8th October 2025
★★★
When The Smashing Machine’s first official still released, and Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson’s look as Mark Kerr was revealed, I remember the disbelief. He was unrecognisable, and instantly it put the film on my radar. But is the film a bold new film from one half of the Safdie Brothers, or is it a vehicle for The Rock’s new career direction?
In the 2010s, the Benny and Josh Safdie really established themselves as a directing duo to look out for with the 2017 crime thriller, Good Time, a film that also showed the world Robert Pattinson’s acting abilities. A huge part of the reason Good Time was so well regarded was a sense of constant anxiety the film would invoke on the audience. Their follow-up, 2019’s Uncut Gems though, truly cemented their legacy. Starring Adam Sandler in a heavily praised role that played against type for Sandler, the film was even more anxiety-inducing than Good Time. Since 2019, the two hadn’t released another film, until it was announced that the two had parted ways to direct on their own.
It’s 2025, and both films have premiered, and are coming within 2 months of each other. It’s funny how that worked out, but in a way it really does show us a definitive comparison of the two, and while that’s not what my review is about, as frankly I find it reductive, I think it’s interesting to know what parts of their films as a duo translate into their solo work. In Benny Safdie’s case, he decided to make a film about the obstacles in the life of Mark Kerr in pursuit of being the best in a mixed-martial arts competition. Kerr himself is often referred to as “the smashing machine” due to his persistence and ability to just completely lock in and destroy his opponents, although as someone who didn’t know anything about Mark Kerr going in, the title gave me a different impression of the film’s subtext. Josh Safdie’s solo feature will be a fascinating comparison, Marty Supreme shares the writer for Good Time and Uncut Gems, and it has premiered as I said before, but as it is just one screening nothing is set in stone yet for it. Considering that both films are about sports in one way or another is a really funny coincidence, but it’s instantly apparent there are differences in their styles.
Cracks in the Rock
Instantly from the first time it was reported that The Rock was starring in this film, it was pretty obvious the angle Dwayne Johnson was going for. As a film produced by A24, and directed by a Safdie basically right after the biggest failure of his career, Johnson’s ambitions for box office domination were growing stale. His attempted takeover of the DC brand with Black Adam in 2022 left him with his butt on the floor, and quite frankly it was embarrassing considering how badly it flopped after the ego-trip that was the marketing campaign for the film. I was very tired of The Rock as an actor because of his ambition only ever being in pursuit of money and fame, and the performance being purely an afterthought. Arguably, his best performance was his voice work in Moana as Maui for me, and it’s mainly because you could tell he was having fun with it, and it really comes across. Compare that to Netflix’s Red Notice (2021), one of the worst movies I have ever suffered through and there is no fun involved, he wanted a successful Netflix film and that is what he got.
Black Adam’s failure however has seemed to change Johnson’s approach to film. He has said himself that he realised that box office domination was ultimately an empty pursuit, and to challenge himself and actually try putting in a performance was something he was more interested in. Mind you, this is in the same breath as a Moana remake that keeps Dwayne Johnson in his role as Maui again, but alas.. Johnson has seemingly managed to land a role in a potentially real Scorsese gangster film and so from the outsider’s perspective it’s a little hard to see what the “play” is. I could sit here and tell you he’s only doing all this because he’s in desperate need of an Oscar, a new egotistical mission — but I don’t want to do that. Whether or not that is his intention, it’s of no relation to the integrity of his performance.
The Smashing Machine truly does show a different side of Dwayne Johnson as an actor. I’m still on the Dave Bautista train, and John Cena continues to impress as Peacemaker, but I will admit I was impressed with Johnson’s performance here. Mark Kerr is portrayed as a man that is willing to abuse his own body in order to be the best. He laments on how much about the high that winning gives him, and he is unbeaten for a while in the movie to the point of his inability to fathom losing as he hasn’t experienced losing. Johnson succeeds in portraying this conflict, his reputation rules his decisions, but there are cracks under the surface, and a lot of this is shown in the scenes behind closed doors with his girlfriend, Dawn, played by Emily Blunt, who is also very good.
