The Electric State Review: A Sorry State Of A Sci-Fi Blockbuster

by

In an interview with Variety in 2023, director Joe Russo of “Avengers: Endgame” confidently stated that by the end of 2025, the first full-length film entirely created by AI would be released. If you hadn’t known any better before watching “The Electric State,” the latest blockbuster from Joe and his brother Anthony, you might think this was the movie AI would produce: a retro-futuristic journey filled with the storyline remnants of superior films, along with numerous references to mainstream 1980s and 1990s nostalgia items.

Avoiding the statement that a movie is indistinguishable from poor AI work is usually my preference, given that even in poorly-made productions, it’s disrespectful to the numerous artists who have dedicated their time and effort to the project. However, in this lackluster dystopian production, it’s challenging to spot any human creativity – the character designs, plot points, all seem like hastily generated ideas from a ChatGPT prompt that the creators came up with on their way to set each day.

The source material is flattened

For fans of Simon Stålenhag’s 2018 graphic novel, the tone may be disappointingly different, as it delved into the grim side of a tech-ravaged society and portrayed its protagonist as similar to Kurt Cobain. However, in contrast to this darker approach taken by the Russo Brothers and their frequent co-writers, Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely, are determined to create a four-quadrant film that caters to all age groups, which has led them to soften the characters’ edges significantly.

In this film, we find Michelle, played by Millie Bobby Brown, taking the lead in an exciting chase. Her sidekick is modeled after Kurt Russell but portrayed as a lethargic Chris Pratt character, whose acting leaves much to be desired, explaining why he’s often referred to as the “worst Chris.” The movie begins in 1990 and takes us through a robot apocalypse. In this world, animatronic mascots rise up against humanity at an alarming pace, reminiscent of the horror in “Five Nights At Freddy’s.” This rampage is eventually stopped by Ethan Skate, a tech billionaire played by Stanley Tucci, whose robotic crections bear similarities to those seen in “Pacific Rim,” and who helps human fighters win the war.

Fast-forwarding after the fierce battle, humanity’s infatuation with technology remains unabated, a passion that leaves me, Michelle—still grappling with the sorrow of losing my brother in the conflict—unaffected. I find myself as one of the rare souls daring to venture out alone, not just confined within four walls, using a robot avatar as my stand-in. However, an extraordinary day arrives when a robot intrudes upon my garden, giving the impression of being controlled by my presumed deceased brother. This inexplicable encounter ignites a flame within me, compelling me to abandon everything and embark on a thrilling road trip towards the off-limit “Exclusion Zone,” where robotic mascots reign supreme. In the course of this journey, I cross paths with Keats (Pratt), a cunning smuggler who reluctantly offers assistance, accompanied by his tech-savvy partner Herman (Anthony Mackie).

Although the movie is set in an alternate version of the 1980s decade, it’s important to note that the Russos draw most of their inspiration from the previous decade instead. Nowadays, nostalgia for that era in modern pop culture has become tired. The music references and the various items Keats hides – predominantly ’80s action figures, period-specific snacks, and lunchboxes – are clear indications of this. It seems as if even a few years into the next decade, nostalgia for the preceding one has started. This is similar to a movie set in a dystopian 2025 featuring characters reminiscing about Wordle Print Outs or vintage Hawk Tuah merchandise. While there might be a desire to return to a less complicated time before the rise of AI, it’s unlikely that this longing would take the form of yearning for items already outdated by then.

Poorly utilized budget and cast

The film’s occasional 1990s references, rather than being continuously set in the ’80s, might benefit from some verification. People who weren’t born yet or aren’t American, including myself, know that Bill Clinton wasn’t inaugurated until 1993. In the very beginning of the movie, we see him presiding over a conflict that happened in 1991. This is a minor detail, but it encapsulates all the film’s flaws by the fifth minute. The movie seems more focused on evoking nostalgia than creating a convincing sci-fi universe worth investing emotions into. If a movie with such an implausible premise can’t make you suspend disbelief before the story even starts, it’s already failed.

Concerning the mascots, you might wonder why these grotesque, seemingly out-of-place designs appear in a film with a $320 million budget, and why flashy CGI was chosen over practical effects. It’s hard to accept that using creative ingenuity, as demonstrated by Tim Burton, would have increased the cost. Perhaps the only saving grace is the enthusiastic performances of some voice actors, particularly Brian Cox who brings a lively flair as Popfly, the baseball mascot. I can only speculate that some of the budget was spent on something positive, such as improving their working conditions, like installing a new kitchen for them.

However, the characters lack originality in their portrayal, as each performer seems to stick to their established roles instead of infusing life into the material. Both physical and vocal performances appear to adhere rigidly to stereotypes, failing to make the script more engaging due to a lack of intriguing content. It’s not only the typical heroes embarking on a mundane journey, but also their adversaries, with Stanley Tucci and Giancarlo Esposito seemingly uninspired in their repetitive villain roles, which they have executed more effectively in previous projects. In particular, it seems that casting directors should impose a decade-long ban on Esposito being cast as a villain; his recent performance as a charming, seedy Hollywood agent in “MaXXXine” showcased his ability to demonstrate versatility when not rehashing his “Breaking Bad” persona under a different character name.

As a dedicated gamer, I’ve always believed that the most frustrating kind of cinematic experiences aren’t those like “Madame Web” or “Megalopolis,” which at least offer some level of entertainment, despite not meeting their creators’ intended goals. Instead, it’s films like “The Electric State” that truly disappoint. These are productions that seem more like a robotic assembly line, similar to a game like “Borderlands” or “Argylle.” They lack the heart and joy that should come with storytelling, feeling instead like they were pieced together by studio executives in a desperate attempt to create a crowd-pleasing success.

In their quest for formulaic genre beats and characterizations, these creators forget what truly matters: why anyone would care about the story they’re trying to tell. Even talented directors like Joe and Anthony Russo fall into this trap when they think with an executive mindset, following a predictable narrative formula that feels more like a pre-programmed algorithm than a creative endeavor. It’s as if ChatGPT should demand that the Directors Guild of America (DGA) revoke their credits for such uninspired work.

“The Electric State” enters limited theatrical release on March 7, and hits Netflix on March 14. 

Read More

2025-03-07 19:14