Mercy (2026) Review The Surprising Truth About This Controversial Film

Mercy (2026) Review The Surprising Truth About This Controversial Film

Mercy (2026 film) has already been judged harshly in the court of public opinion. The sci-fi thriller features Chris Pratt as a detective who has 90 minutes to prove his innocence to an advanced AI judge he once helped create. Essentially, the premise asks what happens when technology you championed becomes your executioner. The movie mercy has sparked debate about its plot holes and predictability, yet some viewers found it entertaining despite its flaws. In this review, I'll break down mercy (2026 film) reviews from critics, examine the mercy (2026 film) rating split between audiences and professionals, and help you decide whether to watch mercy (2026 film).

What is Mercy (2026 Film) About

The movie mercy unfolds in a dystopian version of Los Angeles where the justice system has taken a hard turn toward algorithmic efficiency. Timur Bekmambetov's sci-fi thriller operates through a screenlife format, presenting the narrative through surveillance footage, video calls, bodycams, and layered digital interfaces. The story plays out in real time, meaning the 90-minute countdown isn't just a plot device but the actual runtime experience for viewers.

The 90-Minute AI Trial Premise

The Mercy Capital Court represents a radical shift in criminal justice. Set in 2029, this system uses AI judges to handle violent crimes with brutal efficiency. Crime has dropped by 68%, but privacy has been reduced by 100%. Defendants face a guilty-until-proven-innocent framework that flips traditional jurisprudence on its head.

When someone is accused of a capital crime, they're strapped into the Mercy Chair and given exactly 90 minutes to prove their innocence. The AI judge displays a guilt probability percentage that starts in the high 90s. To avoid execution, defendants must lower that number below 92%. If they fail, a sonic blast ends their life immediately.

The system grants defendants access to the Los Angeles municipal cloud. Every private citizen and organization is mandated by law to connect their devices to it. This means defendants can pull footage from doorbells, traffic cameras, cell phones, social media accounts, and any digital record stored in the cloud. Basically, your entire digital footprint becomes evidence that can either save or condemn you.

Setting and Characters

Chris Raven, played by Chris Pratt, is an LAPD detective who helped architect the Mercy system. He was one of its strongest advocates, having put eight people in the execution chair before finding himself strapped into it. He wakes up hungover and disoriented, accused of brutally stabbing his wife Nicole (Annabelle Wallis) in their kitchen.

Rebecca Ferguson portrays Judge Maddox, the AI authority presiding over Raven's case. She delivers the rules with icy precision, her performance stripped of emotional range by design. Maddox has already calculated Raven's guilt probability at 97.5% based on available evidence.

The supporting cast includes Raven's teenage daughter Britt (Kylie Rogers), who maintains a secret Instagram account that becomes crucial evidence. His LAPD partner Jacqueline 'Jaq' Diallo (Kali Reis) assists from outside the courtroom. Nicole was involved with another man, Patrick Burke, which complicates the investigation. Rob Nelson (Chris Sullivan), Raven's AA sponsor, becomes a key figure as the trial unfolds.

Raven's alcoholism haunts the proceedings. He relapsed after his former partner Ray Vale was murdered, and the suspect was later acquitted. This history, combined with gaps in his memory from the night of Nicole's death, creates a damning narrative that he must systematically dismantle.

Why the Concept Feels Timely

The choice to set mercy (2026 film) rating just three years in the future feels intentional. We're probably 10 to 20 years away from the technology depicted here, but AI is moving fast enough to make this premise feel uncomfortably plausible. The film taps into current anxieties about artificial intelligence making consequential decisions about human lives.

One area where Mercy succeeds is its blunt portrayal of data access and surveillance. The AI judge pulls from any camera, any file, any digital record without boundaries. This depiction deliberately unsettles, especially when real-world conversations about data privacy often downplay these concerns. The film asks whether efficiency and data can replace human judgment when justice, grief, and truth collide.

Mercy (2026 Film) Reviews: What Critics Are Saying

Professional critics tore into mercy (2026 film) reviews with a severity that surprised even seasoned box office watchers. The film currently sits at 20% on Rotten Tomatoes from critics, while audiences scored it 81%. This 61-point gap represents one of the widest divides between professional reviewers and general viewers in 2026. Metacritic painted a similar picture with a score of 34 out of 100. IMDb users landed somewhere in the middle at 6.1 out of 10.

The Critical Divide

This split follows a pattern for Chris Pratt's non-Marvel projects. The Terminal List saw a 52-point gap, Jurassic World Dominion had a 48-point difference, and The Garfield Movie split by 43 points. Critics seem particularly harsh on Pratt vehicles that prioritize entertainment over artistic merit.

Conversely, audiences appear more forgiving of the movie mercy when spectacle and pacing deliver what trailers promised. The divide reveals something about expectations. Critics evaluate films against cinematic standards and thematic depth. General viewers often judge based on whether they were entertained for the ticket price.

