| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Wheelz |
Posted - 01/09/2012 : 15:33:07
I recall liking the first MI film quite a bit (though it's now been many years since I've seen it). The second one wasn't so great and I skipped the third.
The excellent reviews for Ghost Protocol brought me back to the series, and there is a lot to like here. On the surface it looks like just another big-budget action flick -- well, it pretty much is one, to be honest -- but it's an unusually good one.
The action/chase sequences, which are what got me in the door in the first place, are top-notch. The action is just over-the-top enough to keep your adreneline flowing, but not to the point of being so kinetic and bombastic that you can't follow what's happening. That's a tricky line to walk. A climactic parking garage scene is one of the most inventive of its type I have ever seen -- it would be easy to imagine it turning into a confusing and jumbled series of quick-cuts, but it never does. Great stuff.
Meanwhile, Tom Cruise plays super-agent Ethan Hunt with a surprisingly endearing humanity. Jeremy Renner, who is great in everything, is great. Simon Pegg adds a nice comic relief without being overly bumbling. Paula Patton does a convincing job as well as being very easy on the eyes (as is L�a Seydoux in a sly supporting role).
Don't think too hard, get out the popcorn and enjoy the ride. It's a terrific ride. |
| 8 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Beanmimo |
Posted - 01/18/2012 : 14:42:04
Here is the review I posted on my blog.
One of the trailers before the feature was for Haywire (deeply rooted in Nikita). It has all the hallmarks of a female Jason Bourne with double cross instead of the memory loss, it reflects the strong influence of The Bourne Trilogy. It stands as one of the action franchises that kept its basic integrity.
But I had come to the cinema to see Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol the fourth instalment in this franchise that had so far disappointed me. I had rented out 2 and 3.
So why was I there?
Two words� Brad Bird.
After The Iron Giant, The Incredibles and Ratatouille I was eager to see what this director could do with a live action feature and an unstable franchise.
FIRST 30 MINS SPOILERS IN NEXT PARAGRAPH.
Opening with man escaping from a rooftop in true Mission Impossible style we then cut to Ethan Hunt (Tom Cruise) being sprung from a Moscow prison only then to be involved in a a theft at the Kremlin which ends up in tears and Hunt finds himself handcuffed to a gurney in a nearby hospital. Apart from the gurney the rest sounds like the plot for any less ambitious thriller. This is in the first half an hour, Hunt still has to clear his name and save the day.
OK YOU ARE SAFE NOW READ ON.
We race through three more countries and more than a handful of tense deceptions blended seamlessly with action sequences.
This is a much leaner Mission Impossible that sees Hunt surrounded by an unusually inexperienced and self doubting team of agents. It seems to be a sort of a reboot; not only for the series but for Hunts character. He is a little less perfect and cheesy and a little more human and funny.
From the beginning Bird brings us closer to the 1960#8242;s television series than in the previous three instalments as the credits follow the burning fuse through an edited but unrevealing version of the plot.
Paula Patton who plays fellow agent Jane Carter, may be the weakest link in the movie but still manages to brighten up every scene she is in, especially when wearing that green dress.
The other two thirds of the team are made up by Simon Pegg and Jeremy Renner who bounce Tom cruise off the screen and are like Tweedledum and Tweedledee on steroids while packing guns and gadgets.
The gadgets again are sufficiently outlandish but Bird is not afraid to poke fun here. He doesn�t clutter he plot with them balancing high-technology and old fashioned chases where every vehicle in the vicinity does not have to be torn in two or set alight.
Do not get me wrong, it still remains a Mission Impossible movie and you will be suspending your disbelief on many an occasion but this time you may actually enjoy it a little more� that is, of course, if you chose to watch it.
This review will not self destruct in five seconds.
If you would like to see my review in all its glory well... click here |
| Wheelz |
Posted - 01/11/2012 : 14:31:18
Spoiler answer:
As I said in my OP, don't think too hard. |
| randall |
Posted - 01/10/2012 : 21:36:11
Thanks, guys, for keeping those spoilers secret. I'll definitely see it, but my screening might have to wait for home vid: calendar is tight, and I'm off to Sundance at the end of the month for my annual movie binge. |
| rockfsh |
Posted - 01/10/2012 : 18:10:09
Spoiler response:
[I'd design the system so there is more than one set of launch codes. If set A is compromised, they can just tell all their assets, "Go to set x".
In any event, telling the Russians would help in that they could assist and chase the terrorists too. Did you notice that the launch interface briefcase had a cyrillic keyboard but English screen? ]
Of course it's more "heroic" if they are on their own. |
| benj clews |
Posted - 01/10/2012 : 10:17:35
quote:
Originally posted by rockfsh
Spoiler question:
If the IMF knows that a terrorist has stolen both the launch codes and the "football" to send the codes to a sub, why not alert the Russians so they can invalidate/ change the codes? Why risk a real launch?
My best guess is that maybe the codes can't be changed. It's gotta' be an extra security risk if it's *possible* to change the codes because then someone could do that on the launch device and then they'd have the launch device AND the codes. |
| rockfsh |
Posted - 01/10/2012 : 01:40:31
Spoiler question:
If the IMF knows that a terrorist has stolen both the launch codes and the "football" to send the codes to a sub, why not alert the Russians so they can invalidate/ change the codes? Why risk a real launch? |
| randall |
Posted - 01/09/2012 : 21:20:10
I had given up on the MI series, but everything I've heard about this one makes me REALLY WANT TO SEE IT. Afraid I'll have to wait for DVD, when what this picture really seems to call for is IMAX. |
| benj clews |
Posted - 01/09/2012 : 16:26:09
Gotta' say I loved this one too. For some reason, I especially appreciate action flicks where a massive amount of damage is realistically inflicted on our hero (which of course only makes them all the more heroic for (just about) surviving everything) and this film delivers it in spades. At least twice we see Cruise's forehead smack quite violently off something (once to the point of unconciousness)- this is film where you really feel the pain the main character is going through. I seriously wondered if the scriptwriter had it in for Cruise who clearly throws himself (usually literally) 100% into every action scene.
My only gripe is that the final car park scene started to frustrate me somewhat, like it was trying just a little too hard to eke every last drop of tension out of it.
Oh, and it goes without saying that you do want to be seeing this in IMAX if for no reason but the skyscraper scene (unless you're acrophobic).
P.S. Wheelz, given how you enjoyed GP you should definitely give III a try. I'd say it's quite similar in grandstanding action pieces and tone, and certainly leagues away from part II (which I don't blame you for putting you off the franchise). |
|
|
