Mission: Impossible Ghost Protocol - Part 1

[Hunter Rider]

On the Josh Holloway thing, I was surprised how small his role was and the fact the shot of him diving backwards off the building was not actually in the movie.

As for the other discussion, I think it deserves it's high score from critics as it set out to be exactly what it was an achieved it in spectacular and inventive style. I also don't see any other action movie this year that got near it's level, Fast Five was a solid outside contender.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

On the Josh Holloway thing, I was surprised how small his role was and the fact the shot of him diving backwards off the building was not actually in the movie.

It was in the movie wasnt it? He jumps, turns and shoots two guys then lands on his back? Was in the cut I saw anyway.

As for the other discussion, I think it deserves it's high score from critics as it set out to be exactly what it was an achieved it in spectacular and inventive style. I also don't see any other action movie this year that got near it's level, Fast Five was a solid outside contender.

It deserves high praise, but not as high as its getting, 93% on RT is more than films like District 9, Inglorious Basterds, Moon, Inception, amoung others. I dont think it was THAT good, it was an incredibly entertaining and fun movie, but it wasnt deep and didnt develop its characters like other movies have.

I wouldnt even say its the best action movie this year, First Class takes that mantle for me.

 

[Hunter Rider]

It was in the movie wasnt it? He jumps, turns and shoots two guys then lands on his back? Was in the cut I saw anyway.

Did that happen prior to the prison break?

It deserves high praise, but not as high as its getting, 93% on RT is more than films like District 9, Inglorious Basterds, Moon, Inception, amoung others. I dont think it was THAT good, it was an incredibly entertaining and fun movie, but it wasn't deep and didn't develop its characters like other movies have.

I wouldnt even say its the best action movie this year, First Class takes that mantle for me.

I rate it higher than those films and found it equally as well developed as them as well. It's mission (no pun intended) was to be a kickass exciting spy movie, it succeeded at the highest mark IMO therefore should be rated as such, not rated on what it never set out to be. It's nice to see critics rating on how they were entertained, that is the mark of a good movie just as much as anything else, after all cinema started out as escapism and often loses sight of that, churning out pseudo intellectual guff IMO.

That's cool, I didn't really consider any of the action in First Class particularly good aside from the bit with Magneto in the Argentinian bar, which was more cool than spectacular.

 

[BritishChap007]

Did that happen prior to the prison break?

Yes. It is the very first moments of the film.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Did that happen prior to the prison break?

Yeah it was right at the start of the movie, he lands on something that inflates and THEN afterwards gets shot. You must have got in a bit late or something.

I

rate it higher than those films and found it equally as well developed as them as well. It's mission (no pun intended) was to be a kickass exciting spy movie, it succeeded at the highest mark IMO therefore should be rated as such, not rated on what it never set out to be. It's nice to see critics rating on how they were entertained, that is the mark of a good movie just as much as anything else, after all cinema started out as escapism and often loses sight of that, churning out pseudo intellectual guff IMO.

Ah well, thats cool, we all have opinions after all. Now, I love a good, fun action movie, and will watch them more often than the pseudo intellectual films we often, but its the latter type of movies which have a bigger impact in the long term. And when we get both in the same movie, as in the ones I listed, I find it superb. M:I didnt really have both, it entertained me, but didnt move me at all, I prefer a movie to do both, but boy was I entertained.

That's cool, I didn't really consider any of the action in First Class particularly good aside from the bit with Magneto in the Argentinian bar, which was more cool than spectacular.

Really? Even the whole attack on the CIA, or, my personal favourite part of the movie, Magneto lifting the submarine and following events, culminating in Magneto's god complex. I thought all that was amazing.

 

[Doctor Jones]

It was in the movie wasnt it? He jumps, turns and shoots two guys then lands on his back? Was in the cut I saw anyway.



It deserves high praise, but not as high as its getting, 93% on RT is more than films like District 9, Inglorious Basterds, Moon, Inception, amoung others. I dont think it was THAT good, it was an incredibly entertaining and fun movie, but it wasnt deep and didnt develop its characters like other movies have.

I wouldnt even say its the best action movie this year, First Class takes that mantle for me.