Common Complaints About Plot and Pacing

Frank Scheck of The Hollywood Reporter warned that mercy (2026 film) rating should include a caution for "anyone suffering from screen addiction, which these days is pretty much everybody". Manohla Dargis of The New York Times called it a story about a guy "unhappily stuck in a chair watching a lot of onscreen nonsense," analogous to the audience experience. Peter Howell from The Toronto Star dismissed it as "lazily written, chaotically directed and played out with all the zest of a convenience-store security video".

The screenlife format drew particularly sharp criticism. Daniel Barnes of Dare Daniel's noted the film puts "an omnipresent countdown clock in the corner of the screen when the film is this tiresome," providing a "stark reminder of all the time you're wasting". Richard Roeper's review expressed fatigue with the gimmick, yearning for "a wireless mouse so I could log off".

Several critics flagged the film's political messaging as problematic. ScreenRant's Gregory Nussen argued the movie takes "a neoconservative outlook" that supports "militarizing the police, crushing anti-government dissent, and implementing AI and surveillance wherever possible". The film's final message that "human or AI, we all make mistakes" struck some as dismissively pro-AI in an era of legitimate technology concerns.

Positive Takeaways from Professional Reviews

Peter Bradshaw of The Guardian broke from the pack, calling it "ingenious and watchable stuff" with "cheeky twists". Sonia Rao at The Washington Post described it as both "ludicrous" and "a hoot and a half". Owen Gleiberman of Variety suggested the film works as "an avidly watchable mystery" that makes Pratt "sharp and nasty and a bit dark, which looks better on him".

These positive reviews shared a common thread. They approached mercy movie as pulpy entertainment rather than serious science fiction. When viewed as "a taut, competent quickie rather than an insightful treatise on the dangers of AI," the film "mostly hits the right notes".

What Audiences Think: Mercy (2026 Film) Rating Breakdown

The numbers tell a story that Rotten Tomatoes rarely captures so dramatically. Mercy (2026 film) earned an audience score of 83% from verified viewers, while critics landed at 25%. This 58-point chasm mirrors the pattern documented across Chris Pratt's recent non-MCU projects, where The Electric State garnered 79% from audiences against 36% from critics, and The Garfield Movie pulled 67% from viewers versus just 14% from professionals.

Audience Score vs Critics Score

Whereas critics dissected the film's structural flaws and thematic shallowness, general viewers responded to what mercy movie delivered on a visceral level. The divide shows one of the strongest splits between critics and audiences in 2026. Forbes tracked this phenomenon as the "Pratt Gap," noting that audiences consistently love his projects even when critics demolish them.

The pattern suggests something beyond star power. Pratt's non-Marvel films prioritize accessibility and entertainment over artistic ambition. Critics evaluate against cinematic standards. Audiences judge whether they got their money's worth for 90 minutes.

Why Viewers Enjoyed It

Audience reviews consistently praised the film's ability to maintain tension despite its single-location setup. One IMDB reviewer noted they were "pleasantly surprised" given that "most of the plot would take place in a chair," adding that the execution was "genuinely strong". Another viewer emphasized the film kept them "on the edge of my seat" with "two unexpected twists".

The AI premise resonated with viewers who saw it as timely commentary. An audience member on Rotten Tomatoes described it as "a very realistic scenario of where we are headed as a society with the usage of AI in facets of life where they do not belong". Another praised how the film displayed "the domino effects of what can happen with the levels of impact that they are giving in AI".

Several viewers appreciated the straightforward storytelling. One review stated the film works for "anyone who enjoys an edge-of-your seat, popcorn-fueled experience". The 90-minute runtime received specific praise, with viewers noting the film "comes pretty close to deliver on that promise" of resolving the conflict within its stated timeframe.

The IMAX and 3D Experience Factor

IMAX screenings amplified the film's claustrophobic intensity. One viewer admitted potential bias "because I saw it in IMAX, which definitely heightened the experience". The format works by blowing up the faces of Pratt and Ferguson to 70 feet tall, making the audience unable to escape the situation's claustrophobia. The immersive sound system enhanced both the score and the film's few action sequences.

The 3D presentation proved far more divisive. One review warned that the frame becomes "constantly cluttered with pop-up windows and floating data streams on different planes of focus," making the experience "more distracting than immersive". The heavy use of bodycam footage created severe shaky-cam issues, prompting a direct warning for viewers prone to motion sickness. The consensus suggests IMAX adds value, while 3D remains "take-it-or-leave it".

The Performances: Chris Pratt and Rebecca Ferguson

Both leads faced an unusual acting challenge that theater veterans might recognize but film stars rarely encounter. Pratt's entire performance happens while strapped to a chair, and Ferguson exists only as a digital presence. This setup forced both actors into constraints that either exposed or elevated their capabilities, depending on who you ask.

