Downsizing (2017)

[baumer]

Discuss 

[MovieGuyKyle17]

God, this film was so disappointing. Great setup but doesn't really do much with it's own setup. 

[WrathOfHan]

Downsizing is way too ambitious for its own good. After a strong first hour, the movie goes quickly downhill when Hong Chau is introduced. Her character is a really racist stereotype, and I'm shocked she even has awards consideration. I was ready for this movie to end about 90 minutes into it. The only saving grace is the first act. 6/10 | C+

[DeeCee]

Terrible film. 

 

On one level it’s an interesting idea but the more you think about it the creepier it is. The film throws so many messages at the viewer with such a brief exploration of most of them that none of them stick.  

 

Should small people have the same rights as big people? This is explored via the drunken rant of a guy in a bar. 

 

 

[DAJK]

An undoubtedly ambitious and mostly entertaining first 45 minutes, followed by a meandering, pointless, boring, poor excuse of a story for the last hour and a half.

 

Such a waste of a genuinely intriguing premise and good acting across the board. A truly disappointing film, one of the most disappointing of the year IMO.

[filmlover]

Yeah, this was a disappointment of monumental proportions. It starts really well for the first third and seems like it's headed in a fun direction with the premise, but then Matt Damon (giving the kind of performance he could do in his sleep at this point) gets small and it becomes really boring, and is topped off by a "save the environment" message delivered with the subtlety of a sledgehammer. The only thing that really works about the film is Hong Chau; she can't completely save yet (and her character often does across as nothing more than a stereotype), but at least she's an engaging presence. This is easily Alexander Payne's worst movie to date. C

[Ezen Baklattan]

Anything after the 60 minute mark had remarkably little to do with downsizing - the plot could be virtually unaltered had they been normal height - only a few visual choices would have to go. And you're so damn bored of the sad midlife crisis that by the time Chau really gets invested in the plot, which, mind you, isn't even until the movie is half over, it can barely do anything to win you back. Chau does what she can with the thin role, but by the end, it becomes impossible to care about any of this. It skims so many interesting ideas and ends on such a dull, anticlimactic note that, even having watched it two days ago, I can barely remember a thing.

 

As messy as Suburbicon was, you could at least understand what they were trying to do with the amusing and somewhat edgy set up (even if it ends up in disaster) - this felt so little going for it.

[RobinHood26]

This movie is 2 hours and 15 mins for some reason. It also has lots of very sloppy and amateur-ish transions. cool concept.

 

C+ (78)

[Webslinger]

Ironically, Downsizing, a film featuring diminutive characters, features some of the largest ambitions of any film released in 2017. It’s abundantly clear that director and co-writer Alexander Payne swings for the fences with intricate sci-fi world-building and numerous targets of social satire. While his efforts yield a film that is never boring and constantly gnaws on intriguing ideas, even a protracted 135-minute running time isn’t quite enough for it to scale the full heights of its ambitions; there’s so much potential in the concept that it could have made for a great television series rather than just a good-but-flawed film. Payne successfully steps outside his character-driven comfort zone by allowing clever and creative production design and visual effects to make for his most visually-oriented and aesthetically-pleasing film to date, though his work with the actors is good, but not up to his usually superlative level. The acting standout, as affirmed through awards season thus far, is Hong Chau. Her character’s broadly stereotypical nature is somewhat problematic, but Chau expertly finds humanity within the caricature and gives an affecting, lived-in performance that helps the film overcome unfortunate cultural implications. Matt Damon is also a solid everyman whose work goes a long way toward grounding the film, though it’s far from his most impressive work. The film does lose steam as it goes along and sets its sights on new satirical targets, but it has enough to say about humans’ need for connection, the tension between selfishness and compassion, and our obsession with status that it registers as a sufficiently solid offering despite its failure to hit its loftiest targets.

 

B

[somebody85]

I could not wait for this thing to be over. A gigantic waste of a cool premise. Movie dies when Kristen Wiig leaves and Matt Damon had no chemistry with the other woman (have no idea what her name was). Large portions of this film could have taken place with humans at normal size. Completely dull and a total chore to sit through.

C-

[Avatree]

I don't get the complaint that the film could be set in normal size. That's the whole point - downsizing doesn't actually take away any of your problems, and the world is pretty much the same.

There could have been more visual gags and scenes of awe. E.g. the door closing at the end was quite funny, or the divorce paper signing. 

 

A lot of the film doesnt work as well as it wants to, but I enjoyed thinking about its ideas even if they weren't explored particularly well. Also any film that goes to scandinavia and appreciates the scenery is hard for me to dislike.

 

Hong Chau and Christoph Waltz are great.

 

The film got better and better, the weirder it got the more I went along with it. My biggest issue is that it's not confident enough to just go balls to the walls.

[IndustriousAngel]

7/10, B

I liked the leisurely pace and the fact that it doesn't offer any easy answers ... no right or wrong, just different sides / opinions / characters.

[Ezen Baklattan]

On 2/5/2018 at 7:04 PM, Tree Billboards said:

I don't get the complaint that the film could be set in normal size. That's the whole point - downsizing doesn't actually take away any of your problems, and the world is pretty much the same.

There could have been more visual gags and scenes of awe. E.g. the door closing at the end was quite funny, or the divorce paper signing.

True, but it still couldn't shake that the first 45 minutes and the last 90 minutes feel like different movies entirely. I liked the idea of the message, but it doesn't mean you can just let it become a boring white man mid life crisis movie. Also would have helped if it weren't so damn long. 

[Blankments]

Downsizing surprises at points. Hong Chau is spectacular, making all her scenes sing with more emotion than what's written, and delivering the film's strongest satirical point with gusto. Waltz is surprisingly decent too, and the film's world is well-thought out for the most part. However, Matt Damon is miscast in his leading role as the schlubby Paul, but to be fair, I have no idea who would be a good fit to play. Indeed, Paul might be one of the most unlikable main characters of the year, featuring so many dull flaws and barely any awareness of any of them. The film remains on his side for the most part too, oblivious to how obnoxious he is compared to the more interesting stories that could be told within this world. A horrific main character is the source of all of Downsizing's problems, a film with so much potential squandered thanks to its leading role. A mediocre film that could've been something really special. C-