Companion Made Me Question Everything

Companion is overrated. With a 94% critics score and 89% audience score on Rotten Tomatoes, I realize my opinion for this movie is in the minority. Peliplat keeps it a bit more real, rating the movie a 7.4, but even that seems too high. I'm surprised to see such high praise and the audience flocking to the theatre, despite the movie having a first-time director and a cast made up of relative newcomers. To me, the movie had no clear point, and a social commentary that is neither accurate nor enticing.

I've learned recently that acting is one of the most subjective parts of a movie. Sometimes the actors I hate are the ones that others love and vice versa, so I don't expect you to agree with my views. But I will say how I feel. As the character Iris, Sophie Thatcher is flat, monotoned and uninteresting. Playing a robot naturally lends itself to a static performance, but considering how technically advanced she is supposed to be, there could have been a bit more life behind her eyes and a bit more uniqueness to how she presents her emotional turmoil. Just because you're playing a robot doesn't mean you have to deliver a robotic performance. Look at Alicia Vikander; she did it better in Ex Machina.

Jack Quaid should thank his lucky stars and his nepotistic advantages that he's having this year of leading movie roles (he also stars in Novocaine, which comes out on March 14). He's completely forgettable as the main villain, Josh. He's a typical caricature of the modern, single man in his late 20s who is too much of an incel to actually have a girlfriend. Harry Styles did it better in Don't Worry Darling. Deeper in the cast, Lukas Gage is jacked and handsome, and he shines when he has to play a mindless, blank-faced killer, probably because that part of the role required no emotional depth at all (and Schwarzenegger did it better in Terminator). Harvey Guillén does his best to provide comedic levity to Companion, but a high majority of the jokes fell flat in the theatre I was in. There's something so cringe-inducing about watching a movie try to be funny only to have the audience not laugh at all.

I've seen people say that it's best to go into Companion without knowing anything about it. If I'd done that, maybe I would have enjoyed the first act of the movie more. But I made the mortal error of watching the movie's trailer. Thus, I knew that Iris was an AI companion girlfriend. This is what made me want to see the movie—I thought the horror-comedy blend would work well for this robotic protagonist. However, as a guy who watched the trailer, the whole mystique of the first act was lost on me. It's full of easter eggs and subtle nods that she's a robot, but we don't explicitly find that out until the end of act one. Needless to say, I was thoroughly bored for the first 30 minutes as I waited for the story to pick up the pace. Now, you might say that that's a me problem for watching the trailer, but I disagree. The logline and poster make it pretty clear that she's a robot. Besides, without the she's-a-robot angle, the story doesn't exist, so what did others think they were going in to watch? I watch the trailer for nearly every movie I see, and rarely does it affect my viewing experience as much as it did with Companion. I put the blame on the filmmaker, who made a great trailer but also crafted a first act that relied entirely on its end-of-act twist—one that was spoiled in order to get people to watch. As such, Companion would have been better had it had a richer first act that wasn't just a boring love story that relied entirely on its first twist.

Luckily, things picked up significantly in the second act. In line with the modern filmmaker's fear of losing the audience's attention, Companion keeps the twists coming. The second twist of the movie was not spoiled in the trailer and I'll try not to spoil it here. I'll just say that it makes the movie much more engaging and, when it was revealed, I finally started to buy into the film. Iris trying to escape her captors after she realizes she's a robot (the twists keep coming!) was pretty exciting, if not all that memorable. At least I was engaged with the movie. It's just too bad Companion didn't stick the landing.

The third act is as bad as the first, but for totally different reasons. By now, the wheels have completely fallen off. Iris knows she's a robot, Josh isn't getting what he wants, and most of the others are dead. It's in this act that things start getting philosophical. For me, the points this movie are trying to make are either confusing or untrue. It attempts to become this diatribe on feminism and toxic masculinity—how men only desire to control women, not love them, and that a free-thinking woman is a man's greatest fear. Although this may align with some neofeminist ideals, for me it's doubly ridiculous because I disagree with the notion that men only want to control women and, more importantly, Iris is not a woman but a beautifully designed robot. So, it brings up the contentious topic of robotic rights and how we treat AI. How is the audience supposed to see Iris—as a woman or as a robot? If it's a robot, then why do I care if she lives or dies? If she's a woman, why do I have to watch Josh force her to shoot herself in the head and then toss her around like a rag doll? It's either one of the most superfluous domestic abuse scenes I've ever seen, or it's the most ridiculous moral tale that could exist in 2025. Meanwhile, we have other companion robots in the movie regaining lost memories that hurt them so much that they kill themselves. How am I supposed to react to that? Should I sympathize with this sentient being or should I laugh at this robo-human's inability to control their emotions? What in the world is going on in this movie?

At this point, you might be thinking: "But Lucas, what about the other companion relationship? The gay couple, remember? They really loved each other and their relationship did not play into the feminist philosophy. What do you say to that?" Thanks for asking, voice in my head. This gay romance was secondary to the Iris story, and it was likely in Companion to show that some people really do love their robots and don't just manipulate them. Yet, I wonder if this relationship was as authentic as it was portrayed. Yes, they shared the most emotionally poignant dialogue scene in the movie, but was Eli (Gullién) sincere or did he put on the waterworks to keep Patrick (Gage) on his side? How much can somebody really love a robot programmed to their most minuscule desires? At most, it is like loving yourself, which I'm a big supporter of, but if you loved yourself, would you need a robot to fulfill your desire for reciprocal affection? I don't know. I'm questioning everything.

When the credits finally rolled, I was mainly happy that the movie was over, but also confused as to what Companion wanted me to take away from it. My initial thoughts were that men are nothing more than dicks attached to brains who only see women as trophies, not as real-life companions to our depressing, suffering-filled existence. The movie portrayed women as easily replaceable, and men as controlling narcissists. According to Companion, men only want a mirror. They are so self-absorbed that they believe sharing your life with another person is less rewarding than sharing these experiences with a second and hotter version of themselves. The more I think of it, considering it was written and directed by a man, this movie is like performative cinema for feminism. It doesn't mean what it's saying; it's only saying what it thinks you want to hear. There is the subplot of the gay companion relationship, but that storyline literally dies early in the second act. It felt like window dressing designed to hide the movie's more questionable plot elements.

Companion left me wondering about messaging in modern movies and who a movie like this is for. I suppose, if you just went through a breakup, I can see the cathartic charm. To me, it felt like it wanted to be about women's empowerment and furthering the straight-men-are-evil narrative, but having a robot protagonist makes the messaging unclear. I will give the movie credit for an exciting second twist and an engaging second act.

If you really want a horror-romance-comedy with a sci-fi flair, then Companion is a passable streaming option, although I'd suggest you avoid it entirely. Some might even see it as an early crowning achievement for 2025 movies. For me, my disappointment was immeasurable. It played like a movie that wants to be thought-provoking but doesn't have anything real to say.

Companion2025