These domestic scenes were the highlight of the film for me. It shows a different side of Mark Kerr for better and for worse. His addiction to fighting pairs with an addiction to opioids, meanwhile his girlfriend Dawn wants to be let in to the other side of Mark’s life that he has kept a big wall around. It results in a lot of argument scenes that get quite intense, and Emily Blunt is absolutely incredible, it also gives Dwayne Johnson an opportunity to cry and shout, the universal best acting signifier obviously. Jokes aside, I appreciated the focus on Mark Kerr’s fallibility and vulnerability, and the film allows him to just run behind the curtain and just cry, which is a focus you don’t see in these types of movies. Instead you see destructive behaviour, and of course Mark has his fair share of destructive responses, and does abuse himself with his addiction to pain medications, he ultimately achieves sobriety pretty early in the film, a bit earlier than expected, and it honestly allows Mark Kerr’s vulnerability to be based on his own issues, his own flaws and insecurities rather than just getting hopelessly high to drown it out. I was surprised by how Dawn (Emily Blunt) ended up being the one to break to the point of having to forcibly be taken away. That pairing is inherently destructive due to Mark’s big indestructible wall that hurts to try and break through, though her own mental health issues, and growing alcohol and drug reliance causes a lot of tension for Mark as he is really trying to be better and be the strong and undefeated by opioids and yet Dawn is invertedly throwing it back in his face.
I’ve also got to hand it to the makeup department as Johnson did initially look unrecognisable. In action, you can tell it’s him through the way he speaks and generally carries himself, but I never felt like I was just watching The Rock playing himself, and a lot of that is in the makeup that completely changes his face, and I found that really impressive.
I Need You to Let Me In
While the performances and the focus on the humanity and vulnerability of Mark Kerr were big strengths of the film for me, everything else left me a little underwhelmed. The Smashing Machine ends up feeling pretty surface level in the themes it explores, and parts of the plot.
The Smashing Machine feels like it’s a documentary of Mark Kerr’s life, and I don’t think that’s inherently a bad thing, but the core of the plot is a wrestling tournament that doesn’t have well established stakes, that ultimately feels weightless when all is said and done. This would be fine if the film had a lot of substance in its subtext, being a character study that makes it that any fight would have you on the edge of your seat. The Iron Claw (2023) directed by Sean Durkin is a great example of this, the film is devastating and the stakes are extremely high based entirely on how the characters are built up. Mark Kerr is decently developed as I said before, and I still maintain that, but major parts of his development feel skimmed over. For example, his struggle with opioid addiction, his collapse is very random, and it happens off-screen. His sobriety journey then happens almost directly after but we don’t really see it, and it feels like that aspect of his life is just over. It’s a slippery slope complaining about something like this because Mark Kerr is still with us today and he actually did recover and become better, I’m not asking for the film to make up how he was, but rather not make these obstacles feel so insignificant to the tension of the story. Because we barely see either of these aspects, we don’t really feel like we’ve bonded to Mark and are instead being told about it. Hence the documentary comparison — it’s a large part of why biopics fail, because they feel more concerned about adapting their Wikipedia page. The Smashing Machine does choose to focus on a specific period of time, and it wants to go into Mark Kerr as a person and his struggle, but it doesn’t go beyond the surface level.
For example, Mark’s abuse of opioids, addiction to pain, and even a clear scene that shows two cars destroying each other for the entertainment of others. These all feel like they’d contribute to this concept of Mark Kerr feeling inhuman, as if he is a machine made to deal and take pain; the title of the film equally adding to this. I am aware of the fact the title is just his own title in the ring given by others and he took it up, but arguably that’s why it could’ve been a bigger focus here because it’s an active aspect of Mark Kerr by his own admission. There’s so many interesting ways Safdie could’ve shown Mark Kerr’s feeling of being a machine vs being a human, and while I loved the humanity aspects of the film, the machine side is glossed over way too quickly in favour of showing us the tournament. There are certainly aspects of the machine aspect as I said, with the destruction derby parallel, even the broken plate that’s said to be more beautiful glued back together, but it feels a bit shallow when vital aspects to that dichotomy are skimmed over.
It ultimately leaves the film feeling a little pointless. It didn’t feel like it wanted to say anything, and I don’t always agree that films need to say something, but arguably what’s the point of watching this over a well-made documentary if it’s not willing to use the medium of film to portray things that can’t be done in a documentary in the same way. It left me ironically wanting to be let in, but I was at a distance.
Despite that, the film was still well made, I loved the performances and I did like the vulnerability of Mark Kerr, but I left the cinema feeling cheated out of a vastly more interesting take of this same movie. Though Benny Safdie’s next solo project is something I will still be keeping an eye out for as what works here really does work for me. The Smashing Machine is a good film that could’ve been great.
Thanks for reading.
Newton's Law 