Does anyone here like the Mission: Impossible movies? They're loosely based on the TV series. I think there's only two recurring characters, Tom Cruise as "Ethan Hunt" and Ving Rhames as "Luther Stickell." The first one is the best in the series by far. The sequel was good, but no where near as great as the original. The third movie seems to feature the best elements of the first two movies. It has some moments where it surpasses the original as well. My only real complaint of the third movie is that we don't see Ethan Hunt steal the Rabit's Foot, we only see him enter and exit the building. Ah well. I was hoping they'd make a fourth movie, but it sees that Paramount Pictures has rejected Tom Cruise for acting silly in public. Talk about superficial! ::) Fortunately, Paramount can always make an M:I4 and simply introduce a new title character.
I really liked the first movie. Directed by Brian DePalma, it was a well-made, suspenseful action film. I liked that it wasn't beholden at all to its TV roots. (This is from the perspective of someone who wasn't tied to the original, having only seen it once or twice.) I know that fans of the TV show hated that, but I didn't care.
As much as I liked the first film, I hated the second that much more. Direct by John Woo, it was a caricature of a John Woo film. At one point, I turned to my wife and said "when are we going to get the stupid doves?" A moment later, there they were. Black trenchcoats flapping, slow-motion, in the wind? Check. Two guys shooting at each other with two handguns each and somehow missing from point-blank? Check. Ugh, that movie was bad! Plus, everything was so unrealistic, even for an MI film. It made the first one look like a documentary.
I loved the third; it's one of my favorite movies of the last few years. As an action movie, I don't think I've ever felt so much that I got my money's worth. About a half-hour into the film, I leaned over to my wife and said "this movie better calm the [frak] down or I think I'm going to have a heart attack." The fact that Abrams made this film makes me feel that I'll enjoy his Trek movie, despite all the other possible issues. (My guess is that it'll be a well-received critical and box office success which will nevertheless meet with an amazing level of resistance and outright hatred in the Trek community.)
I understand why Paramount is done with Cruise. I thought that last movie was so great, and I had the hardest time getting anyone to go see it, even after I told anyone who would listen that it was the most suspenseful action movie I'd ever seen. Friends who finally watched it on DVD agreed with me, but you just couldn't get people to go see a movie starring the short, wacky Scientologist.
After the initial 5 minutes of the first one where they [SPOILER] kill off the whole team [/SPOILER] (Please. If you haven't seen it yet, it's the first 5 minutes.) I was bored silly until the end. I almost fell asleep, and that doesn't happen often. Yes, there were some decent set pieces, but ultimately it felt overly talky and overlong.
I did see the second one even so. I was excited to see John Woo take on the character and universe. My experience in the theater could be described in these thoughts.
"Does the rolling help?"
"Wow, this is like Face-Off (it even has a Scientologist), but alas, no Nicholas Cage to make it fun."
"That girl is so dead."
"What? That guy's at least a foot taller than him!"
"Why would you build a perimeter fence under a rock cliff so people can just climb up there and jump in?"
"I didn't know motorcycles could fly."
"They are probably going to make another one of these."
Wow. What a crapfest. I walked away severely underwhelmed and, after reading just a bit about the film, figured out why. Apparently, Cruise and Woo had 5 action scenes they really wanted in the film. They gave them to the screenwriter who had to assemble them with an artificial story. Nothing like the creative process, eh?
So, no, I didn't see the third one, although not because Cruise is ... who he is. Just because the first two made me feel like a year was taken off my life in approx 4 hours.
I enjoyed the first movie - but was not pleased at the end with Jim Phelps character. Second and third were just ok - not a Tom Cruise fan. I would have liked a more seasoned (older) actor playing the lead. I am a big fan of the original series and am currently watching it on DVD.
Pretty much with Mark on this subject too. Enjoyed the first one, second one not so much. But I did like the third one quite a bit, especially Phillip Seymour Hoffman as the bad guy. One of the better bad guys in recent movies for me. He was nasty.
