MovieChat Forums > Uncharted (2022) Discussion > I'm a huge fan of the games and...

I'm a huge fan of the games and...

posted 3 years ago by GingerbreadPimp (1767)
5 replies | jump to latest

Meh. It wasn't as horrible as I thought it was going to be, but it also wasn't really good either.

Pros:
- Tom Holland was fine as a younger Drake.
- Some really fun action scenes. There are two great ones in the 3rd act
- Pretty spot on to the games when it came to the scenes where they were going through new locations and solving puzzles

Cons:
- Mark Wahlberg was for sure miscast as Sully. Felt like he was sleepwalking through his role.
- Story was pretty weak and generic.
- Comedy was hit and miss
- Weak villians.
- They took a lot of liberties with the source material when it came to the story.

I wouldn't see it in theaters, but worth renting if your a fan of the games

[–] WhereIsRent (1080) 3 years ago

‘Some really fun action scenes. There are two great ones in the 3rd act.’

Agreed, but for me it was far too late in the film. The action scenes in the first two acts were just brief fist fights and a foot chase and it was all choppily edited.

Tom Holland as Nate and the actress that played Chloe were good in their roles.

It just really had a ‘Netflix film’ feel to the whole thing, considering this film was announced in 2009 and was in development hell for about 10 years I really thought they would have got a good story together in that time but it seems they just didn’t care.

But when it comes to Sony it just shows they can release bad films like Venom: Let There be Carnage and Uncharted and the films will still make money.

It’s frustrating to me as this film should have been so much better.

[–] cyguration (3951) 3 years ago

What's disappointing is that they literally could have copped the entire story from Uncharted 2 and made one of the most compelling, awesome, action-adventure films to date without skipping a beat. Heck, they could have even kept all the dialogue the same, too.

Then again, I guess it's easier to just stick with the game and avoid the hassle of being disappointed with a lackluster movie.

[–] WhereIsRent (1080) 3 years ago

Yeah, I reckon you’d need a $200 million + budget to do justice to Uncharted 2 though whereas the film had around half of that budget to work with.

I bet a large chunk of the budget went on getting Tom Holland and Mark Wahlberg as well because a lot of the action scenes were just bland and generic like a dull foot chase and a fight in a Papa Johns.

Seems if they make a sequel then Uncharted: Drake’s Fortune will be the basis of it so we should see some lush jungle environments and it should feel more like Uncharted and less like discount National Treasure.

[–] jekporkins (1972) 3 years ago

I think Wahlberg is a bad actor, but even by those standards he was atrocious. Someone with a sense of fun and whimsy would have been so much better. I don't even think he memorized his lines and read them off a cue card.

[–] GingerbreadPimp (1767) 3 years ago

I really got the impression he didn't want to be there and couldn't get out of the contract. He was originally suppose to play Drake but got too old by the time filming was suppose to start.