Challengers
audience Reviews
, 74% Audience Score- Rating: 1 out of 5 starsJust felt like they dragged the movie out too long, spent too much time being confused about the backwards and forwards in timeline. It’s just about sex and tennis, thats basically it. Had high hopes for it considering Zendaya is in it.
- Rating: 5 out of 5 starsChallengers is an absolute blast! A film that really surprised me - exciting, full of passion and brilliantly shot. The chemistry between the main characters is amazing and the story draws you in from the first minute. I love how the film combines sports with deeper themes, showing not only rivalry but also interpersonal relationships. It gives everything you could expect from cinema - laughter, emotion and a thrill.
- Rating: 0.5 out of 5 starsHorrible movie. Ending made no sense and was a cop-out. No character to root for. Not one genuine moment of laughter. Forced sexiness wasn't even provocative at all. Boring story. Boring lifestyle. Boring plot. Just watch Closer and have this story’s actual moral and dramatic effect.
- Rating: 2 out of 5 starsReally nice character driven movie. Great arcs and motive of people. All three had really great chemistry, but for me its still a part of movie not the movie. I'm just confused with why director chose non-linear storytelling. I mean i do understand some part of it, but movie still leaves a large gap about how their relationship went because art and tashi are married and have kids. I also feel story doesn't involves me personally because we know there's some friction between the two (art and patrick) and eventually it will come down to what happens in finals. So maybe in film-school-artsy-term this was not about story but unfortunately i needed some. Also i think its funny, that film doesn't do justice to art as in some great player in tennis, because right from the movie starts he's struggling till the end. Also, i don't know why people don't acknowledge the fact that even if art unleashed his true tennis in the end which i saw were basically playing catch catch in slomo (which even made me think maybe they are making a mockery out of it). So good movie, just an hour long would have been perfect with some less camera angles.
- Rating: 1 out of 5 starsAdore Zendaya. But the 2 guys are duds in this movie. Wimpy and self loathing. Cringe worthy performances. Neither one close to “being a tennis athlete.” Pathetic thus a downer of a movie.
- Rating: 1 out of 5 starsWeird pacing, horrible acting/writing/directing. Not sure if I’m supposed to care about any of the characters. Random loud music between shots, just seems like a college kid made it so I’m assuming it’s an indie film
- Rating: 5 out of 5 starsi was captivated all the way through. amazing movie
- Rating: 2.5 out of 5 starsI’m a film enthusiast but I’ve never posted a review online. After watching this I searched for critic reviews that shared my opinion, but I came up empty. That’s why I’m trying something new and providing my opinion here. This movie is a 5.5/10 that could have easily been 7.5/10. The depth of sexuality and the beautiful way certain questions were left unanswered, along with the phenomenally unique use of the score when Patrick and Tashi had their tumultuous scenes set fantastic potential here, making it a sin to be this mediocre. Call Me By Your Name is a masterpiece, and I’m not asking him to repeat, but come on… The main issue I’m consumed by is why is Patrick is so aggressively hated by his costars. He got in one harmless argument with his partner, a situation where she was likely more in the wrong, and that creates seemingly IMMENSE animosity between the group that lasts 15 years. It makes no sense. He’s kind of a prick but we never even see him act out with that behavior, aside from his dating app endeavor. Who loses their best friend from this type of situation? He should be more confused and upset, instead of the pathetic heal. Either way, like a lot of films these days, it feels like these uber-modern directors can’t figure out a way to tell a complete satisfying story in two hours, though it used to be on the longer side of the norm. I don’t fully understand any relationship in this film, as we didn’t have the necessary scenes or dialogue to truly feel those connections, and in a movie like this it’s completely necessary. There’s a lot of amazing stuff here, notably all in the first 70 minutes, but I’d pass on the next 70 if I somehow found myself watching it again. So unless you’re a cinefile, what’s the point?
- Rating: 2.5 out of 5 starsThere's potential here, but we are all still waiting for this movie to go somewhere or anywhere. Maybe the lack of conclusion is just a reflection of current American culture, or maybe the writer/director just couldn't decide what the right answer is in such a dizzying take on reality for a trio of characters that makes little to no contribution to life. Congrats to the actors for portraying such horrible people so well. It's a struggle to root for any of them.
- Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars🎾 At the beginning of Challengers, I was a bit worried that my expectations for Luca Guadagnino's new film might be too high—after all, with Call Me By Your Name, Suspiria, and Bones and All, he’s delivered the best directing trifecta of the 21st century. But initially, everything Guadagnino and Kuritzkes threw at me felt so direct, flat, almost banal. Was this really just about the drama between this tennis trio? Would I actually enjoy this for over two hours? 🍌 Yes, and oh yes! At a certain point, the film had me—I was as trapped as the three protagonists in the game of life (=tennis?). And what a joy it was to unravel how the script works, with its unexpected pay-offs, some of which had been set up 90 minutes earlier. How the film can be viewed from three different perspectives, making it a drama at times, a comedy at others. How Faist and O'Connor let themselves be used by Zendaya like loyal Labradors. How everything slowly builds up and culminates in that decisive scene—the 15 seconds of real tennis that erupt the entire volcano of character build-up. While watching, I could feel the screenplay grinning mischievously at me. 🌭 Then there’s Guadagnino, whose dominant directing style made it a particular delight to see how he controlled what I could and couldn’t see, and when. The dialogue makes the audience’s gaze dart back and forth like in a tennis match. The depth of the frame is utilized like a serve that somehow crashes straight into the net (the hotel bar scene is especially brilliant here). Phallic food, endless sexual tension, slow-motion sweat dripping onto the camera—everything about this is the best tennis I’ve ever seen. 🥵 I won’t even get started on the film’s structure, the phenomenal score, or the staging of the finale. What’s clear is this: rarely have two hours flown by so quickly, rarely has a sport I don’t like captivated me so much, and rarely have I wanted to rewatch a film the second the credits rolled. Challengers will stick with me for a long time. Simply put, it’s an erotic tennis film—and pulling that off is an achievement in itself...