The Rip Feature Scores
Explore all 40 feature scores for The Rip, organized into pros and cons.
Scores by Feature
Summary
40 reviewed features-
Very positive 4.5-5.05 (13%)
-
Positive 3.5-4.421 (53%)
-
Neutral 2.5-3.412 (30%)
-
Negative 1.5-2.42 (5%)
Pros
Sort
-
Damon and Affleck’s chemistry is the clearest consensus strength. Their long friendship gives the trust, suspicion, banter, and confrontations a lived-in weight the script could not easily manufacture.
-
Suspense is the movie’s most dependable craft strength. The money, ticking clock, uncertain loyalties, and Damon-Affleck distrust create sustained pressure even when the eventual action or reveals disappoint.
-
The ensemble is one of the movie’s biggest strengths, with the cast repeatedly credited for lifting routine material. Even harsher takes usually blame the script more than the performers.
-
Joe Carnahan is widely praised for controlling suspicion, pressure, and contained action with confident genre instincts. A minority find the filmmaking inert, overly blunt, or chaotic once the final act erupts.
-
As an old-school cop and crime thriller, the movie generally delivers what genre fans want: stars, paranoia, moral murk, and escalating danger. Even lukewarm reviews often concede that it functions as a solid throwback.
-
Damon and Affleck repeatedly elevate the material, with Damon often singled out for the more controlled, layered work. Their performances remain compelling even when the script gives them familiar archetypes.
-
The pulsing, glowering score is a consistent technical strength, amplifying dread and keeping momentum alive through quieter stretches. Even a more skeptical review still finds it propulsive.
-
The supporting cast is frequently praised, especially Steven Yeun and Sasha Calle, and several reviews call the ensemble unusually strong. The frustration is that Taylor, Moreno, and others are not always given enough to do.
-
Most reactions land on enjoyable to very entertaining, especially when the movie leans into suspicion and star chemistry. The dissenters see it as disposable, generic streaming fare that is easy to forget.
-
Once suspicion takes hold, the film can move with excellent momentum and make its length feel light. The main complaints are a slow first act, a long setup, and finales that sometimes run past the natural stopping point.
-
The moody, low-light cinematography often gives the film a gritty theatrical look and turns confined spaces into pressure cookers. The main drawback is that the final act becomes too murky for at least one critic.
-
The film usually moves well enough that its near-two-hour length is not a major problem. The most common runtime complaint is that the wrap-up or finale could lose several minutes.
-
The screenplay earns praise for its contained premise, suspicion engine, and satisfying reveal structure. Its weaker side is exposition, thin secondary characterization, and logic that becomes patchy under the weight of the twists.
-
The moral ambiguity around greed, loyalty, corruption, and who counts as a good cop gives the thriller more substance than a simple shootout movie. Some critics still wish those ideas were sharper or less simplistic.
-
The best version of the story is a compact pressure cooker about trust, greed, and corruption. The weaker version becomes generic or muddled once its thin characterization and pileup of twists start showing.
-
The mystery can reward a second viewing, and some viewers are eager to revisit how the clues fit together. Others expect the movie to fade quickly once the twists are known.
-
Its firmly adult crime-thriller sensibility is part of the appeal for viewers who want a grown-up, hard-edged genre movie.
-
The strongest dramatic scenes are the face-offs between Damon and Affleck, where their friendship and mutual distrust give the macho posturing real emotional intensity.
-
The ordinary cul-de-sac and stash house are transformed into threatening, enclosed spaces, making the modest location feel tense rather than cheap.
-
One enthusiastic reviewer felt the movie offered enough star power and old-school excitement to justify paying for the experience rather than only streaming it.
-
The cop lingo, worn-down behavior, and grounded production often create convincing authenticity. That realism is weakened by implausible decisions, continuity errors, and plot mechanics that some reviewers could not buy.
-
The central friendship and weary-cop humanity give the movie real emotional weight for some viewers. Others find late grief beats or sentimental touches unearned, leaving the emotional payoff uneven.
-
The sound can make gunfire and physical hits feel forceful on a good setup, but the mix is inconsistent. One review specifically notes dialogue being swallowed by ambient noise.
-
The movie plays best as a Friday-night, macho crime-thriller watch rather than a broad crowd-pleaser. Viewers already drawn to Damon, Affleck, and old-school cop movies are the clearest fit.
-
Some of the early critical enthusiasm is seen as justified, especially around the darker style and stronger-than-usual Netflix craft. That praise does not erase complaints about generic plotting and thin characters.
