The Smashing Machine Review: Let’s be honest, when people started talking about The Smashing Machine, they weren’t talking about the story, direction, or emotional depth. Nope. It was all about The Rock’s transformation. The prosthetics, the voice, the grit, and that worried me a bit. Because when the main buzz around a movie is “wow, look how different the actor looks,” it usually means there’s not much else holding it up.
So yeah, I walked in skeptical but curious. Let’s talk about what worked, what didn’t, and why The Smashing Machine feels like a mix of brilliance and burnout.
My Rating: 3.5/5
| Movie Title | The Smashing Machine |
|---|---|
| Director | Benny Safdie |
| Producers | Dwayne Johnson, Benny Safdie, Eli Bush |
| Production Company | A24 |
| Genre | Biographical Sports Drama |
| Based On | The life of MMA fighter Mark Kerr |
| Main Cast | Dwayne Johnson (The Rock), Emily Blunt |
| Release Year | 3 October 2025 |
| Runtime | 2h 3m |
| Language | English |
About the Movie
The film dives into the life of Mark Kerr, a real-life MMA fighter during the late ‘90s and early 2000s, a time when UFC was still finding its footing and Pride Fighting Championships in Japan were exploding in popularity.
Directed by Benny Safdie, one-half of the Safdie brothers behind Uncut Gems, the movie promised raw chaos and emotional intensity. And sure, there’s plenty of that, but it also feels like the chaos sometimes eats the story alive.
The Real Story — Mark Kerr’s Journey
Kerr was an unstoppable force, undefeated until life hit harder than any opponent ever could. The movie touches on his opioid addiction, his struggles to come back, and his toxic relationship that seems to anchor (and drown) both of them.
What’s missing is depth. We’re told he spiraled; we’re told he got clean. But we never see the collapse. No real emotional descent, just a jump cut from one version of him to another. It’s a missed opportunity to truly understand what broke the man behind the legend.
The Rock’s Transformation
Let’s talk about the elephant in the octagon, The Rock. Dwayne Johnson looks completely different here. The prosthetics team deserves an award. The bulk, the scars, the exhaustion, it’s all there.
But the performance? That’s where it gets complicated. For the first half, he’s solid, surprisingly subtle even. You can see him trying to stretch beyond his usual blockbuster bravado. But once the movie demands heavier emotional lifting, things start to wobble.
He has his moments, though. When Kerr starts realizing his life’s falling apart, The Rock sells that quiet devastation with real sincerity. It’s just the writing that doesn’t meet him halfway.
Emily Blunt’s Role
Emily Blunt plays Kerr’s girlfriend, and to put it simply, they’re the couple that should never have stayed together. Their dynamic is toxic, messy, and frustrating to watch. But not in a way that feels compelling, more like two people screaming on loop.
They love, they fight, they break things, they make up, then repeat. It’s supposed to show the emotional toll of fame and addiction, but it ends up feeling repetitive. You don’t root for either of them; you just want the scene to end.
The Safdie Touch
Benny Safdie knows how to make chaos cinematic. You saw it in Uncut Gems, that anxious, sweaty realism that feels like it’s shot in panic mode. Here, though, the formula doesn’t land the same way.
The Smashing Machine feels slower, heavier, and less sharp. The pacing drags in the middle, and instead of tension, you get fatigue.
The Fight Scenes
Now, the fights. You’d expect fireworks, right? The Rock in the ring, MMA at its rawest. But surprisingly, the matches take a back seat. Most of them happen in Japan under Pride banners, and while the technical realism is great, the emotional punch isn’t.
It’s ironic that the guy’s nickname is The Smashing Machine, but the movie’s most intense battles happen in his living room, not the cage.
Addiction and Recovery — Shown or Told?
The film wants to talk about addiction, but it doesn’t show it. We hear about his struggle, but we don’t feel it. It’s like reading a Wikipedia summary instead of watching someone’s descent.
That missing layer keeps the movie from being powerful. Addiction stories work when we see the cracks forming, when the audience suffers with the character. Here, we’re kept at arm’s length.
The Relationship That Dominates the Film
Honestly, this relationship drama hijacks the movie. For a film about an MMA legend, we spend more time watching emotional cage fights than real ones.
It’s not that personal drama doesn’t belong in sports biopics; The Wrestler and Creed nailed it. But here, it just feels unbalanced. By the end, you know more about their petty arguments than about what made Mark Kerr “The Smashing Machine.”
What the Movie Gets Right
- The acting — genuinely strong across the board.
- The cinematography — gritty, grounded, visually intense.
- The attempt — The Rock clearly cares about doing something different.
You can see the ambition. This is The Rock trying to reinvent himself for a new kind of audience — the A24 crowd.
What the Movie Gets Wrong
- Uneven pacing.
- Shallow storytelling for such a deep subject.
- Emotionally distant — it’s hard to care about anyone.
It’s a movie that feels like it wants to be three things at once: a sports drama, a relationship story, and an addiction narrative — and ends up half-landing each.
The Bigger Picture
Here’s what’s interesting: The Rock isn’t just acting here; he’s rebranding. He’s trying to step away from his franchise-heavy career and appeal to cinephiles. And honestly, I respect that.
But the movie around him doesn’t match the risk he’s taking. It’s too cautious, too uneven. Instead of The Rock’s best acting role, we get The Rock’s best acting attempt in an undercooked film.
Also Read: One Battle After Another Review: Leonardo DiCaprio’s Wildest Role Yet ?
Good & Bad
| Good Stuff | Bad Stuff |
|---|---|
| The Rock genuinely pushes himself as an actor | Slow pacing that kills momentum |
| Gritty, realistic cinematography | Emotionally distant storytelling |
| Emily Blunt’s performance holds ground | Relationship subplot overstays its welcome |
| Strong makeup and prosthetic work | Addiction arc is underdeveloped |
| Bold creative choice for The Rock’s career | Lacks narrative focus and heart |
Final Verdict
Here’s the thing: The Smashing Machine isn’t terrible. It’s just confused. It’s a bold experiment that forgets to connect emotionally.
The Rock does solid work, Emily Blunt matches his energy, and Benny Safdie’s style gives it edge. But storytelling-wise, it’s clunky and stretched thin.
If you’re an MMA fan, you’ll wish there was more action. If you’re into emotional biopics, you’ll wish it hit harder. Either way, it’s an admirable swing that doesn’t quite land the knockout.
Conclusion
The Smashing Machine is The Rock’s attempt to break out of his comfort zone, and while he doesn’t win by knockout, he earns points for stepping into a new ring.
It’s ambitious, messy, and at times frustrating, but it’s also the most human we’ve seen him in years. Whether that’s enough to make it memorable is another story.
FAQs
1. Is The Smashing Machine based on a true story?
Yes. It’s based on the real-life journey of MMA fighter Mark Kerr and his struggles with addiction and fame in the late ‘90s.
2. How accurate is The Rock’s portrayal?
Pretty accurate in spirit. While some parts are dramatized, The Rock captures Kerr’s intensity and inner conflict convincingly.
3. Is this movie worth watching for UFC fans?
If you’re here for the fights, maybe not. It’s more of a character study than a sports film.
4. Does it compare to other sports dramas like The Wrestler?
It tries to, but it doesn’t reach that level of emotional depth or storytelling.
5. Where can you watch The Smashing Machine?
In the theater right now.
