Posts : 610 Member Since : 2011-03-21 Location : the island of Lemoy
Subject: Re: Mission Impossible - Ghost Protocol ::: December 16, 2011 Thu Nov 17, 2011 9:18 pm
Mr. Brown wrote:
The guy who played MacGyver should play nuPhelps.
I lIke it :bounce:
Control 00 Agent
Posts : 5206 Member Since : 2010-05-13 Location : Slumber, Inc.
Subject: Re: Mission Impossible - Ghost Protocol ::: December 16, 2011 Fri Nov 18, 2011 12:43 am
Prisoner Monkeys wrote:
They could have found a better way to pass the baton on to Hunt. The first film is actually a nice little thriller (even if the train sequence is OTT), but it ruined the Jim Phelps character. Even if Phelps died at the end of the film, he should have been a hero.
I agree, for the most part.
The character of Jim Phelps was indeed ruined by De Palma's film, but I think that was just a result of revamping the franchise. Aside from that, I think De Palma did a fantastic job of capturing the essence of the original series. On top of it, the film worked well as a blockbuster, without getting entirely sloppy and ridiculous--granted, the train sequence was indeed over-the-top.
I particularly enjoyed the confrontation between Jim and Ethan at the end of the film. Danny Elfman was also a good choice for the music.
I know many don't enjoy it, but I do. And it's not just the De Palma fan boy speaking for me.
FourDot 'R'
Posts : 484 Member Since : 2011-03-14 Location : There, not there.
Subject: Re: Mission Impossible - Ghost Protocol ::: December 16, 2011 Fri Nov 18, 2011 4:55 am
I enjoy it, and it's very accomplished on a technical level. But the Phelps turn/confrontation just doesn't work for me, and I'm not even a fan of the original series. It just seems cheap.
The real joy of the film, though, is Henry Czerny. That's a hilarious performance. It's kinda surprising De Palma didn't just chuck Lithgow into that role.
Makeshift Python 00 Agent
Posts : 7656 Member Since : 2011-03-14 Location : You're the man now, dog!
Subject: Re: Mission Impossible - Ghost Protocol ::: December 16, 2011 Fri Nov 18, 2011 5:57 am
Mr. Brown wrote:
Prisoner Monkeys wrote:
They could have found a better way to pass the baton on to Hunt. The first film is actually a nice little thriller (even if the train sequence is OTT), but it ruined the Jim Phelps character. Even if Phelps died at the end of the film, he should have been a hero.
I agree, for the most part.
The character of Jim Phelps was indeed ruined by De Palma's film, but I think that was just a result of revamping the franchise. Aside from that, I think De Palma did a fantastic job of capturing the essence of the original series. On top of it, the film worked well as a blockbuster, without getting entirely sloppy and ridiculous--granted, the train sequence was indeed over-the-top.
I particularly enjoyed the confrontation between Jim and Ethan at the end of the film. Danny Elfman was also a good choice for the music.
I know many don't enjoy it, but I do. And it's not just the De Palma fan boy speaking for me.
I agree to an extent. It's pretty low-key for the average blockbuster and I like that restraint and I also really like how De Palma frames his flicks. But yeah, the Phelps thing is really the only thing that bothers me. It doesn't make any sense as his motives for betraying his country aren't clear, he's just a bad guy for no reason. And that train sequence did feel out of place compared to everything that came before but I imagine studios demanded some splosions to satisfy popcorn eaters.
