The Weight Feature Scores
Explore all 43 feature scores for The Weight, organized into pros and cons.
Scores by Feature
Summary
43 reviewed features-
Very positive 4.5-5.017 (40%)
-
Positive 3.5-4.413 (30%)
-
Neutral 2.5-3.48 (19%)
-
Negative 1.5-2.45 (12%)
Pros
Sort
-
Ethan Hawke's restrained, gravel-voiced turn is the clearest point of consensus, repeatedly described as the film's anchor and among his strongest recent work. The main reservation is that a few critics find him less convincing in full action-hero mode.
-
The cast is widely praised for giving the rugged material credibility, with the strongest notices going to Ethan Hawke and several supporting players. Even more reserved assessments still describe the ensemble as solid.
-
The wilderness photography is one of the most consistently praised crafts, with reviewers admiring its foreboding landscapes, period texture, and composed imagery. A few object to murky lighting, shallow focus, or claustrophobic framing.
-
Reviewers respond strongly to the film's ideas about labor, class, institutional power, greed, and solidarity. Even when the politics are called direct or blunt, the social message is generally seen as meaningful rather than disposable.
-
Russell Crowe, Julia Jones, Avi Nash, Austin Amelio, and the broader ensemble receive frequent praise for adding menace, warmth, or personality around Hawke. Even reviews critical of the characters often distinguish the performances as strong.
-
The strongest relationship work comes from the believable camaraderie and friction within the group and the understated connection between Murphy and Anna. A few reviews find some alliances too thinly developed.
-
The period setting is largely praised for researched detail, convincing production texture, and Depression-era context. A few critics question specific historical or geographic choices, including how convincingly the Pacific Northwest is represented.
-
The film is widely seen as a satisfying throwback survival thriller, with its 1970s-style grit and character-driven adventure earning repeated praise. Even mixed reviews generally recognize the appeal of its old-fashioned genre approach.
-
Murphy's separation from his daughter gives the film a strong emotional anchor, and several critics find the opening or quieter character beats genuinely affecting. Others feel the movie pushes the pathos too hard or leaves emotional potential underdeveloped.
-
Sets, period vehicles, worn environments, and other production details are consistently credited with making the Depression-era world believable and textured.
-
The 1933 wilderness and labor-camp setting are often described as immersive, lived-in, and carefully developed, giving the heist real social and physical context.
-
The bridge and river sequences generate the strongest agreement, with many reviewers describing them as gripping or nerve-racking. Still, a substantial minority feel the film never sustains the white-knuckle tension its premise suggests.
-
The weathered 1970s throwback look, natural environments, and period imagery are frequently admired. Critics who dissent complain about overly murky images, shallow focus, or stylized framing that distracts from the action.
-
Many critics appreciate the survival story's deeper interest in class, labor, greed, solidarity, fatherhood, and institutional cruelty. Others find those ideas blunt, shallow, or insufficiently explored.
-
Creaking forests, environmental texture, and impact-heavy action sound are frequently praised for increasing immersion and tension. One notable complaint is a dialogue mix so quiet that lines become difficult to hear.
-
Most direct recommendations say the film is worth seeking out, and several specifically encourage seeing its physical set pieces on a big screen. More qualified praise still frames it as worthwhile genre entertainment.
-
The metallic, propulsive score is often praised for adding dread, momentum, and scale to the journey. Some critics find it distracting, overbearing, or stylistically out of place.
-
The grounded locations, practical texture, and believable problem-solving often make the danger feel immediate. However, a few major set-piece choices—especially the bridge solution—are criticized as forced or implausible.
-
The physical set pieces—especially the rope bridge, river crossing, and later confrontations—are often tense, tactile highlights. A minority find some action confusingly cut, implausible, or less exciting than the setup promises.
-
Padraic McKinley's debut is frequently praised for confidence, atmosphere, and physical staging, especially in the survival set pieces. Dissenting reviews fault uneven visual choices, limited suspense, or action coverage that sacrifices clarity.
-
Period clothing, especially the worn workwear and denim, is repeatedly credited with helping the 1933 setting feel lived-in and authentic.
-
The dialogue is generally praised as sharp and purposeful, with several reviewers singling out the writing enough to want every line to land clearly. Even positive accounts note that some delivery can be very quiet.
-
Several critics describe the film as crowd-pleasing, theater-worthy adult entertainment, particularly for viewers who miss old-fashioned survival adventures. Others think its slow stretches make streaming a better fit.
-
The drama is strongest when the performances keep the human stakes grounded between bursts of action. Reviewers who mention these quieter scenes often find them among the film's best material.
-
Real locations and tactile, practical filmmaking are praised for giving the danger physical credibility and a rugged texture that more polished studio action can lack.
-
The core premise—a desperate father leading a dangerous gold transport—is often called a strong, well-told yarn with clear stakes. Less enthusiastic critics find the execution saggy, familiar, or weaker than the setup.
-
For many reviewers, the straightforward adventure delivers sturdy, old-school entertainment with enough peril and character interplay to stay engaging. More negative critics find it merely agreeable or weighed down by sluggish stretches.
-
The script earns praise for its premise, momentum, character relationships, and class themes, but reactions are uneven. Critics of it point to contrivances, thin secondary characters, forced beats, and shortcuts in the final act.
