If you want better cultural representation
Choose Peaky Blinders: The Immortal Man. It scores 5.0 vs 1.4 for cultural representation, with a 3.7 overall score.
The Fix Movie Review
Bottom Line
Choose it if you want brutal military action, conspiracy twists, and an unusual Iran-set heist. Skip it if you need a tight runtime, clean plotting, nuanced politics, or consistently convincing character work.
Best for
Best for action-thriller fans who can tolerate a long runtime and messy plotting in exchange for brutal set pieces, conspiracy turns, and an unusual Iran-set heist.
Not for
Not for viewers who want tight plotting, nuanced geopolitical treatment, restrained violence, or consistently convincing character work; those are the most repeated weaknesses.
Verdict
The Fix has a muscular action-thriller core that several reviewers genuinely enjoy, especially when the movie leans into battlefield chaos, heist mechanics, suspense, and late twists. Its Kabul opening and other action set pieces are the clearest strengths, and a few viewers also praise the locations, visual style, and Zachary Levi’s grittier turn. The tradeoff is a 141–142 minute structure that many critics find bloated, convoluted, and overloaded with exposition, dubious twists, uneven politics, and thin character work. Levi is especially divisive, while Liam Neeson’s limited role earns both praise for gravitas and criticism for feeling underused. The result is a polarizing genre movie: energetic and tense at its best, but frequently weighed down by the screenplay surrounding the action.
Feature Scorecards
Summary
45 reviewed features-
Very positive 4.5-5.02 (4%)
-
Positive 3.5-4.45 (11%)
-
Neutral 2.5-3.48 (18%)
-
Negative 1.5-2.417 (38%)
-
Very negative below 1.513 (29%)
Pros
-
The action is one of the film’s strongest and most consistent selling points, with the Kabul opening and later set pieces often praised as intense, immersive, urgent, or thrilling. A smaller group finds the gunplay obvious, clipped, or creatively empty.
-
Audience-facing reactions are much warmer than the critical response, with strong scores and enthusiastic comments about the action, twists, pacing, and fun factor. The movie appears to connect best with viewers already inclined toward military conspiracy thrillers.
-
The location work is a major visual asset in the two reviews that address it directly. Both praise the scouting and environments for convincingly evoking the region and giving the film a stronger sense of place.
-
Suspense is a relative strength, especially for audience-positive viewers who praise the tension, uncertainty, and edge-of-the-seat third act. The main reservation is that long stretches between action beats can drain urgency.
-
The supporting cast generally fares better than the screenplay gives them room to show. Quincy Isaiah, Wes Chatham, Jake Choi, and Augusto Aguilera earn positive mentions, though other reviews find the ensemble thinly written or largely nondescript.
-
The photography is divisive but has notable highs, especially the moonlit action, strong framing, and immersive battle imagery. One critic, however, found the daytime image blurry and nighttime scenes hard to see.
Cons
-
The screenplay is the film’s most consistent structural problem, criticized as incompetent, bland, convoluted, overcomplicated, exposition-heavy, and in need of major tightening. Even mixed-positive reactions tend to separate the action craft from the writing problems.
-
The 141–142 minute length is the clearest consensus complaint. Most critics say the film is badly overlong or could lose substantial time, although a few enthusiastic viewers say the action and twists make the two-plus hours pass quickly.
-
The violence is intense, graphic, and often deliberately brutal, but many critics think the film pushes it too far. Reactions include jarring, exploitative, fetishistic, or shock-for-shock’s-sake, even when the action itself is praised.
-
Dialogue is a near-consensus weakness, repeatedly called clichéd, cringe-inducing, on-the-nose, basic, stiff, or clunky. Even critics who find some natural team banter say the plot-driven exchanges quickly become awkward.
-
The marketing repeatedly creates the impression of a Liam Neeson action vehicle, while his actual role is small and largely supporting. Several reviewers specifically call the poster, billing, or advertising misleading.
-
The Tucker-Zara romance is almost uniformly disliked. Critics call it awkward, predictable, tacked-on, and out of place, with some arguing that it creates bad decisions instead of meaningful chemistry.
Cast & Creators
-
ClayIsaiah is one of the more consistently praised supporting performers, described as believable, worth watching, and impressively charismatic.
-
ActorChatham stands out positively, first as part of a believable team and then for the unpredictable, coiled energy he brings to his scenes.
-
CinematographerSmith’s cinematography is singled out as a major strength, especially for using moonlight, headlights, fire, and color to keep the night action visually engaging.
-
BruceAguilera is part of the team that one reviewer finds believably played, and another highlights his scenes with the other operators as some of the movie’s livelier moments.
-
CharlieChoi is praised as part of a believable team and for helping deliver some of the film’s rare crackling operator interactions.
-
ZaraNorouzi draws generally positive notices, ranging from doing what the role requires to being called very good. Her performance fares better than the writing of Zara’s subplot.