-
The humor is light and mostly carried by banter, attitude, and the Damon-Affleck dynamic. Some viewers think that amount is just right, while others wish the grim tone had more levity.
Cons
Sort
-
Character depth is the most consistent weakness. Damon and Affleck get the most usable material, while several supporting officers are repeatedly described as underdeveloped, thin, or introduced too late.
-
The dialogue draws frequent criticism for exposition, tough-guy clichés, and repetitive profanity. A smaller group likes the natural banter and hard-boiled rhythm when the actors can make it feel lived in.
-
The layered double-crosses and hidden motives are often harder to follow than they need to be. Some enjoy that density, but several reviewers call the plotting muddy, convoluted, or logically inconsistent.
-
The film’s moral framing of cops and corruption splits opinion. Some appreciate its search for imperfect heroes, while others see the good-cop message as simplistic, too pointed, or close to copaganda.
-
The movie rarely escapes the shadow of familiar cop-thriller formulas. A few reviewers find smart variations in its contained setup, but most still describe the overall package as derivative or recognizably Netflix-era genre fare.
-
The stash house itself can feel lived-in and threatening, but the broader Miami setting is underused. Several critics wanted more local texture and a stronger sense that the story truly belonged to that city.
-
The constant tough-cop profanity can become grating rather than immersive, especially when paired with the film’s sourer stretches.
-
The late surge of gunfire and chases can feel excessive when it starts crowding out the intrigue that made the earlier sections work.
-
The contained, grounded pressure-cooker tone works very well at its best. The trouble comes when the movie shifts into shouty action, relentless dourness, or sentimental closure that feels like a different film.
-
The film’s dark neo-noir lighting and gritty sheen often create a convincing, cinematic mood. The same darkness is also a recurring complaint, with several viewers finding later scenes murky, ugly, or generically Netflix-polished.
-
The quieter money-counting and interrogation scenes benefit from deliberate cuts that let tension breathe. Action editing is less consistent, with some complaints about choppiness and a chaotic final stretch.
-
The ending is sharply divisive. Several critics love the final reveal and resolution, while others think the film keeps going too long, turns generic, or closes on an overly sentimental note.
-
The twists are the most polarizing part of the plot: some land as clever surprises, while others are spotted early or feel mandated by the genre. The structure works better than its actual novelty.
-
The action is divisive: some praise the clear gunfights, chases, and physical impact, while others find it too sparse, generic, or overbearing late in the film. The suspense often lands better than the spectacle.
Cast & Creators
-
Dane DumarsDamon is the most consistently praised performer, bringing weary authority, restraint, and emotional weight to Dane. Even negative reviews often single him out as the actor most capable of rising above the material.
-
JD ByrneAffleck’s volatile energy and long-standing chemistry with Damon give J.D. much of the film’s spark. Most responses are strongly positive, though a few find the macho bravado overcooked or visibly performed.
-
DesiCalle receives near-universal praise for making Desi guarded, vulnerable, suspicious, and sympathetic at once. Her presence is repeatedly credited with sharpening the tension inside the house.
-
Mike RoYeun is repeatedly described as reliable, convincing, and compelling, with his understated manner helping the film’s uncertainty about who can be trusted.
-
Writer-DirectorCarnahan’s strongest contribution is the way he turns a contained setup into sustained paranoia and pressure. His direction is usually praised as confident and muscular, with the main criticism aimed at bluntness or a chaotic final act.
-
Numa BaptisteTaylor brings lively energy and skepticism to Numa, and some viewers call her a scene stealer. The recurring frustration is that the role is smaller than her presence deserves.
-
ComposerShorter’s score is one of the clearest technical successes, using an accelerated pulse and glowering synth texture to intensify suspense without needing constant action.
-
MattyChandler makes a strong impression with relaxed charisma and a slightly seedy edge. Even reviews that dislike the movie often treat him as a bright spot.
-
Lolo SalazarMoreno is praised for the banter and grounded energy she brings to the team, especially opposite Taylor. Her performance works even though the character is not given much depth.
-
CinematographerAzpiroz’s gritty cinematography is praised for avoiding flat streaming gloss and giving the film cinematic tension. The main knock is that the final act becomes too dark and visually chaotic.
-
DelAdkins is a welcome against-type presence for viewers who enjoy seeing him outside martial-arts roles. One reviewer, however, finds his acting noticeably weaker beside Damon and Affleck.
-
WriterMcGrale’s co-written screenplay is criticized in one review for falling short of the cast’s pedigree, particularly in a story that could have used sharper character work.
-
EditorHale’s editing is criticized in the film’s final stretch, where the visual and cutting choices become too chaotic to make the action easy to appreciate.