Funny how we all seem to have the same impression. I enjoyed the first film enough to see the second. The second film I hated. It was like watching a 2 hour music video with screaming grunge guitar through the whole thing. John Woo may make good music videos (I wouldn't really know) but as a film director I would rather sit through another Ernest movie before I would see another of his films. The third film I did not see at the theater. Mostly because of Tom Cruise and his shenanigans and I really had no intention of ever seeing it but a close friend convinced me to rent it and I have to say that I like it best of the three. It was very suspenseful. My biggest complaint is that Cruise looks like he is on drugs through most of the film. His eyes are very dilated and he just looks awful. Outside of that I think the film worked.
Kevin
It seems most enjoyed the first and third movies, but hated the second movie. I also feel that 1 and 3 are supperior to 2, but 2 wasn't thad bad. It's clearly not realistic which is the whole point of Mission: Impssible... realism, but it was entertaining, which is enough for me. I've got the movies on loan to my sister. When I get them back, I'm going to work my way through the series, three nights in a row to see if this changes my views on any of the three movies. 8)
I don't think the story of 2 was all that bad but I hated the directing and the soundtrack. Both were very amatuerish imho.
Kevin
Indeed. It felt like a music video during certain scenes.
About the third movie... you say Cruise looked like he was on drugs. Isn't this because he was in high-stress situatins for most of the movie? He spent most of it being shot at, tortured, and running from being shot at. :o
Quote from: Captain Jean-Luc Picard on July 03, 2007, 09:35:45 PM
About the third movie... you say Cruise looked like he was on drugs. Isn't this because he was in high-stress situatins for most of the movie? He spent most of it being shot at, tortured, and running from being shot at. :o
I'm not convinced it was just acting. Just my opinion of course but at times he looked like a man possessed.
Kevin
First drugs, now possession? :blink Is it possible that your dislike for the actor is clouding your judgment? :-\ It's easy to point out the flaws in something you dislike. :P I don't think it's fair to suggest that he was on drugs or possessed based on appearance alone. :-[ In any event, we've gotten off topic.
Did you enjoy the mystery of the Rabit's Foot in the third film or did you find it unsatisfying to not find out? I didn't mind the mystery, but I was dissapointed that we didn't get to see him steal it. Remember those awesome scenes in the original movie where Hunt had to steal those files? I was hoping we'd see something like that when he stole the Rabbit's Foot. Not necessarilly hanging from the cieling via cables, but some kind of infiltration scene would have been nice.
Quote from: Captain Jean-Luc Picard on July 03, 2007, 10:13:28 PM
First drugs, now possession? :blink Is it possible that your dislike for the actor is clouding your judgment? :-\ It's easy to point out the flaws in something you dislike.
Yes but it's even easier to overlook real flaws by being blinded by lack of objectivity, which also can cloud your judgment.
Kevin
I just don't feel the need to suggest that X actor is a druggie. What good does this do? We all know drugs are bad.
Quote from: Captain Jean-Luc Picard on July 03, 2007, 10:41:30 PM
I just don't feel the need to suggest that X actor is a druggie. What good does this do? We all know drugs are bad.
Hey...I gave MY opinion as to what I did not like about the film. Take it or leave it. I don't care. That was my original impression when I saw the film and still is after a couple of viewings. So bug off!
Kevin
Calm down! :o I understand that you gave your opinion as to why you dislike the movie. I simply disagreed with your opinion. There is no need for hostilities.
Getting back on topic...Quote from: Captain Jean-Luc PicardDid you enjoy the mystery of the Rabit's Foot in the third film or did you find it unsatisfying to not find out? I didn't mind the mystery, but I was dissapointed that we didn't get to see him steal it. Remember those awesome scenes in the original movie where Hunt had to steal those files? I was hoping we'd see something like that when he stole the Rabbit's Foot. Not necessarilly hanging from the cieling via cables, but some kind of infiltration scene would have been nice.