He said, she said: Why you should, or shouldn't, see Mortal Engines
Mortal Engines is in cinemas now, but the critics are divided over whether to see it or not.
Slated by some for a lack of personality and being directionless, the film's garnered all of 47 on review aggregate site Metacritic, meaning it might struggle at the box office.
But some reviewers have loved it, calling it "wondrous", shot with pace and style.
Much like the traction cities of the film are pitted against each other, the only way to work out if it's worth your time is a reviewer head-to-head.
READ MORE:
* Mortal Engines: Wondrous Kiwi-shot fantasy offers pace and style
* Mortal Engines lacks 'personality', 'direction' say less-than-impressed critics
* Ugly girl: Why women have to be pretty in TV land, even when they're ugly
* Sir Peter Jackson says Mortal Engines is escapism, and we need it more than ever
* Mortal Engines: Sir Peter Jackson on who would win in a Kiwi battle of the cities
He says: Its story is fairly weak
Granted, Mad Max Fury Road was essentially just a chase film, and Mortal Engines, which feels like a fantasy successor to that, is much the same, with plenty of wonderfully visualised scenes existing solely to be strung together by our band of heroes being forced to go on the run.
Over two hours, this grates immensely, with the stop/start/stop/start stuttering plot suffering badly for it. While it feels like a one-shot film, if this is the start of a franchise, (there are four books) then it doesn't bode well for future instalments and characters you're supposed to be invested in.
She says: The story is a classic
Not being funny, but this film is about as much like Mad Max as I am like Charlize Theron. Forget Mad Max and think Snowpiercer, or Time Bandits, think early Terry Gilliam where meaning is buried under a mountain of weird and wonderful visual effects, where people and places are dredged up from the very bottom of the Id. If Mortal Engines feels familiar, it's because it's like a fairytale from the far future.
Each new adventure is stepping stone on the way to uncovering the inevitable end game - the ultimate crucible in which the characters will be tested, what could be more classic than that? Effortlessly united with the veritable mountain of world-building the film achieves, the story never feels clumsy or forced. Marvellous.
He says: Its characters are massively underwritten
I adore Robert Sheehan as an actor (his Misfits' character is one of the best ever-committed to the small screen thanks to his character's cocky arrogance) but as Tom Natsworthy, he's given little to do - except assume the role of the dumb companion and ask lots of questions.
Hera Hilmar doesn't fare much better as our heroine Hester Shaw, on a quest for revenge. Mainly because the script needs her to get to certain points of her character arc before getting the time to develop and make the journey feel organic.
Equally, Hugo Weaving's there to growl and glower, and while some efforts are put in to hint at motives, his vanilla villain is too one-note to be memorable enough. Mortal Engines' commitment is to on screen action (at which it's utterly brilliant and jaw-droppingly well visualised), rather than in depth character.
She says: Two words... Anna Fang
Archetypal characters are open to interpretation. Tom is the Everyboy, gadget obsessed, crushing on the prettiest girl in the engine room, oppressed on all sides by society's expectations, oblivious to the harsher realities of the world he's been born into. With Hester's help, Tom grows into himself over the course of the film, shrugs off the weight of expectations and meets the destiny his chosen head on.
But it's not all simplicity, the amazing Anna Fang (JiHAE) stood out to me. Talk about a kick-ass screen queen. Fierce, compassionate, skilled and driven, Anna is the film's conscience personified and I love her.
He says: Its script relies too much on exposition
This is the clincher for me; rather than organically giving you time to invest in characters, you're forced to hear garbled explanations about their past from their own mouths and buy into their predicament. It's the downside of the plot's breakneck speed to get to the next brilliant action sequence (one of the real reasons to see this film on the biggest screen possible) that it sacrifices the emotional investment from the audience.
Plus one sequence where one character tells another character what they're actually feeling is clunky as, and not what I'd expected from the writing team behind Lord Of The Rings. Mortal Engines - more like Meh-tal Engines. - DARREN BEVAN
She says: Y'all wanted something new, well, here it is.
Another day, another whinge in the entertainment press about how everything is a remake or a reboot, or a sequel or - God help us - a prequel. Mortal Engines is none of these things. It may be an adaptation, but as far as the big screen is concerned this bad baby is fresh as. It even looks new - I've seen plenty of reviews going on about it being "steam punk" but it patently is not Steampunk, there's nothing weirdy-Victorian about it. It is its own, jaw droppingly astounding beast and those out-of-this-world visuals make it worth the price of admission alone.
If you want a good couple of hours of escapism that smokes along at a fair old pace, this is the film for you. Long live these Mortal Engines. - KYLIE KLEIN NIXON
Have you seen Mortal Engines? Is Darren right, and Kylie wrong? Or is Kylie right, and Darren wrong? Tell us in the comments below!
Stuff