlety for sheer performative spark. There is an impish humor within Bong's direction in Mickey 17 that is held at the seams by the weird voice-over of Mickey Barnes. A bravura performance by Robert Pattinson as both Mickey 17 and Mickey 18 holds the full film together, mixing slapstick physicality with vulnerable emotionality.

Even as the film tends to become a full mess, it never completely loses sight of being a subversive take on a Robert Heinlein sci-fi novel, a far more sincere yet no less funny satire of sci-fi that is also in love with the genre itself. It's the inherent hopefulness within the entire third act of the film that allows for that messy third act to resonate, and, of course, the high-pitched yet utterly hilarious performances of everyone in the cast.

---

Amartya Acharya is a film critic and film scholar based in Alipurdwar, North Bengal.