I might watch all three again soon. 2nd one is just cheese from what I recall, basically Tom Cruise masturbating to the mirror. I only saw the J.J. Abrams flick once but I remember thinking it made a pretty good direct-to-DVD flick. Oh wait.
lachesis Head of Station
Posts : 1588 Member Since : 2011-09-19 Location : Nottingahm, UK
Subject: Re: Mission Impossible - Ghost Protocol ::: December 16, 2011 Fri Nov 18, 2011 3:21 pm
The Mission Impossible series is sort of like damp fuse wire imo, theres an odd fizzle now and then but you spend most of the time thinking it must have gone out.
saint mark Head of Station
Posts : 1160 Member Since : 2011-09-08 Location : Up in the Dutch mountains
Subject: Re: Mission Impossible - Ghost Protocol ::: December 16, 2011 Fri Nov 18, 2011 8:11 pm
lachesis wrote:
The Mission Impossible series is sort of like damp fuse wire imo, theres an odd fizzle now and then but you spend most of the time thinking it must have gone out.
If the fourth movie is half as good is as the third than I am kinda sad that Cruise quits because the third movie was easily better than no. 1 & 2 combined.
Largo's Shark 00 Agent
Posts : 10588 Member Since : 2011-03-14
Subject: Re: Mission Impossible - Ghost Protocol ::: December 16, 2011 Fri Nov 18, 2011 8:51 pm
saint mark wrote:
lachesis wrote:
The Mission Impossible series is sort of like damp fuse wire imo, theres an odd fizzle now and then but you spend most of the time thinking it must have gone out.
If the fourth movie is half as good is as the third than I am kinda sad that Cruise quits because the third movie was easily better than no. 1 & 2 combined.
err... no. It was basically a feature length episode of ALIAS, with soap-opera drama, messily executed action, Phil Seymour Hoffman's usual ham acting, and ugly digital grading. I'm no fan big of MI:2, but at least it had truckloads of style and elegance, courtesy of John Woo . Ya know, it looked and sounded nice, also thanks to Hans Zimmer.
Easily the best MI score to date, IMHO.
Guest Guest
Subject: Re: Mission Impossible - Ghost Protocol ::: December 16, 2011 Fri Nov 18, 2011 10:11 pm
MI2 was a brainless steal from To Catch a Thief with slowmo cumshots of Cruise on a motorbike. Nevertheless, I was so turned on I joined the Scientologists on the spot. (I was lucky they had a recruitment centre in the cinema foyer.)
I was able to recapture the moment six years later when Dan Craig walked past me in nothing but his Speedos.
Makeshift Python 00 Agent
Posts : 7656 Member Since : 2011-03-14 Location : You're the man now, dog!
Subject: Re: Mission Impossible - Ghost Protocol ::: December 16, 2011 Sat Nov 19, 2011 12:42 am
I always saw it as an incredibly shameless rip-off of NOTORIOUS.
Seve Q Branch
Posts : 610 Member Since : 2011-03-21 Location : the island of Lemoy
Subject: Re: Mission Impossible - Ghost Protocol ::: December 16, 2011 Sat Nov 19, 2011 1:13 am
Prisoner Monkeys wrote:
They could have found a better way to pass the baton on to Hunt. The first film is actually a nice little thriller (even if the train sequence is OTT), but it ruined the Jim Phelps character. Even if Phelps died at the end of the film, he should have been a hero.
if only :cheers:
Mr. Brown wrote:
The character of Jim Phelps was indeed ruined by De Palma's film, but I think that was just a result of revamping the franchise.
I don't see why he had to sacrificed purely for the sake of providing a surprise twist? :scratch:
FourDot wrote:
I enjoy it, and it's very accomplished on a technical level. But the Phelps turn/confrontation just doesn't work for me, and I'm not even a fan of the original series. It just seems cheap.
exactly, the worst kind of twist for the sake of a twist
"no one will ever expect it, therefore lets do it"
Sharky wrote:
I'm no fan big of MI:2, but at least it had truckloads of style and elegance, courtesy of John Woo .
it had truckloads of something, but it wasn't style or elegance...
Prisoner Monkeys Potential 00 Agent
Posts : 2849 Member Since : 2011-10-29 Location : Located
Subject: Re: Mission Impossible - Ghost Protocol ::: December 16, 2011 Sat Nov 19, 2011 2:22 am
MI:2's problem was that the story was written around the action sequences that Woo wanted to include. The first cut of the film was actually three hours long, and contained a much more detailed account of the plot. The studios told Woo to cut it down, so what went from a story about a villain buying stock options in a pharmaceutical company and releasing a virus for profit because a story about a villain releasing a virus.
