For those who were living under a rock since the dawn of this 21st century, Uncharted was/is a really popular PlayStation game that took the world by storm; inspired by the love of its creators to films such as the Indiana Jones franchise. The film adaptation has been in development for over a decade, close to 15 years - and we now finally have Nathan Drake on the big screen, a figure who for many is the gaming equivalent of Indy.
Forget for now the brouhaha that erupted when the announcement was made that the popular, but young, Tom Holland would be portraying Nathan. Even if the game has a much more mature Nathan, I don’t find anything wrong with the producers thinking franchise and investing in a young Nathan so that the installments can have him maturing through the years. That’s canny Hollywood marketing at work, and I personally have no qualms about that. The more important question is if they retain the essence of the game in the film treatment.
The film opens with one of those high octane action sequences that we know will reappear later in the film, and it’s setting the mood in a good way - more reminiscent of Mission Impossible than Indiana Jones, but I’m not complaining. We then get the inevitable flashback to Nathan and his older brother at an orphanage, a sequence that will help us appreciate motive down the road.
The other main members of the cast are Sully (Mark Wahlberg), Chloe (Sophia Ali), and Santiago Moncada (Antonio Banderas). Sully is the mentor/irritant in Nate’s life, while Chloe is their double-crossing confederate, and Santiago is the main villain of the film. Let’s talk about Santiago first. I don’t know if there were Banderas contractual obligations to another film, but after offering a promising start, Moncada practically disappears, leaving us with villain by proxy. And I don’t know if you’ll agree with me, but it’s something I had a problem with.
Sully and Nathan are the bromance-buddy film aspect of this story; as there’s a constant cat-and-dog element to their relationship. My issue here were how so many of the banter was predictable and lame. The potential to make this so much more engaging and interesting, and not one-dimensional, is never realized.
In short, there isn’t much to dislike with this film adaptation. The last 30 minutes or so are actually very good, when the film finally takes flight (literally and metaphorically), and comes closest to approximating what the game was all about. For those who’ve played the game, there will be built-in expectations, and I’m sure they’ll be underwhelmed. For the uninitiated, it’s a more than serviceable adventure film - one that aspires to be a blend of Indiana Jones and Mission Impossible, but ultimately falling into the territory of National Treasure.
Ruben Fleischer previously directed Zombieland and Venom; and I think it’s fair to say this one is more Venom than Zombieland. It’s a case of what could have been to make it so much better.