Chris Pratt's Restrained Detective Role

Pratt requested that director Timur Bekmambetov lock him in the chair for real, sometimes for up to 50 minutes at a time. He believed this would create authentic feelings of claustrophobia and being trapped. The physical reality meant he couldn't scratch his face when it itched or shift positions when uncomfortable. Sweat accumulated naturally, adding visceral authenticity to Detective Raven's desperation.

This role marks a departure from Pratt's typical wisecracking action hero persona in franchises like Guardians of the Galaxy and Jurassic World. Bekmambetov described the performance as "very vulnerable" and noted Pratt played "a very broken man" for the first time. The director's favorite scene shows Chris speaking to his wife before she dies, calling it "the most dramatic, edgy, painful and emotional scene".

Pratt described the experience as "like a long performance of a two or three-act stage play" with blockbuster-level special effects. However, critics remained divided on whether he succeeded. Roger Ebert's reviewer noted his emoting "isn't always entirely convincing" and "you can see him...trying". Another critic dismissed the performance as "little more than Chris Pratt" and suggested he was miscast.

Rebecca Ferguson as the AI Judge Maddox

Ferguson tackled the opposite challenge. She delivered Judge Maddox from a locked, dark space with green screen behind her, never sharing physical space with Pratt. They communicated through earpieces during filming, maintaining connection without visual contact.

Her performance required projecting stoic authority while occasionally inserting subtle AI "emotion" glitches. Critics who appreciated her work praised how she managed "the stoic, alternately mocking tone of a passive-aggressive AI avatar" while delivering "just enough, but not too many, believable moments" of robotic malfunction. By the same token, several reviewers lamented that one of the best actors working today was reduced to playing "essentially a talking head" speaking in robotic monotone. The Ringer's review called it "a waste of Rebecca Ferguson," noting audiences miss watching her run and jump as she does in Mission: Impossible.

Supporting Cast Contributions

Kali Reis received praise for "doing fine work" as Raven's partner Jaq, though her role's complexity grew as the trial unfolded. Kylie Rogers brought emotional weight as Raven's daughter Britt, handling "a lot of on-the-phone crying". Chris Sullivan earned recognition for delivering "key moments and levels of intensity" as Rob Nelson despite limited screen time.

The Challenge of Static Performances

The format imposed limitations that even talented actors struggled to overcome. Ferguson, who typically excels in physical roles, was shot only from the neck up. Pratt remained immobilized for the majority of runtime. This static dynamic created what some critics viewed as theatrical staging hampered by film expectations rather than enhanced by cinematic possibilities.

The Real Issues: Plot Holes, Predictability, and Screenlife Format

Structural weaknesses undermine mercy (2026 film) more than any single performance issue. The screenplay by Marco van Belle stacks logic problems that pull viewers out of the story at crucial moments.

Logic Problems That Distract Viewers

The 90-minute trial window is arbitrary with no justification. Defense attorneys typically receive weeks or months to build cases, yet defendants here must work against an artificial clock. Beyond that, if there's an airtight case that Pratt stabbed his wife to death, he should have blood on him, but he doesn't. The film tries explaining away leaps in logic by having Raven relapse the night before, but that excuse wears thin.

AI glitches appear throughout, hinting at a wider conspiracy until they're completely forgotten. Rob Nelson's entire plan depends on Raven unpredictably coming home from work early, otherwise he'd have a rock-solid alibi at his police job.

Predictable Twists and Comparisons to Minority Report

Critics called mercy movie a "beat-for-beat Minority Report rip-off". Raven discovers he was framed by his AA sponsor Rob Nelson, paralleling how Anderton was betrayed by PreCrime director Lamar Burgess. In similar fashion, both films reveal the system isn't perfect through a partner destroying evidence. The setup feels recycled rather than reimagined.

The Screenlife Format Debate

Director Timur Bekmambetov believes "if you don't have a Screenlife element in a movie, it looks old". He produced Searching, Missing, Profile, and Unfriended using this technique. However, critics found it self-restraining from visual and storytelling perspectives. Watching a character bound to a chair scrolling through files feels anti-cinematic.

When Entertainment Outweighs Flaws

Despite being "not a good film," mercy (2026 film) remains entertaining. The film delivers "a decent package whose entertainment value comes at the expense of its many flaws". With popcorn and a buzzed mind, viewers can have an OK time.

Conclusion

Mercy (2026 film) won't win awards for originality or airtight logic. The plot borrows heavily from better films, and the screenlife format restricts what could have been a more dynamic thriller. However, if you're looking for 90 minutes of tense entertainment that sparks conversation about AI and surveillance, you'll probably enjoy it despite the flaws.

The critic-audience split tells you everything you need to know. Critics judged it as cinema; audiences enjoyed it as a popcorn thriller. Check your expectations at the door, grab some snacks, and you might find yourself surprisingly engaged by this imperfect but entertaining ride.