View all 45 feature scores and cast & creators
Compared With Category Average
Compared with other Movies, this product is above average in audience appeal, production design, near average in action sequences, theme depth, below average in humor, sound design, lead performance.
Comparison summary
45 compared features-
Above average 0.4+ pts higher2 (4%)
-
Same as average within 0.3 pts5 (11%)
-
Below average 0.4+ pts lower38 (84%)
Largest category differences
| Attribute | This product | Category average | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| humor | 1.0 | 3.7 | -2.7 |
| sound design | 1.5 | 4.2 | -2.7 |
| lead performance | 2.3 | 4.3 | -2.0 |
| critic appeal | 1.2 | 3.5 | -2.3 |
| makeup quality | 1.0 | 3.4 | -2.4 |
| romance quality | 1.1 | 3.4 | -2.3 |
| historical accuracy | 1.0 | 3.3 | -2.3 |
| cultural representation | 1.4 | 3.6 | -2.1 |
Consider This Instead
If you want better lead performance
Choose Wicked: For Good. It scores 4.9 vs 2.3 for lead performance, with a 3.5 overall score.
If you want better genre satisfaction
Choose Normal. It scores 4.8 vs 2.9 for genre satisfaction, with a 3.8 overall score.
If you want better CGI quality
Choose Project Hail Mary. It scores 4.7 vs 1.3 for CGI quality, with a 4.3 overall score.
Compared in Reviews
Products reviewers directly compared with this model, grouped into quick takeaways.
- Better: thriller urgency The Fix is judged less urgent than Fuze.
Three Kings
- Similar: soldier-heist formula The Fix is framed as a joyless spin on soldier-heist movies like Three Kings.
- Similar: war-heist premise The reviewer says The Fix recalls Three Kings to some extent.
Argo
- Better: thriller urgency The Fix is judged less urgent than Argo.
FAQ
Is The Fix action-packed?
Yes. The opening combat sequence and several later set pieces are among the most praised parts of the film, often described as intense, immersive, urgent, or thrilling.
Is The Fix too long?
For most critics, yes. The roughly 141–142 minute runtime is one of the most repeated complaints, although a few positive viewers say the action and twists make it pass quickly.
How is Zachary Levi in the lead?
Reaction is sharply divided. Some viewers call him phenomenal, convincing, or surprisingly effective, while many critics find him miscast, inert, or unable to carry the dramatic weight.
How much is Liam Neeson in the movie?
He has a limited supporting role rather than being the main action lead. His smaller amount of screen time disappoints some viewers, though several reviewers praise the gravitas he brings when he appears.
Is the plot easy to follow?
Often not. Many critics call it convoluted, head-spinning, or overloaded with twists and double-crosses, while a minority of viewers say the story connects its dots well.
How violent is The Fix?
Very. The reviews describe graphic wartime injuries, executions, shootings, explosions, and brutal aftermaths, and several critics feel the violence becomes excessive or exploitative.
Do audiences like it more than critics?
Yes. The supplied coverage shows a pronounced split, with audience reactions much warmer than the very poor critical reception, especially around the action, suspense, and twists.
Sample Expert Reviews We Analyzed
These are a few of the reviews included in our analysis.
Video Reviews
YouTube - The Blue Futon
- Review score
- 3.7
Article Reviews
scene-stealers.com
A narrative bird’s nest stocked with shallow characters, spotty acting, shitty politics, and schizophrenic editing, almost nothing can redeem...
- Review score
- 1.4
icecream4freaks.com
Guy Moshe's The Fix should have been a thrifty disposable action thriller that makes a bit of an impact, and moves on. Instead, the film...
- Review score
- 1.3
theholofiles.com
Liam Neeson and Zachary Levi star in this derivative, right-wing action movie. Read our review of The Fix here.
- Review score
- 1.1
cbr.com
Liam Neeson's new action film was slammed by critics, but audiences disagree.
- Review score
- 3.6
Top Movies to Consider
Best for pristine archival footage, immersive sound, and a surprisingly tense look at Disneyland’s construction. Skip it if you want a comprehensive, deeply critical history; several reviewers found the 78–79-minute...
Pros: plot clarity, realism
Cons: plot originality, runtime
Best for an intimate, inventive archival portrait with strong emotional and cultural impact. Skip it if substantial nudity or an occasionally wandering biographical structure will frustrate you.
Pros: chemistry between characters, emotional impact
Cons: runtime, plot clarity
Best for an audacious, text-driven conspiracy thriller with gorgeous 16mm atmosphere and mounting dread. Skip it if long stretches of reading, deliberate repetition, and an intentionally austere narrative sound more...
Pros: story quality, plot clarity
Cons: chemistry between characters, sound design
Best for a profound, formally inventive meditation on grief, memory, and the ethics of filming family. Skip it if intensely personal addiction material, a 114-minute runtime, or occasional repetition will...
Pros: plot originality, ending satisfaction
Cons: runtime, pacing