Hey now, just because it wasn't as deep as those other films doesn't mean it doesn't deserve the high praise as those others. The critics, and rightfully so, are judging it on its own merits, as any film should be.

It worked for what it was trying to accomplish, just like IB did, but that happened to be lower, but on its own merits. It's not fair to pair that kind of things up because they are accomplishing two different things. It's a disservice to both films.

 

[Hunter Rider]

Yes. It is the very first moments of the film.

Yeah it was right at the start of the movie, he lands on something that inflates and THEN afterwards gets shot. You must have got in a bit late or something.

Thanks guys, I was slightly late but didn't think I'd missed anything, clearly I did lol.

Ah well, thats cool, we all have opinions after all. Now, I love a good, fun action movie, and will watch them more often than the pseudo intellectual films we often, but its the latter type of movies which have a bigger impact in the long term. And when we get both in the same movie, as in the ones I listed, I find it superb. M:I didnt really have both, it entertained me, but didnt move me at all, I prefer a movie to do both, but boy was I entertained.

I don't think the movies you listed did have both to any great degree in truth, but again that's just opinion. All I know if that when I think of impact I don't really think any of the movies we are talking about in this discussion will be seen long term as anything but good films. To me I look at what a movie set out to be, take Predator and Die Hard, neither could be considered deep but they are a perfect execution of their concept, same for me with Ghost Protocol, thus why I feel it deserves it's high marks, same reason I marked Real Steel so high.

Really? Even the whole attack on the CIA, or, my personal favourite part of the movie, Magneto lifting the submarine and following events, culminating in Magneto's god complex. I thought all that was amazing.

I just found all that stuff very CGI laden, and not great CGI either, not to mention fairly unremarkable in design and shot selection.

 

[Doctor Jones]

Being entertained is as much as fulfilling as being thought provoking. It's about fulfillment. This film fulfilled me ALOT. Definitely the best action film all year.

And great point about Die Hard and films like those. It's about execution and the people behind it. Hell, Raiders of the Lost Ark isn't the most thought provoking film either, but it's perfectly executed and hailed as one of the greatest films ever made.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Hey now, just because it wasn't as deep as those other films doesn't mean it doesn't deserve the high praise as those others. The critics, and rightfully so, are judging it on its own merits, as any film should be.

It worked for what it was trying to accomplish, just like IB did, but that happened to be lower, but on its own merits. It's not fair to pair that kind of things up because they are accomplishing two different things. It's a disservice to both films.

I know they are trying to acheive different things, but I just personally think the films that try something a bit deeper should be given a bit more credit for it when they do it well.

Thanks guys, I was slightly late but didn't think I'd missed anything, clearly I did lol.

Ha ha, something to look forward to when you next see it.

I don't think the movies you listed did have both to any great degree in truth, but again that's just opinion. All I know if that when I think of impact I don't really think any of the movies we are talking about in this discussion will be seen long term as anything but good films. To me I look at what a movie set out to be, take Predator and Die Hard, neither could be considered deep but they are a perfect execution of their concept, same for me with Ghost Protocol, thus why I feel it deserves it's high marks, same reason I marked Real Steel so high.

Fair enough, good point about Predator and Die Hard, they arent really deep in any way but I dont think even they got this much praise at the time they came out. They became iconic over a few years though.

I just found all that stuff very CGI laden, and not great CGI either, not to mention fairly unremarkable in design and shot selection.

Really? I thought 90-95% of the CGI was superb in FC, and I thought the direction was excellent as well, especially given the time restraints, oh well, opinion .

 

[Doctor Jones]

But it doesn't matter what they're trying to do, it matters how they do it. You can't put a film higher because it's deeper, despite the quality. I'd rather have a film like this that's good and enjoyable than bad and trying to be deep.

 

[Secret Fawful]

I can't take my eyes off the dude in your icon right now. The Artist has made me obsessed!

Dujardin dressed as Flynn? Classic.

 

[Warhammer]

It deserves high praise, but not as high as its getting, 93% on RT is more than films like District 9, Inglorious Basterds, Moon, Inception, amoung others. I dont think it was THAT good, it was an incredibly entertaining and fun movie, but it wasnt deep and didnt develop its characters like other movies have.

