Scorch | Kevin Barrett's Blog

Posts Tagged ‘Scorch’

The Other Side Of The Walls (And Few Answers)

Posted in General Comments, Movie Review, Movies, Reviews, tagged Aidan Gillen, Alexander Flores, Barry Pepper, Cranks, Dexter Darden, Dr. Ava Paige, Dylan O’Brien, Flare virus, General Comments, Giancarlo Esposito, Gladers, Kaya Scodelario, Ki Hong Lee, Lili Taylor, Moderate Movie Recommendation, Movie Reviews, Patricia Clarkson, Reviews, Rosa Salazar, Scorch, The Maze Runner, The Maze Runner: Scorch Trials (2015) -- movie review, Thomas Brodie-Sangster, WCKD on October 18, 2025| Leave a Comment »

“The Maze Runner: Scorch Trials” (2015) — movie review
This review is for the dystopian action sequel “The Maze Runner: Scorch Trials” (2015), starring Dylan O’Brien as Thomas (the Gladers’ increasingly defiant leader), Kaya Scodelario as Teresa (his conflicted companion with her own secrets), Ki Hong Lee as Minho (the group’s athletic scout), Thomas Brodie-Sangster as Newt (the quiet strategist), Dexter Darden as Frypan (the loyal cook), and Alexander Flores as Winston (the wounded realist). New additions include Giancarlo Esposito as Jorge (a survivalist with shifting loyalties), Rosa Salazar as Brenda (a fierce fighter with a tragic past and “semi-” daughter to Jorge), Aidan Gillen as Janson (a manipulative WCKD agent), Barry Pepper as Vince (leader of the Right Arm resistance), Lili Taylor as Mary (a scientist with moral qualms), and Patricia Clarkson returning as Dr. Ava Paige (the enigmatic head of WCKD).

Background: This was my first viewing of the sequel. I watched it hoping it would be at least as good as the original “Maze Runner” which I had just watched a couple of days prior (review here). As with most sequels, and particularly for franchises I really had never heard of, I approached “Scorch Trials” with tempered expectations. Mainly, I was curious whether the franchise could expand its world outside the glade / maze without collapsing under its own increasingly convoluted storytelling. I bought this as the three-pack bundle, so I went in knowing this is supposed to be act two of the story and there was NO danger the lead was going to be killed off. He’s on the poster for all three films. LoL.

Plot: The film picks up immediately after the events of “The Maze Runner” (2014), with the Gladers escaping one trap only to enter another — this time a scorched wasteland filled with “Cranks” (humans infected by the “Flare” virus), moral ambiguity, and the slow unraveling of trust. The Gladers, having escaped the maze, are captured and now prisoners in a facility run by WCKD. When Thomas uncovers the truth — that they’re being harvested for their immunity to the Flare virus — he leads a breakout. The group traverses the “Scorch”, the nickname for the sun-blasted ruin of civilization, encountering Cranks (zombie-like infected humans), scavengers, and resistance fighters. Their journey is both physical and existential, as loyalties shift and the line between survival and sacrifice blurs. Teresa’s eventual betrayal adds emotional weight, while the introduction of Jorge and Brenda injects new energy into the narrative.

So, is this movie any good? How’s the acting? The filming / FX? Any problems? Did I enjoy the film? Short answers: Yes (mostly); solid performances (for YA actors and for the genre); visually ambitious; several narrative issues; yes.

Any Good? Yes — it’s a visually rich film that tries to expand its universe while maintaining momentum. The world-building is ambitious, though frequently muddled. The film trades the claustrophobic tension of the maze for the sprawling chaos of the Scorch, and in doing so, loses (inverts) some of its “perceptive” tightness. Instead of a self-contained area we (they) are released into a vast wasteland (the “Scorch” desert and the mountainous wasteland / retreat of the resistance fighters).

Acting: Dylan O’Brien continues to anchor the series with a mix of earnestness and grit. Ki Hong Lee and Thomas Brodie-Sangster provide steady support, though their arcs feel lesser. Kaya Scodelario’s Teresa is more plot device (group traitor) than character here (love interest or viable survivor), which undermines her emotional impact. Giancarlo Esposito is a standout — his Jorge is unpredictable, charismatic, and oddly paternal (towards Brenda). Rosa Salazar’s Brenda adds urgency and vulnerability, and Aidan Gillen plays Janson with the kind of smirking menace that’s become his trademark. Clarkson, Pepper, and Taylor are underused but lend gravitas.

Filming / FX: The cinematography captures the scorched landscapes with dry / dusty grandeur. The ruined cities, collapsed buildings, and sandstorms evoke a post-apocalyptic aesthetic that left me feeling it both worked and didn’t work. The Crank sequences are sufficiently creepy, blending horror and action. CGI is competent. The pacing is brisk, with kinetic chase scenes and moments of eerie stillness. The film’s visuals exceed its storytelling clarity.

Problems: Several. The plot is convoluted, with bursts of talk meant to explain instead of just using character’s actions. Character motivations — especially Teresa’s — are murky, mostly unstated or not shown via flashbacks (which is the usual fallback to substitute action for monologue). The world-building is intriguing but inconsistent; WCKD’s goals remain vague (undisclosed), and the resistance lacks definition except they are against WCKD (with no explanation / history). The film leans heavily on genre tropes: betrayal, infection, escape, repeat. Emotional moments are present but underdeveloped. The post-apocalyptic aesthetic is the most confusing as there in no reason for the massive destruction – the Flare virus doesn’t infect buildings and there is no explanation of a war happening. The “aesthetic” makes for good visuals and actions scene backgrounds, but it doesn’t make any sense (to me, anyway). And, of course, NONE of the virus or Cranks story-line makes sense, but that’s kind of a given. This is entertainment, not a science class. So, the ending of this film sets up the next installment without resolving much.

Did I Enjoy It? Yes (moderately). It’s a visually engaging ride with moments of cinematic tension and somewhat genuine character interplay. While it doesn’t fully deliver on its potential — philosophical questions of autonomy, sacrifice, and trust — it does enough as an action movie to keep you invested in the trilogy. I found myself wanting more from the characters (and story), but not abandoning them – mainly because I know (knew) there is (was) a third installment to tie up the loose ends.

Final Recommendation: Moderate recommendation. “The Maze Runner: Scorch Trials” is a middle chapter that expands the scope of its universe while sacrificing some of its coherence. It’s visually interesting and reasonably entertaining as an action flick. If you’re a fan of dystopian survival stories with a YA edge, it’s worth watching. Just don’t expect resolution — this is a franchise “bridge” installment, not a standalone narrative. For its atmosphere, performances, and momentum, it secures its place in the series.

.
Click here (18 October) to see the posts of prior years. I started this blog in late 2009. Daily posting began in late January 2011. Not all of the days in the early years (2009-2010) will have posts.