This movie was really damn enjoyable. Action packed and fun to watch. I was half expecting to see Cruise's sudden-wackiness come out in that movie but there weren't any hints of no one being behind the wheel.
The insta-face scene is the first thing I've told people about, and the support female agent is beautiful. That scene @ the vatican when she's in that red dress.... oh man.
an albeit too-brief Simon Pegg sighting made me happy, but the real star of the show for my money was my MAN Phil Hoffman. fresh off winning an oscar for Capote, which he was excellent in, we get to see him be a very E-V-I-L villain. kudos to him. physically, he's not intimidating at all, but with that kind of performance, i was always a little scared when he was on screen. in the bathroom sequence, you could also argue he plays a better tom cruise than tom cruise
and yes, JJ Abrams (which i think Cruise, as a producer, was partially responsible for bringing on board) really brings a frenetic bent to the proceedings. i was impressed with how fast the first reel/two reels of the movie move--it imparts the necessary information but keeps on moving moving moving.
it was nice because though it made good on all the mission impossible tropes (though the on-screen insta-face transformation had me giggling--very nice job there), there wasn't any sequence where the film was trying to outdo whatever else came before it... it was really just concerned with being a tight and effective action movie. and in doing so, succeeded admirably.
Michelle Monaghan is extremely cute, albeit far too blank in this role... she was great in Kiss Kiss Bang Bang. the way they've assembled the supporting players at the end of the movie, it's hard not to think that there's a likeminded sequel being a possibility... hopefully Abrams will give it another go, if he's not too busy creating hit shows
The sound was crazy loud. The camera shots were super quick, annoyingly close a lot of times and really shaky. It was the most uncomfortable watch ever in a theatre for me. But it did totaly got you into the picture. My adrenaline pump was open 200%. I got out of the theatre hyper as a loon.
jelmer: haha yeah with today's action filmmakers' penchant for ShakeyCam abuse, it's often wise to sit back a few rows more than you might normally so the action seems slightly more coherent
Just saw this today. Gotta say I liked it as well. Like gauss said, it gave you all the info you needed while the movie sped along. Great stunts, good dialog, acting and story. Made for an entertaining morning
It was an awesome movie, the whole bridge assault scene was awesome, I loved the whole physics of those missiles(and the magnetic bombs in the beginning), hope to see that sort of stuff in some games soon. It was also the first time I was in a theatre and the film reel got too hot and burnt itself, it looks really cool lol
BTW: what was up with that 1 minute running scene? Tom runs kinda goofy IMO
I can't bring myself to go see this movie. When I saw the TV spot for it and they said something like "it's bomb-O-lcious to the radical max!" I changed the chanel...
Was it even remotely believable when the explosion happens behind him on the bridge and cruise flies into the car on the right? It looks so off in the previews...
humm, you guys just opened my apetite to go watch it. cool
btw, you have to watch final destination 3, its more of the same.. but hell, i would go see it just for the introduction. that shit is all 3d. pretty awesome. i dont remember who made it.. but i think it was the same company that made the panic room intro as well. i'll have to check it out.
I soo wasn't looking forward to this movie. But it ended up quite good and action packed. And since the writers of this movie are the same guys writing the Transformers movie I couldn't help but to check it out
I loved the face off scene aswell. It was done SOOO much better than the second movie.
The end scene was great for Tom Cruise too I loved how he just came too and knew exactly where he was and what he was doing. Probably quite unlikely but awesome nonetheless.
The bad guy could have put up more of a fight or been killed in a more vengeful fashion though
I gotta be the odd man out and say it was mediocre. I watched the original TV series with my dad as a kid, and this, once again, is NOT mission impossible. Rather than working out elaborate plans to pull off some extremely difficult objectives. It was much more James Bond than Mission Impossible. It was better than MI2, that's for sure in terms of staying true to it's source material, but isn't as good as the first movie in that sense.
So to address it as what it is, an action movie through and through. It wasn't too shabby, a good popcorn flick. Personally I don't care much for Tom Cruise, he does the same role he has done for his entire life, playing Tom Cruise. I definitely appreciate him doing his own stunts in this movie particularly. The portrayal of him and his wife's relationship was so paper thin I was kind of hoping Phil Hoffman's character WOULD kill her just to go against the normal plot that you KNOW the hero is going to save the girl.
Lastly, I read a review before seeing it, and I have to agree, Philip Seymour Hoffman's character was severely under emphasized. He seemed like he'd make a great bad guy and for the scenes he had, he did, but the script just didn't seem to cast him to strongly as the nemesis, it was more about "who was the person in the organization that is a traitor", which is a plot twist we've already seen in the original (and many James Bond flicks to go with my comparison before).
I dunno, there were some excusable holes in the plot, but worth a rental if it's your bag.
Replies
it looks like a great action movie, with J.J. calling the shots. I just wish Tom would contract explosive face disease.
Acne?
[/ QUOTE ]
I suspect Ely was hoping for something a little more lethal.
- BoBo
The insta-face scene is the first thing I've told people about, and the support female agent is beautiful. That scene @ the vatican when she's in that red dress.... oh man.
JJ proves he is once again god.
and yes, JJ Abrams (which i think Cruise, as a producer, was partially responsible for bringing on board) really brings a frenetic bent to the proceedings. i was impressed with how fast the first reel/two reels of the movie move--it imparts the necessary information but keeps on moving moving moving.
it was nice because though it made good on all the mission impossible tropes (though the on-screen insta-face transformation had me giggling--very nice job there), there wasn't any sequence where the film was trying to outdo whatever else came before it... it was really just concerned with being a tight and effective action movie. and in doing so, succeeded admirably.
Michelle Monaghan is extremely cute, albeit far too blank in this role... she was great in Kiss Kiss Bang Bang. the way they've assembled the supporting players at the end of the movie, it's hard not to think that there's a likeminded sequel being a possibility... hopefully Abrams will give it another go, if he's not too busy creating hit shows
BTW: what was up with that 1 minute running scene? Tom runs kinda goofy IMO
btw, you have to watch final destination 3, its more of the same.. but hell, i would go see it just for the introduction. that shit is all 3d. pretty awesome. i dont remember who made it.. but i think it was the same company that made the panic room intro as well. i'll have to check it out.
I loved the face off scene aswell. It was done SOOO much better than the second movie.
The end scene was great for Tom Cruise too I loved how he just came too and knew exactly where he was and what he was doing. Probably quite unlikely but awesome nonetheless.
The bad guy could have put up more of a fight or been killed in a more vengeful fashion though
So to address it as what it is, an action movie through and through. It wasn't too shabby, a good popcorn flick. Personally I don't care much for Tom Cruise, he does the same role he has done for his entire life, playing Tom Cruise. I definitely appreciate him doing his own stunts in this movie particularly. The portrayal of him and his wife's relationship was so paper thin I was kind of hoping Phil Hoffman's character WOULD kill her just to go against the normal plot that you KNOW the hero is going to save the girl.
Lastly, I read a review before seeing it, and I have to agree, Philip Seymour Hoffman's character was severely under emphasized. He seemed like he'd make a great bad guy and for the scenes he had, he did, but the script just didn't seem to cast him to strongly as the nemesis, it was more about "who was the person in the organization that is a traitor", which is a plot twist we've already seen in the original (and many James Bond flicks to go with my comparison before).
I dunno, there were some excusable holes in the plot, but worth a rental if it's your bag.