65 (2023) – Film Review

Director: Scott Beck, Bryan Woods

Cast: Adam Driver, Ariana Greenblatt

Review Author: Tony

Synopsis: After crash-landing on prehistoric Earth, only two survivors must navigate the hostile terrain and fend off vicious creatures to ensure their survival.

I’ve always had a soft spot for schlock in my genre films, so when Hollywood decides to splurge on a B-movie concept, it piques my interest. The initial trailer for “65” immediately caught my eye; with top-tier Hollywood actor Adam Driver playing a spaceman battling dinosaurs on a prehistoric Earth, it was the kind of cinematic madness I’d been yearning for. It also brought to mind the 2008 film “Outlander”, which shares a similar premise of a spaceman crash-landing in Viking-era Scandinavia and joining forces with the local Vikings to confront a Space Dragon. However, while Outlander fully embraced its bizarre premise and delivered an entertaining schlockfest, “65” turned out to be a tedious slog.

The trope of the grizzled father/adoptive father figure has become increasingly prevalent in both film and TV nowadays. Originating from the 70s Japanese manga and film series, The Lone Wolf and Cub, this narrative archetype has become a staple in modern media, evident in shows like Stranger Things, films like Logan, and games like The Last of Us. The Mandalorian is perhaps the most well-known recent example. While it’s undeniably an effective storytelling device, its overuse has started to feel stale. “65” epitomizes this reliance on the trope for emotional depth, but fails to establish any meaningful connection between its lead characters. The decision to introduce a language barrier between them only serves to hinder the development of their relationship, making it one of the film’s most puzzling choices.

The criticism of the lead characters lacking chemistry is just one aspect of the overall disappointment with the film. It’s not just the lack of chemistry that affects the viewing experience, but also the sheer dullness of the plot. There’s no sense of urgency or excitement as the characters simply move from one point on the map to another, with the occasional encounter with dinosaurs. One can’t help but wonder if introducing a larger cast would have added more depth to the story, creating higher stakes and increasing the tension as different characters are gradually eliminated in dramatic and suspenseful ways. This approach could have injected some much-needed energy into the film, transforming it into a more gripping and engaging narrative.

Paleontologists must be tearing their hair out watching yet another Hollywood film that disregards the true appearance of dinosaurs. While mainstream audiences may not be ready for feathered dinosaurs, they deserve better than the CGI mess presented in “65”. The design and effects of the film’s dinosaurs are cartoonish and unappealing, a far cry from the standards set by the Jurassic Park series. Hollywood seems to have lost its touch when it comes to making dinosaurs exciting, with “65” failing to recapture the magic of “Jurassic Park”. Come on, Hollywood, give us feathered dinosaurs already!

“65” feels like a film destined for the graveyard of streaming movies. Its meager box office earnings of $60 million on a budget ranging from $45 to $57 million reflect its lackluster performance at the cinema. While I may seem critical of streaming films, they at least provide a platform for mid-budget genre films to find an audience, even if the quality is inconsistent. Unfortunately, “65” falls short, delivering a painfully dull experience that squanders an intriguing concept and the star power of Adam Driver. This script should have stayed extinct.

Rating:

Awkward Bird calls