MI6 agent Rachel Stone (Gal Gadot) must locate and retrieve a powerful artificial intelligence from the hands of a clandestine organization known as “The Charter.”
Gal Gadot as Rachel Stone in a still from “Heart of Stone”
Hollywood actors and screenwriters continue their strike in the United States. Two points of their demands are of particular interest: the regulation of artificial intelligence and the transparency of streaming service data. Agreements on both have yet to be reached, which is not surprising: producers are much more willing to pay AI specialists than ordinary writers, and they are even less likely to disclose viewing statistics. The credibility of streaming services would be seriously damaged if everyone realized that “the emperor has no clothes” and that the numbers have been manipulated for years to create a sense of status. Against the backdrop of the strikes, Netflix releases the deliberately mocking project “Heart of Stone” – an unsolicited response to Tom Cruise and his “Mission: Impossible” franchise with zero artistic value; illogical, without a developed identity, with a lack of coherent script and dialogues from a chatbot.
Gal Gadot as Rachel Stone in a still from “Heart of Stone”
The plot centers on the spy organization “The Charter,” which competes with global intelligence agencies and cleans up after them. It has achieved great influence thanks to the powerful machine intelligence “Heart,” which can find and neutralize any criminal in seconds. Highly qualified agents, “sixes” and “nines,” monitor the “Heart.” Among them is Rachel Stone (Gal Gadot): working as a double agent for British intelligence always keeps her in a world of intrigue and betrayal. When the “Heart” is stolen, the heroine uses her extensive arsenal to retrieve the device and learns many “shocking” secrets.
A dangerous weapon in the hands of notorious villains – one of the main plot tropes of modern action films – looks ironic and almost accusatory in the hands of Netflix. To quote the heroine of the series “Euphoria,” this play is indeed, to some extent, about them, the heads of the streaming service, who do not know the measure of their own greed. Due to the straightforwardness and lack of humor of the creators, director Tom Harper (“The Aeronauts”), and screenwriters Greg Rucka (“The Old Guard”) and Allison Schroeder (“Christopher Robin”), it is almost impossible to soberly assess the local set of stereotypes. For the most part, “Heart of Stone” is a ridiculous, generated, multi-million dollar piece of plastic that pollutes the already fragile Hollywood ecology. According to content managers, the sophisticated viewer will be pleased with a nostalgic journey into the world of international espionage, but with additions for the present time. The film has already topped the weekly chart of Netflix novelties, but in theaters, it would certainly have failed, not recouping its budget. The reason lies in the underestimation of the intellectual and viewing abilities of the audience, which will instantly get bored, anticipating all the twists.
Jamie Dornan as Parker in a still from “Heart of Stone”
Gal Gadot’s acting range continues to amaze and raise questions. The absence of even a hint of screen charisma does not do her credit in comparison with the unattainable Cruise, who is implicitly set as an example here – Gadot is convincing only in cashing a large check. From a professional point of view, it is still impossible to find signs of an action star in her. It is quite reasonable that the main antagonist of “Heart of Stone” is the same anti-charismatic Jamie Dornan, whose storyline completely exhausts itself by the end. The supporting cast is more stable: there is the cheerful Matthias Schweighöfer from “Army of the Dead” and even a cameo by Glenn Close. Bollywood star Alia Bhatt (“RRR”) and her geeky heroine with unclear principles leave a vague impression: the girl was deceived by the villain Dornan, but in the end, she took the side of conditional good, allowing her computer genius skills to be exploited further.
“Heart” rushes from snowy mountains to African deserts, chases through the streets of Lisbon, and drowns in the grayness of Icelandic landscapes. The battle scenes are somewhat reminiscent of Jennifer Lopez’s recent stellar hour in “The Mother” from the same Netflix (for example, the futility of existence). Steven Soderbergh and Nicolas Winding Refn were right: Hollywood either concedes, making its processes transparent, raising wages for workers, and guaranteeing protection from AI, or burns to the ground. The second option, for all its radicalism, is not so heartless.