Tom’s Guide Verdict: “War Machine”
- Rating: 2.5/5 Stars
- Verdict: The ending of this movie is a bit baffling, as it drags on too long and serves only to set up a sequel we may never get. But this action movie is largely well-paced, and Alan Ritchson is well-cast. Unfortunately, for all its explosiveness, “War Machine” is just too formulaic and fails to use its star to the fullest.
- Premiere date/time: Available to stream now
- Where to watch: Stream “War Machine” on Netflix
“War Machine” has been the clear choice if you’re looking for a movie to watch on Netflix this week. It’s an action/sci-fi war movie, starring “Reacher” star Alan Ritchson, who looks like perfect casting for a military action flick. It clocks in at less than two hours long, which means you don’t need to invest a ton of time into it. In short, the recipe for success is there.
The result is a movie that, while perfectly fine, fails to deliver any memorable performances. Ritchson, who is a perfect blend of charm and bulk, should be putting on a masterclass in action movie acting in “War Machine.” But the only time a performance really caught my attention was when one of the soldiers, “15” (Blake Richardson), snapped and let loose on Ritchson’s character, “81,” for being cold and emotionless. Which, ironically, is my biggest complaint about the movie.
Alan Ritchson isn’t miscast, but he is misused
Let me be clear, I like Alan Ritchson. In fact, I’d go as far as to say he’s what sold me on this movie. In “Reacher,” he manages to be a charming, even witty figure while still maintaining his physical prowess and ability to kill anyone at a moment’s notice.
It’s that blend that makes Ritchson a good actor and enjoyable to watch. But, whether because the script maybe wasn’t written with him specifically in mind or some other mistake, the creative team behind “War Machine” failed to pick up on half of that equation. Instead, we get a brooding, even morose, quiet loner who only starts to come out of his shell in the second half of the movie.
This is by design. As we learn in the movie’s opening act, 81 (almost every character in this movie is designated solely by a number) is shaped largely by a recent trauma that drove him to join the Ranger Assessment Selection Program, despite being just shy of too old to join.
If this movie were a drama about the horrors of war and what shapes soldiers, then the decision to make 81 largely a quiet figure haunted by this darkness could work. But “War Machine” isn’t that. It’s an action movie filled with death, destruction, explosions and minutes-long car chases where an alien assault walker attacks a U.S. military Humvee. The ending even feels ripped straight from the 1986 movie “Aliens,” only with Ritchson using a bulldozer instead of a power loader.
Verdict: ‘War Machine’ is too formulaic, but could set up a good sequel
The true surprise of this movie isn’t the misuse of Ritchson, though. It’s that the movie, which is largely well-paced (I love that it clocks in at less than two hours), uses its final scenes to push a sequel in a movie that doesn’t need a sequel. We might not even ever get a sequel.
But if we get a sequel, I have hope for it. There was definitely potential in this man vs. machine showdown, and a global war against alien invaders is a sci-fi premise that should be easy to insert into an action movie. If the follow-up to “War Machine” just manages to use its lead actor properly, we could be talking about a really good action movie instead of a fine but underwhelming one.
“War Machine” final rating: 2.5 out of 5 stars
More from Tom’s Guide
First Appeared on
Source link
Leave feedback about this