As a diehard MMA fan (one of the only sports I consistently watch with any kind of knowledge and enthusiasm) and a champion of “The Rock” Rebrand, “The Smashing Machine” was not only one of my most anticipated films of TIFF – it was a film that felt tailor made for me and my cinema sensibilities. Add to that a solo outing from Benny Safdie who has more than established himself as a proven filmmaker, the recipe for a knockout success seemed undeniable. Unfortunately, the perfect puzzle pieces come together to deliver a fuzzy picture, one that functions more like a boring, lay and pray unanimous decision victory rather than a smashing KO. This film possesses all of the talent and skill needed to create a celebrated work, but can’t seem to put them all together to be as effective and clever as it thinks itself to be.
Safdie’s final product feels more self indulgent than self reflective, and approaches the material at arms length and a sort of meandering disinterest in his subject. At no point in “The Smashing Machine” does it feel like the director personally connects to his story or work, leaving the film to be a rather pedestrian sports biopic dressed up as an auteur’s vision. It really makes you question the Silver Lion Award from Venice; considering the abundance of riches of some of the best filmmakers working today that the jury could’ve chosen from, Safdie taking the prize is a bit of a head scratcher. That disconnected approach leaves “The Smashing Machine” hinged on the performances alone without more definitive commentary or even some contextualization of the sport itself, its humble beginnings, the struggles of fighters and the overall legacy of Mark Kerr himself.
Only true MMA fans like me understand the indelible effect Kerr had on the sport, a founding father of what was once completely fringe but is now a global phenomenon. “The Smashing Machine” could not care less about any of that; the sport of MMA, its humble beginnings, the reign of Pride and the rise of the UFC, even the athletes and athletic talents are largely sidelined or left unexplored. These are important things that all make the story of Kerr (played by an almost unrecognizable Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson) more compelling, but instead the film chooses to zeroes in on a short period of time in Kerr’s life and really only cares about his complicated relationship with his longtime girlfriend Dawn (Emily Blunt). Their tumultuous relationship is the central lynchpin of “The Smashing Machine,” and seems to be the only aspect of the broader story that Benny cares about at all. Even the addiction and recovery pieces of Kerr’s story – the real fight in his life – are glossed over in the broadest of strokes without any regard or pause to examine them more deeply.
For his part though, Johnson really does deliver a transformative performance even though the film around him seems more like a vanity project than anything meaningful. The Rock is best when he tries, and while I’m convinced “The Smashing Machine” is more of a rebrand than anything substantial for him, he’s at least remembering that he can perform and can actually be vulnerable when needed. He used to do this kind of stuff all the time and displayed a strong knack for comedic timing and dramatic capabilities, but abandoned them to make the same movie over and over again because that’s what the brand called for. “The Smashing Machine” isn’t even close to an Oscar worthy performance (and I’d argue we need to cool it on the best of the year hyperbole) but it is the best The Rock has been in over a decade and nothing works here without him putting in the effort.
For Blunt’s part, it’s time for her to take a break from the tortured wife roles for a while. She is an undeniable performer, often times the best part of a bad movie. And while she’s doing the most she can here, the script and characterization does absolutely nothing for her. She is relegated to an unbelievably toxic partner, one who only ever makes things worse but is stuck in the least interesting part of Kerr’s career and life. She becomes an insufferable nuisance rather than a complex character and overshadows the far more intriguing bromance between Kerr and also MMA pioneer Mark Coleman (played surprisingly well by MMA fighter Ryan Bader). It’s really unfortunate because Blunt and the real life woman she plays deserve better than how “The Smashing Machine” paints them.
“The Smashing Machine” is quite striking visually, creating a beautiful late 90s aesthetic and some of the best on screen in cage action I’ve seen since “Warrior.” It sports some genuinely excellent performances from its leads and is competently constructed with an almost elevated take on a cliche ridden genre. But it falls short in the end and becomes lost in the pitfalls of sports biopic trappings by refusing to answer the most basic questions of its own world. It becomes indistinguishable from countless other sports movies when it has all of the grounding to stand tall among its peers and should be something special.
“The Smashing Machine” struggles to justify its existence and while it has some excellent visuals and strong performances, it left me wanting and felt more like a lackluster fight that makes you want leave in round 3 instead of standing up and cheering for a barnburner. You’re better off watching the documentary of the same name to be more informed about everything and everyone.
Rating: 3 out of 5 Stars
“The Smashing Machine” is in theaters Oct 3rd. You can watch the trailer below.
