'Rebel Moon - Part Two: The Scargiver': So Bad It's Unbelievable

Two hours and five minutes of unrelated action, forced by special effects, which at the end raises the question: "What did I just watch?"

by Sededin Dedovic
SHARE
'Rebel Moon - Part Two: The Scargiver': So Bad It's Unbelievable
© The Critical Drinker / Youtube channel

Although it made it to the list of the most watched titles, the first installment of the space opera Rebel Moon was met with a number of negative reviews. The audience still found a few good words, but the criticism was merciless.

This spectacularly announced title was created under the director's baton of Zack Snyder, a director who gained fame by working on numerous superhero films. Thus, his directorial portfolio includes the films Man of Steel, Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice and Justice League, as well as the historical spectacle 300.

While the first part of Zack Snyder's "Rebel Moon" offered a glimpse into the bizarre world of science fiction, the second part, "The Scargiver", completely exposes the nonsensical spectacle that Snyder launched in the cinematic universe.

Forget any semblance of a thoughtful narrative, witty dialogue, or even remotely believable characters. This film is an uneven mix of incoherent plot threads, terrible acting and special effects that often seem like a parody of itself.

The second part of the film, titled Rebel Moon — Part Two: The Scargiver, arrived on Netflix on April 19, and in a week of showing it managed to collect even worse reviews.

Rebel Moon - Part Two: The Scargiver© Netflix / Youtube channel

Thus, on the Rotten Tomatoes site, there are only 15% positive ratings from accredited critics.

According to them, the main problem is reflected in the fact that Rebel Moon acts as a collage whose scenes are assembled from other (and significantly better) films of the same genre. At the same time, their joining was carried out superficially, almost limply.

They compared watching this film to putting together a puzzle in which the pieces simply do not match. Instead of offering a riveting follow-up to the rebellion against the tyrannical Admiral Arcturus Noble, "The Scargiver" throws logic and narrative coherence out of the airlock.

The "shockingly infantile yet somehow insanely complicated" fairy tale, as you aptly described, moves between nonsensical plot points and character motivations that leave the audience in suspense.

Rebel Moon - Part Two: The Scargiver© Netflix / Youtube channel

Snyder's attempt to breathe life into the seemingly defeated Noble through a bizarre Matrix-meets-Cronenberg resurrection sequence is a prime example of this disconnect.

His sole purpose becomes fueled by a petty anger marked by a conveniently placed scar, a central thematic element as deep as a child's tantrum. Despite possessing "the most powerful fleet in the galaxy," capable of reviving the dead, traversing wormholes, and even reading minds, this supposedly formidable force prioritizes conquering the planet for its...agricultural potential.

Apparently, interstellar travel and resurrection technology are less valuable than arable land, a pointless detail that illustrates the film's confusing priorities. Meanwhile, our heroes, blissfully unaware of the impending space armada, resort to the most unusual defense strategy imaginable: mass farming.

As you rightly point out, the film devotes a significant portion to showing the painstaking process of cultivating the soil, all in glorious slow motion. This sequence, along with the equally tiresome "festival of exposition" where the characters recount their backstories, illustrates Snyder's complete disregard for pacing and audience engagement.

Rebel Moon - Part Two: The Scargiver© Netflix / YOutube channel

The film descends more and more into the absurd with its action sequences. While the slow-motion battles might appeal to a niche audience, the strategic brilliance employed by our "ragged team of farmers" against a technologically superior force stretches credulity to the absolute limit.

It's as if Erwin Rommel himself landed on this bizarre planet and decided to train the worm fighters in the art of intergalactic warfare. The performances, unfortunately, reflect the overall quality of the film. Sofia Boutella, despite her stunning presence in films like "Kingsman" and "The Mummy," struggles under the weight of a poorly written, one-dimensional character.

Forced to carry the weight of the narrative, her limitations as an actress become painfully obvious, making you wonder if this film might actually be hindering her career prospects instead of propelling her forward. The rest of the cast fares no better, delivering lines like "you're like a mountain, strong and immovable" with all the emotional depth of a cardboard cutout.

The only saving grace seems to be Ed Skrein, who seems fully aware of the absurdity he's gotten himself into and delivers his negative performance with a campy, almost self-aware charm. Perhaps the most disturbing aspect of "Rebel Moon - Part Two: The Scargiver" is the shadow of its intended future.

The film's open ending and Snyder's announcement of a six-film franchise send shivers down the spine of even the most ardent sci-fi enthusiast. Viewers weren't so harsh on him though. So they readily pointed out that despite the aforementioned flaws, it still has stunning visual effects that make it worth watching.

Both parts of the movie Rebel Moon are available on Netflix, so you can see for yourself and judge what kind of movie it is.

SHARE