Critics have not held back in their scathing assessments of Zack Snyder’s Rebel Moon saga, with both Part One: A Child of Fire and Part Two: The Scargiver facing significant backlash from audiences and reviewers alike. Despite Snyder’s signature visual style and ambitious world-building, the films have failed to resonate with viewers, earning dismal ratings and sparking widespread criticism.
One of the most common complaints leveled against both installments is their excessive reliance on exposition. While exposition can be a valuable tool for world-building and character development, critics argue that Rebel Moon inundates audiences with lengthy backstory sequences and expository dialogue, detracting from the overall pacing and narrative cohesion. Flashbacks, in particular, are singled out for their overuse, with reviewers lamenting Snyder’s tendency to rely on them as a crutch for conveying character histories and plot details.
Critics such as Forbes’ Erik Kain have criticized the films for their reliance on exposition-heavy flashbacks, which they argue detract from character development and narrative momentum. Similarly, IGN notes that the abundance of exposition in Part Two contributes to a sense of narrative stagnation, with flashbacks hindering the pacing and depth of character relationships.
In addition to issues with exposition, critics have also pointed to weak character work as a major flaw in both films. While Part One is criticized for featuring generic and underdeveloped characters, Part Two’s attempts to rectify this issue are described as forced and ineffective. Mashable suggests that the character development in Part Two feels wedged into the narrative, resulting in a lack of emotional resonance and coherence. Moreover, Snyder’s handling of character-driven storytelling is deemed inadequate by critics such as Gizmodo, who argue that his reliance on slow-motion and flashbacks undermines attempts at emotional engagement.
The pervasive use of slow-motion throughout both films has also drawn ire from reviewers, who accuse Snyder of indulging in his trademark visual style to the detriment of pacing and storytelling. The Independent criticizes Part Two for its excessive reliance on slow-motion sequences, which it argues contribute to a sense of tedium and artificiality. Similarly, The Hollywood Reporter suggests that the films would be significantly shorter if not for Snyder’s penchant for slow-motion, with the effect detracting from the overall viewing experience.
Furthermore, both Rebel Moon films have been criticized for their derivative and trope-laden narratives, drawing comparisons to established sci-fi franchises such as Star Wars and Guardians of the Galaxy. Variety notes that Part Two borrows heavily from genre conventions, resulting in a formulaic and uninspired storyline. Similarly, The Wrap suggests that the films’ reliance on overfamiliar tropes diminishes their impact and originality, contributing to a sense of creative stagnation.
Despite the widespread criticism, Snyder has confirmed that extended, R-rated cuts of both films are in the works, promising a deeper dive into the Rebel Moon universe. However, critics remain skeptical of these upcoming releases, questioning the necessity of additional content and expressing frustration at the prospect of having to revisit the films in their current state. As audiences await the arrival of these revised editions, the critical consensus remains clear: Zack Snyder’s Rebel Moon saga has failed to live up to its ambitious premise, delivering a disappointing viewing experience that falls short of expectations.