On June 21, 2028, a riot breaks out in Los Angeles over the privatization of the city's water supply. In the midst of the chaos, professional criminal Sherman attempts a bank robbery. This goes badly wrong, leaving half his team dead and his brother Lev critically wounded. They don't even get away with much in the way of spoils, though Lev does steal a fancy pen from a well-dressed bank customer, despite the man saying that doing so is a terrible mistake.
Sherman and Lev escape to the nearby Hotel Artemis, a secretive hospital that treats only criminals. This is run by "The Nurse", who has not been outside the Hotel for 22 years, due to her severe agoraphobia and her grief over the death of her son. The Nurse has a strict set of rules for the hospital: "No weapons", "No non-members", and "No killing of other guests".
Of course, the fact that we're watching a movie ought to clue you into the fact that pretty much all of these rules are going to be tested during the next couple of hours ...
Hotel Artemis has a truly top notch cast, several good action scenes, and some snappy dialogue, but it unfortunately felt rather less than the sum of its parts, to me. I place most of the blame for this on the execution of the sub-plots. One example is the Nurse's breaching of her very own rules. This whole sub-plot feels a bit orphaned. While it does tie into the Nurse's trauma about her son, it doesn't really connect up to the broader action within the hospital on this particular night, and the exposition it delivered could easily have come from somewhere else that potentially could have been used to strengthen our understanding of other, more central themes of the film.
Of course, the fact that we're watching a movie ought to clue you into the fact that pretty much all of these rules are going to be tested during the next couple of hours ...
Hotel Artemis has a truly top notch cast, several good action scenes, and some snappy dialogue, but it unfortunately felt rather less than the sum of its parts, to me. I place most of the blame for this on the execution of the sub-plots. One example is the Nurse's breaching of her very own rules. This whole sub-plot feels a bit orphaned. While it does tie into the Nurse's trauma about her son, it doesn't really connect up to the broader action within the hospital on this particular night, and the exposition it delivered could easily have come from somewhere else that potentially could have been used to strengthen our understanding of other, more central themes of the film.
Similarly, one major character's fate is left essentially unresolved. I don't actually hate this as an idea. The character's personal journey has arguably already been 'finished' through the choices they make and the reasons behind them. But I don't feel that the execution quite works: it doesn't feel finished, even if it technically is. I suspect this is because the characters choices feel more like they are made to facilitate someone else's story, rather than to complete their own.
This lack of a sense of conclusion is actually a recurring theme within the film; for most of the characters, I was left saying "wait, that's the ending you're giving them?". The whole movie feels like a case of an intriguing premise that doesn't deliver on its promise.
I will say that I did appreciate the film's trenchant criticism of the privatisation of essential utilities like water and law enforcement. Thumbs up for that at least.
No comments:
Post a Comment