I wouldnt even say its the best action movie this year, First Class takes that mantle for me.

This is an example of why RT is merely a gauge. That 93% means that 93% of critics thought the movie was favorable. It doesn't reflect how good they thought the movie actually was.

 

[SuperSoldier985]

On the Josh Holloway thing, I was surprised how small his role was and the fact the shot of him diving backwards off the building was not actually in the movie..

How does someone fall asleep in the first 2 minutes of a movie?

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

It was in the IMAX version of the movie. I don't know about the normal version though.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

I rate it higher than those films and found it equally as well developed as them as well. It's mission (no pun intended) was to be a kickass exciting spy movie, it succeeded at the highest mark IMO therefore should be rated as such, not rated on what it never set out to be. It's nice to see critics rating on how they were entertained, that is the mark of a good movie just as much as anything else, after all cinema started out as escapism and often loses sight of that, churning out pseudo intellectual guff IMO.

That's cool, I didn't really consider any of the action in First Class particularly good aside from the bit with Magneto in the Argentinian bar, which was more cool than spectacular.

I agree with all of it. I get into arguments with people in the Bond thread for the exact same reason. The older Bond movies were the same, and people who watch the older movies after watching Casino Royale get disappointed that older movies aren't as gritty. I always have to remind a few of them that few of the older Bond movies were actually aiming for gritty.

Anyway, the critics understand what the Mission Impossible is trying to do best and it succeeds. Not all movies will be character driven nor can they all be intellectual as the main goal of film to me is entertainment.

 

[flickchick85]

Dujardin dressed as Flynn? Classic.

It really is perfection. I was amazed at how much he looked like him in that costume, because in general, Dujardin looks to me like a cross between Gene Kelly, Sean Connery and Robert DeNiro - not a hint of Errol Flynn. But when he walked out in that costume, with that grin, I did a double take. I feel like given the right costume, that guy could pretty much look like [Name That Classic Movie Star], lol.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

But it doesn't matter what they're trying to do, it matters how they do it. You can't put a film higher because it's deeper, despite the quality. I'd rather have a film like this that's good and enjoyable than bad and trying to be deep.

Thats why I said the deeper films that are good should be rated higher, if they are deep but bad movies they deserve all of the criticism and scorn they get. But IMO if they try to be a bit deeper, try something a bit different, and do it well, they deserve that bit more praise. Again, IMO, an action movie is just that, this movie didnt even really try to develop its characters, especially the main one, it was just pure action, so its not like it tried anything different. I loved the movie, but dont think its deserves better critic ratings than a lot of movies it has surpassed in this regard.

This is an example of why RT is merely a gauge. That 93% means that 93% of critics thought the movie was favorable. It doesn't reflect how good they thought the movie actually was.

Well yeah thats true, both Empire and Total Film gave Sherlock Holmes 2 4 stars compared to M:I 4's 3, yet look at the difference in their ratings on RT.

 

[CelticPredator]

It was in the IMAX version of the movie. I don't know about the normal version though.

It was in both.

Nothing was extended in the IMAX version. Except the screen size.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Yeah thats right, I didnt see the movie in IMAX and it was in the movie I saw, pretty damn good opening as well.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

It was in both.

Nothing was extended in the IMAX version. Except the screen size.

Oh, okay. I was confused by Hunter's comment since that part happens in the first 30 seconds.

 

[Hunter Rider]

I know they are trying to acheive different things, but I just personally think the films that try something a bit deeper should be given a bit more credit for it when they do it well.

I think a film should be rated on the scale of enjoyment and on whether it succeeded in what it set out to be. I mean for me Ghost Protocol did try new things in the field of action set piece design and delivered magnificently.

Ha ha, something to look forward to when you next see it.

Indeed!

Fair enough, good point about Predator and Die Hard, they arent really deep in any way but I dont think even they got this much praise at the time they came out. They became iconic over a few years though.

I was only 7 and 8 when they came out so I couldn't say to be sure but I recall Predator being hyped everywhere and was dissapointed that I wasn't allowed to see it. I think the ripple effect Die Hard had on the structure of action movies was where it's legacy came from, to this day people still use the term "Die Hard in/on a...." to describe movies set in a confined space with a hero vs multiple enemies.