-
Humor is used sparingly but effectively, with reviewers noticing both subtle comic touches in the script and lighter moments that relieve the otherwise grim trek.
-
One reviewer approves of the rough, unglamorized handling of violence because it carries emotional impact rather than feeling like polished action spectacle.
Cons
Sort
-
The film's tone is a repeated concern, especially when its grim, punishing journey gives way to a sunnier resolution or an anachronistic musical flourish. Reviewers who raise the issue generally find those shifts mismatched.
-
Several reviewers report moments of confusion, especially during fast-cut action or late-story developments. The underlying mission remains simple, but visual and narrative transitions sometimes make execution harder to follow.
-
The music choices outside the score are much more divisive, especially the anachronistic rock needle drop near the ending. A few viewers enjoy that choice, while several critics call it jarring or tonally wrong.
-
The nearly two-hour length is a recurring drawback, with several reviewers arguing that tighter cuts would improve the film. One more positive assessment considers the 113-minute ride an uncomplicated, worthwhile use of time.
-
Anna's assimilation history gives the film some meaningful cultural texture, but multiple reviewers criticize the Native character's narrative function or say the racial politics are too bluntly handled.
-
Rewatch interest is mixed and sparsely discussed: one critic predicts a long afterlife as a comfort-watch 'dad movie,' while others expect it to be remembered pleasantly rather than revisited often.
-
Some viewers enjoy the story's surprises and resistance to cookie-cutter plotting, but others see predictable bones and familiar turns beneath the polished execution.
-
Some reviews find the travelers distinct, sympathetic, and well-defined enough for their changing dynamics to matter. Others see thin archetypes, an over-idealized protagonist, and underwritten supporting characters.
-
Pacing is one of the most divided attributes. Positive reviews praise sustained momentum and a confident clip, while critics of the film point to a long setup, a sagging middle, or an overlong runtime.
-
Editing is a major point of disagreement: some critics call it sharp, intentional, or even stunning, while others say fast cuts and disjointed transitions make climactic action rushed or hard to follow.
-
The quiet connection between Murphy and Anna works best when treated as mutual respect and tenderness rather than a conventional romance. Several critics, however, find the romantic thread unnecessary, thin, or underdeveloped.
-
The film's relationship to classic survival thrillers produces mixed reactions: many admire how it uses familiar influences without becoming imitation, while others find the story too derivative or unsurprising.
-
The finale divides opinion. Some find the hard-won resolution entertaining and emotionally earned, while others think its cheerful turn clashes with the story's darker themes or arrives too neatly.
Cast & Creators
-
Samuel MurphyEthan Hawke is the film's most consistently acclaimed element, with reviewers praising his quiet intensity, expressive restraint, physical commitment, and ability to carry the emotional stakes. A few find him less convincing as a conventional action hero, but the overall response is overwhelmingly strong.
-
CinematographerMatteo Cocco's cinematography earns near-uniform praise for turning the wilderness into something beautiful, threatening, and convincingly period-specific, with only occasional reservations about visual murkiness.
-
ClancyRussell Crowe is widely praised for making Clancy menacing, charismatic, and controlled without needing much screen time. Reviewers repeatedly note that his limited appearances still carry strong presence.
-
AnnaJulia Jones is repeatedly praised for giving Anna wary intelligence, emotional force, and capable presence, often standing out despite limited material. Some reviews admire her chemistry with Hawke even while criticizing how the character is written.
-
DirectorPadraic McKinley's feature directing debut earns substantial praise for confident staging, atmosphere, and tactile suspense, especially in the bridge and river sequences. More critical reviews fault uneven camera choices, action clarity, and stretches where tension drops.
-
Writer/ComposerShelby Gaines' contributions draw praise both for the screenplay's momentum and themes and for the score's tense, metallic character. Negative reviews, however, criticize parts of the script as forced and some music choices as intrusive.
-
ComposerLatham Gaines' score work is often praised for propulsive, metallic tension and mood, though a few critics find the electronic sound distracting or out of place.
-
WriterMatthew Chapman's writing contribution is generally received positively for momentum and character writing, though one review notes that the screenplay takes shortcuts.
-
SinghAvi Nash draws strong notices as Singh, with reviewers calling him a tremendous screen presence and an outstanding part of the ensemble.
-
WriterMatthew Booi's writing receives a mixed-positive response: several reviewers praise the muscular premise, themes, and momentum, while others criticize forced plotting, shortcuts, and underdeveloped characters.
-
RankinAustin Amelio is praised for making Rankin's abrasive unpredictability entertaining and credible, giving the group a volatile presence who could derail the mission by accident or choice.
-
PennyAvy Berry receives direct praise for her performance as Penny, with one reviewer calling the young actor 'really, really fantastic.'
-
WriterLeo Scherman's story contribution is part of a writing team one reviewer says works surprisingly well despite the number of credited writers.
-
AmisSam Hazeldine is included in a solid ensemble assessment, supporting the film's generally strong cast work.
-
EditorMatthew Woolley's editing contribution is criticized in the reviews that name him, particularly for choppy or disjointed cutting that hurts action clarity.