After numerous attempts which saw talent attached only to depart before filming began, “Uncharted” has finally arrived on the big screen. The movie is based on the hit Playstation series of games by Naughty Dog and stars Tom Holland as Nathan Drake, a young man who is as adept at history as he is with pickpocketing which he uses to offset his income from Bartending. Nathan’s brother fled the law years earlier and aside from Postcards has had no contact with him over the years.  Things change when Victor Sullivan (Mark Wahlberg) arrives and recruits Nathan by showing him that he used to work with his brother. Despite misgivings and unresolved feelings; Nathan joins with Victor and finds himself in a daring caper to steal a valuable object that could unlock the key to a gold supply that has been lost for over five hundred years. Naturally, there are others who want the money, and Nathan, Victory, and their dubious partner Chloe (Sophia Ali); as they rush around the world in one adventure after another to solve the ancient puzzles and stay one step ahead of some very deadly individuals. The movie has elements of “National Treasure” and “Raiders of the Lost Ark” in terms of the quests to find ancient treasures mixed with action but keeps things in a simpler context. The focus is not on plot development, character development, or plausibility but considering the film is based on a video game, it does a good job with the source material. There has been some controversy about the casting of Holland as Nathan is older in the game series, but he goes all-in with his performance even when the acrobatic action sequences does offer many reminders of his Spider-man role. The action in the game is fun and over-the-top and more than once I thought I should be pushing my X and Square button to help him make the moves necessary to complete the task and survive. The post-credit scenes offer some great possibilities for future adventures and those would be more than welcome for those looking for some no-brainer escapist entertainment. 3.5 stars out of 5.

Go to full review

FULL SPOILER-FREE REVIEW @ https://www.msbreviews.com/movie-reviews/uncharted-spoiler-free-review "Uncharted is an action-adventure flick, but despite a more entertaining last act, it fails to break the curse of videogame film adaptations due precisely to the lack of said action and adventure. Even though Tom Holland and Mark Wahlberg offer good performances, as well as convincing arcs by the two protagonists, Ruben Fleischer delivers an extremely generic and formulaic narrative based on endless exposition. Additionally, the secondary characters become irrelevant due to the irritatingly repetitive betrayals and constant shifts of the true antagonist. In the end, the general feeling is that it would be much more interesting to be controlling the characters than simply watching them. It may be enough for fans of the franchise, but for the average moviegoer, it's "just one more"." Rating: C-

Go to full review

I'm just an ordinary joe. I've never played the game this movie is adapted from but from what I hear it's pretty fun. The movie itself is okay for a treasure hunting movie. The action is good and keeps flowing, and the actors, Holland (latest Spiderman) and Whalberg seem to have good chemistry. Even the female protagonist did well in her "diverse & inclusive" part. If I had any cons to put forth about the movie, I'd say the lead villian being a female (thanks to Woke-Hollywood's influence) has been thoroughly worn to the point of irritation. This woke trope is tired and worse, but oh-so-true to the core, it is dubious at best; especially so when it comes to fight scenes between the protagonist and villain. It is time for Hollywood to hang up its Woke-cape. There is no need for "inclusivity" when you can just give someone the job because it works for the story instead of politics. I wouldn't complain on this aspect so much if Liberal (woke) Hollywood had the ability to write good characters and therefore good scripts. But that is not possible when you are reaching to tick off checkboxes. **Somewhat Spoiler & complaints:** If the movie had simply begun with a female villain and had her demostrate certain abilities in combat, then her fighting men would be more believable. It also would establish WHY her people would follow her. But the female antagonist's action scenes do not come across as pertinent as they should because her profession is not established in the movie. I struggled to get a handle on whether she was a fellow treasure hunter since she knew Walberg's character personally and was there to advise the rich villain, or if she was a hired mecenary. Turns out she was the later, but that still did not help her character gel. I kept thinking, "Why on earth would anyone follow her? She's hasn't done anything to prove she's more than any other run-of-the-mill killer." If the movie failed in any way it was this one glaring aspect. Henry Cavill made an EXCELLENT head henchman in _Mission Impossible: Fallout_, because men fighting men is believable; villains have menace. But without that special training I mentioned for a female villian, any interaction between her and men in fight scenes comes across as purely contrived. The actress, Tati Gabrielle, did very well as a villain but this women fighting men is just not believable; and that matters to the male viewing audience. Instead of sitting on the edge of your chair wondering who's going to win, you're sitting back with a finger to your temple wondering what bullcrap Hollywood is going to make of this fight scene. If I have to rate this movie on a whole I give it 3.5/5 stars. It's far removed from _National Treasure_ or _Indiana Jones_, but it's better than _Red Notice_, if only just.

Go to full review