Really? I thought 90-95% of the CGI was superb in FC, and I thought the direction was excellent as well, especially given the time restraints, oh well, opinion .

Well I thought the direction of the general film was good and I did like the movie, just didn't think the action was it's strong suit.

How does someone fall asleep in the first 2 minutes of a movie?

Oh, okay. I was confused by Hunter's comment since that part happens in the first 30 seconds.

I was late.

I agree with all of it. I get into arguments with people in the Bond thread for the exact same reason. The older Bond movies were the same, and people who watch the older movies after watching Casino Royale get disappointed that older movies aren't as gritty. I always have to remind a few of them that few of the older Bond movies were actually aiming for gritty.

Anyway, the critics understand what the Mission Impossible is trying to do best and it succeeds. Not all movies will be character driven nor can they all be intellectual as the main goal of film to me is entertainment.

Great point on the Bond movies, not all the best ones in the franchise history were full of big action or as gritty as the Craig films, and sometimes when fans watch them in reverse they don't take era context or what the film is trying to achieve into consideration when judging them.

It seems at times on this board being entertaining is a dirty word or a backhanded compliment that diminishes a movies worth. I know it's not the "cool" thing to say but Fast Five > Drive for me.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

I think a film should be rated on the scale of enjoyment and on whether it succeeded in what it set out to be. I mean for me Ghost Protocol did try new things in the field of action set piece design and delivered magnificently.

Oh yeah dont get me wrong, the set-pieces were fantastic, dont remember not enjoying one of them, but there was hardly anything new in the movie with the action sequences, just some improvisation, car chase, but in a sandstorm for example. They were all done extremely well, bar one or two bits of average CG, but again, nothing pushed the genre beyond its norms for me.

Indeed!

It really was a great opening as well.

I was only 7 and 8 when they came out so I couldn't say to be sure but I recall Predator being hyped everywhere and was dissapointed that I wasn't allowed to see it. I think the ripple effect Die Hard had on the structure of action movies was where it's legacy came from, to this day people still use the term "Die Hard in/on a...." to describe movies set in a confined space with a hero vs multiple enemies.

Both got good reviews but hardly universal praise like M:I4 is getting, while I loved it I dont think it will have a lasting impact like Predator or especially Die Hard ended up having. Its the best M:I movie thats for sure, I always found the series of movies in general very 'meh' before Ghost Protocol.

Well I thought the direction of the general film was good and I did like the movie, just didn't think the action was it's strong suit.

Fair enough.

Great point on the Bond movies, not all the best ones in the franchise history were full of big action or as gritty as the Craig films, and sometimes when fans watch them in reverse they don't take era context or what the film is trying to achieve into consideration when judging them.It seems at times on this board being entertaining is a dirty word or a backhanded compliment that diminishes a movies worth. I know it's not the "cool" thing to say but Fast Five > Drive for me.

I think this is a problem with older movies in general, look at the criticism the first X-Men movie gets not compared to the universal praise it got when it was released, people forget the state comic book movies were in at the time and how they were viewed by critcs and the GA in a poor light.

 

[SuperSoldier985]

I was late. .

wow, that explains everything..

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

It was in the movie wasnt it? He jumps, turns and shoots two guys then lands on his back? Was in the cut I saw anyway.



It deserves high praise, but not as high as its getting, 93% on RT is more than films like District 9, Inglorious Basterds, Moon, Inception, amoung others. I dont think it was THAT good, it was an incredibly entertaining and fun movie, but it wasnt deep and didnt develop its characters like other movies have.

I wouldnt even say its the best action movie this year, First Class takes that mantle for me.

A 93% on Rotten Tomatoes just means that 93% of the critics gave it a positive review. That doesn't mean that most or all believe that it is the best movie of the year.

I think that First Class, Hanna, Captain American and Fast Five are all better blockbuster films but I still thought that MI4 was a solid flick and a lot of fun.

Hunter Rider you know my love for you is endless but you are crazy as hell if you think that the admittedly awesome Fast Five is better than the borderline masterwork that is Drive. I love both films so I'm not dissin Fast Five by writing that.

 

[SuperSoldier985]

Yeah, people really need to change the way they look at that RT meter...