The latest Netflix action movie of the summer features Gal Gadot as Rachel Stone, who must protect something known as the Heart. The appropriately titled Heart of Stone serves as another action-hero role for the Israeli actress who has gained widespread fame for her roles in the Fast & Furious series and as Wonder Woman in the DC Extended Universe. An actress of Gadot’s caliber teaming with the executive producers of Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning seems like a match made in heaven at first glance. However, as this action spy thriller progresses, it becomes apparent how bland and barebones this movie really is.
Heart of Stone kicks off with a big opening action set piece. This is always a great way to start off a spy movie, introducing the team members, the espionage, and the technology at the forefront of this story. We’re quickly introduced to the world with a classic James Bond-esque opening that feels reminiscent of On Her Majesty’s Secret Service. When it comes to espionage thrillers, the comparison will always be made to the two cinematic titans of the franchise: James Bond and Mission: Impossible. Comparisons can be made to both, but unfortunately, with Heart of Stone, it’s an uphill battle.
You can see parts of what the filmmakers are attempting to create here. Stone is a badass action hero with a few quips in the vein of John McClane. The opening set piece does a great job of consistently building in intensity as the locations change and new obstacles are introduced. However, the direction of these sequences is subpar. The film is directed by Tom Harper, who has helmed a few Peaky Blinders episodes and, most recently, The Aeronauts. This is Harper’s first venture into large-scale action blockbuster territory, and it’s clear why this movie did not reach its full potential.
Heart of Stone features many action sequences, but most of them don’t fully land. The close-quarters combat scenes are filmed and edited in a way that makes it hard to tell what’s going on. The camera placement is uninspired and often too close to the actors to see the choreography. The other issue here is that with Harper’s shot choices, it is evident that Gadot is not doing the majority of her stunts. Whenever she is on a motorcycle, the camera is either mounted to the motorcycle in a close-up as she pivots her way in front of a green screen or so wide that we can’t see the stunt double’s face.
Perhaps this is the wrong movie to come out the same year as films like John Wick: Chapter 4, Extraction 2, and Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One that all feature leading actors willing to perform their own stunts. If you’ve seen any of those movies, it’s always easy to see the performers driving, jumping, and fighting for real. However, when you have Rachel Stone wearing a helmet that obstructs her head every time she does anything remotely dangerous, you’re not getting the same thrills that you get while watching Ethan Hunt, John Wick, Tyler Rake do their stuff.
Don’t get me wrong, I don’t want to take away from any of the fantastic stunts that Gadot does perform in this movie. But with the aforementioned movies being released in just the past few months, the caliber of action movies is high, and the market does not need a middle-of-the-road actioner. Heart of Stone can definitely be applauded for being one of the few female-led action films which feature a woman kicking ass in the lead role, and this movie also has the right idea of not making the feminism preachy to the point where it distracts from the story. Rachel’s strength as an action hero speaks for itself, and that is executed well.
However, it seems as if they forgot to give Rachel a character. She has virtually no characterization in this movie. It feels like an early-era James Bond movie where Bond does not have a past that we know of, but his gadgets and charm are so magnetic that he’s fun to watch. This movie does not have gadgets, nor does it have any emotional stakes driving the movie forward. There’s a sliver of revenge at the center of Heart of Stone, which drives the hero and the villain. This is mildly compelling, but Gadot’s leading lady performance is not charismatic enough to counterbalance the film’s lack of humor and charm.
The story is yet another movie about a group of people trying to obtain something powerful before it falls into the wrong hands. You can compare this to Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One, where the heroes and villains are both pursuing the same powerful object. However, it works in that movie because the opening scene shows you precisely what the object is capable of. The MacGuffin in Heart of Stone is so metaphorical and so vague that the only thing we know about it is that whoever owns it can become invincible. The goals and stakes at the forefront of this film are so undeveloped that even in a globetrotting action thriller, the stakes feel lower than ever, as the villain is mainly on a personal vendetta.
Speaking of villains, Heart of Stone seems to introduce a new one every 20 minutes. Once the movie finally decides on its main players, it gets rid of one of them way too early. The remaining two villains do not have any chemistry or an interesting relationship with each other. The story sometimes feels as if it is making itself up as it goes along, feeling derivative of other superior action films and lacking the strong creative voice that Christopher McQuarrie, Chad Stahelski, Sam Hargrave, and David Leitch have brought to the genre in recent years. Despite a surprising twist early on, Heart of Stone features an underwhelming final battle and will ultimately leave you stone-faced.
SCORE: 5/10
As ComingSoon’s review policy explains, a score of 5 equates to “Mediocre.” The positives and negatives wind up negating each other, making it a wash.
