| Set just three years in the future in 2029, Mercy is a mix between Minority Report and Searching where the court of law has been replaced by an AI judge and one man has to use all the technology at his fingertips to prove his innocence. The premise is fun, there are some fundamental flaws to it, but that premise works great in Minority Report and when it leads to a Searching-esque mystery plot, the movie is at its best. | | 2026
Directed by: Timur Bekmambetov
Screenplay by: Marco van Belle
Starring: Chris Pratt, Rebecca Ferguson
|
One of the flaws with the premise, is that the movie does not trust its audience to understand it. The first third of the movie is just supposition; the AI, Judge Maddox (Rebecca Ferguson), is explaining how this works to the lead character, Chris Raven (Chris Pratt), a police officer who is responsible for implementing this system, so I think he knows how it works. Really the movie wants to explain it to the audience, but if you need 30 minutes to explain how your movie works, then either, the filmmakers underestimate the audience, or the premise is bad. The premise isn’t bad, it’s just flawed; audiences are not as dumb as the movie thinks we are.
The next fundamental flaw is the year. Society is not three years removed from an AI court of law with immediate execution, especially not in California. We are also not three years removed from police officers in flying scooters. The movie needs everything else close enough to present day such that phone technology and all the rest are the same but then made some massive leaps which are probably never happening let alone within three years.
Chris, a police officer, has just been arrested for murdering his wife, and here he is barely hours later while the crime scene is still being investigated, on trial for his life. The AI will use all of the evidence to determine his guilt level. Above 92.5% is considered guilty beyond a reasonable doubt and he will be executed immediately. I’m sorry, but how are we not supposed to laugh at that? Are we really supposed to believe that within three years, an AI judge is going to start executing all criminals and potential criminals? There’s also a weird rule where if you bring your guilt level low enough to be considered innocent, but you stay in the chair, then you will also be executed. A future where AI gets to murder innocent people too, that’s fun.
Like Searching, the movie pulls together answers to a mystery using video calls, doorbell cams, backyard cameras, traffic cams, history of chat messages, and uses the computer screen to group together suspects. As with Searching and Missing, it’s a clever way to use current technology to solve a crime from afar. Or in this case, solve a crime while strapped to a chair. It’s supposed to be an electric chair, but resembles a wheelchair used by people with cerebral palsy. The production design (or lack thereof – it’s just Chris Pratt in his chair in an empty room) along with the 3D is very gimmicky.
The ending is being ridiculed for going too big, too far, too ridiculous. Other than a miscast Chris Sullivan, the ending fits the movie. It’s an action movie, the movie needs something bigger than just a percentage of guilt on a computer screen, and the last third of the movie is the only action you’re going to get. The main problem with Mercy goes back to the premise, this is not some treatise on the dangers of an AI court of law; it’s too far removed from a believable future to actually analyze the pitfalls (or benefits) of such a system.
|
