Thoughts on the Uncharted movie?

So I ended up seeing the Uncharted movie after a friend wanted to see it and to be honest, I liked it much more than I expected. It's totally ridiculous from a believability standpoint, but honestly not much more so than a Fast and Furious movie. Nothing super original, but I just thought it was a fun popcorn movie where the cast had good chemistry and is likable.

Personally I think the most of the really negative critic reviews are overly harsh here.

Anyone else see it?

I had no idea that it was actually made rather than just an eternal pitch.

I will not be seeing it.

I'll probably watch it on some streaming service but it looks pretty generic and has Wahlberg so I won't risk getting sick to see it in theaters.

I thought it was a miscast, low-effort cash grab (Spider-Man and Marky-Mark aren't Nate & Sully); a pretty generic Hollywood Action Movie (TM) that panders to fans with fanservice from each of the games.

It's an "Uncharted" movie because Sony owns the IP; Tom Holland was cast because of his relationship with Sony and successes with MCU Spider Man (and to target younger demos); Mark Wahlberg has been trying to make an Uncharted movie happen for a decade (where he was supposed to be Nathan Drake), contractually (IIRC) they couldn't do it without him.

Basically, you could change the title and character names and you'd change NOTHING about the film.

The Last of Us is getting a big-budget, prestige TV series adaptation for HBO. Uncharted fans got "National Treasure" minus Nick Cage.

It was a ok film, it's really not worth the energy complaining about it.

I had bought the PS5 remaster upgrade (only $10 US) for the two PS4 Uncharted games (I have both of them on disc, and I only need one disc to play both games now!), but unbeknownst to me, my purchase also granted me a voucher code to see the Uncharted movie. So I redeemed it, paying less than $2 for online ticket fees, essentially seeing this movie for a buck and change.

I did not think it was bad, but I also thought it was pretty mediocre and forgettable by the end of the year. I liked Tom Holland and Sophia Ali (who played Chloe), I liked the big set piece towards the end, and also...

I did not care for Mark Wahlberg as Sully, and I thought the villains were bland.

If this makes any sense, I thought last year's Mortal Kombat was worse, but I also found it more memorable and re-watchable.

"Totally serviceable action movie panned by critics" is almost as natural as the air we breath...Gonna see it when I see it.

My expectations were low, and it surpassed it.

It felt like an Uncharted story, had some cool action, and the characters were likeable. So I enjoyed it.

Wasn't as bad as people will lead you to believe. It's just a simple movie. The type you can take one of those fan scripts that Hollywood rejects and change the words with control find...Nathan in place of all main character dialogue so on. The set pieces are from different games, mostly 3 and 4 which had the good ones. I'd say that was smart, unlike people who state it's dumb...get those out the way so you can do more crazy original fast, and furious silly stunts like the pirate ships. The actors besides walburg and that girl tried. The girl didn't get much to work with so can't blame her. Thou she looked the part. See why always casting for looks doesn't work looking at you people who state any off-model casting is bad cause its not the right man for the job ie ethnic swaps or sex. The story is modeled after Nathan's early years so I don't get the hate that he's not full Nathan yet but I also noticed the influx of movie streamers causing people to lack the ability to wait for character development. Give it to me now culture. The fights were sometimes filmed really well other times not. Sometimes Nathan fought better than spiderman with creative stuff so that was strange. Spiderman (2nd actor) had the best fights off-topic. On paper, if judging hard it's bad like people say. For someone who loves the games, you'll never be pleased. This is for people like my family that see me play the games but can't handle dual analog or playing a 10-hour game. People like this exist no matter how much people online say id rather play the game it's better than a movie (same with anime to live-action, some still can't take anime people they exist). It's a decent watch for short fun, don't take it seriously, and you'll like it. very silly.

Its seems to be doing okay in theeater as far as audicnes response, so ist has that. Vide game story based movies always have it tough. There are critics who will pan any video game movie. Then on teh opposite side there are critics who love video games - thus ultra harsh when a movies does not capture taht game well. Finally, there are critsis who just don't care either way tehy have tehri own headspace to battle for any number of reasons.

Its eems to m,e that give the subjkects matter Sony gave ist the bets push ist coudl by useing Holland and Wahlberg....ist woudl have been killed without "know stars". Moreover, if this tuned isnto a gfranchse they got young enough actors to play the characters for an decade or more.

Haven't seen it but it looks cool but honestly those games are already movies so I don't see the point in making one. It always just boils down to fans saying "so and so doesn't look like so and so" because, well the games are basically movies with distinct character faces etc.

It’s fine but Wahlberg ruins the movie for me. In every scene he just brings the movie down. The script is bad as well but the movie itself is fun enough.

Fun adventure movie, Tom Holland was good, I didn't hate Mark Wahlberg as Sully, there was a great cameo.

I liked it a lot more than I expected. It didn't justify its decade-long development cycle, but it was fine.