Loomis Head of Station
Posts : 1413 Member Since : 2011-04-11
Subject: Re: Mission Impossible - Ghost Protocol ::: December 16, 2011 Sat Nov 19, 2011 2:43 am
Prisoner Monkeys wrote:
The first cut of the film was actually three hours long
I was under the impression that that had been debunked as a movie geeks' urban myth. I doubt that there was ever a three-hour cut of MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE II with added plot (no way would they have originally gone for a running time of 180 minutes or so, even at the height of the M:I franchise's and Cruise's box office pulling power), although I'd certainly love to see it if it exists.
I love MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE II anyway, though. It does what it says on the tin.
Prisoner Monkeys Potential 00 Agent
Posts : 2849 Member Since : 2011-10-29 Location : Located
Subject: Re: Mission Impossible - Ghost Protocol ::: December 16, 2011 Sat Nov 19, 2011 2:53 am
Well, it might not have been three hours long - but apparently, a couple of scenes that explained the plot a little more fully were removed. Right now, you can understand what Ambrose tires to do ... if you know about economics. The flimsy explanation given probably went right over the heads of younger audiences.
Tubes Q Branch
Posts : 734 Member Since : 2011-03-14
Subject: Re: Mission Impossible - Ghost Protocol ::: December 16, 2011 Sat Nov 19, 2011 3:17 am
Prisoner Monkeys wrote:
so what went from a story about a villain buying stock options in a pharmaceutical company and releasing a virus for profit because a story about a villain releasing a virus.
That story is still in there, although it's only in Ambrose's 2 minute villain speech at the end.
MI:2 is a tremendous exercise of stylistic Hollywood action. Woo has made better movies, however, with just as good action sequences. Only worth it to see Tom Cruise's hilarious mullet.
Prisoner Monkeys Potential 00 Agent
Posts : 2849 Member Since : 2011-10-29 Location : Located
Subject: Re: Mission Impossible - Ghost Protocol ::: December 16, 2011 Sat Nov 19, 2011 3:48 am
Then there's also the stunt "casting" of using Australia as a location. I think the tourist board really lobbied hard to get us included in the film. But it's absolutely ridiculous - Hunt's team is based on a sheep station, while the villains are in Sydney. Contrary to popular opinion, you don't just go from the city to the "Outback" (I saw an episode of "JAG" recently where an Australian character claimed he "took his jeep into the Outback on weekends"); it's actually a few hundred kilometres out beyond the city limits. In the event of a crisis in the city, Hunt's team would be hours away from anything and unlikely to even know about it, much less be able to get there on time to do anything but clean up the wreckage.
FourDot 'R'
Posts : 484 Member Since : 2011-03-14 Location : There, not there.
Subject: Re: Mission Impossible - Ghost Protocol ::: December 16, 2011 Sat Nov 19, 2011 4:03 am
At least they actually came here though, instead of those shitty Bond films ignoring us completely.
The only thing I can really say about Mission: Impossible 2 is that it features the best motorcycle jousting I've ever seen.
Otherwise, you've got to put up with Dougray Scott and Richard Roxborugh as villains. Even after stealing the Mason/Landau dynamic from North by Northwest, they still couldn't make those two guys even remotely interesting. The best solution is to not cast either of them ever.
Seve Q Branch
Posts : 610 Member Since : 2011-03-21 Location : the island of Lemoy
Subject: Re: Mission Impossible - Ghost Protocol ::: December 16, 2011 Sat Nov 19, 2011 10:10 pm
Loomis wrote:
Prisoner Monkeys wrote:
The first cut of the film was actually three hours long
I was under the impression that that had been debunked as a movie geeks' urban myth. I doubt that there was ever a three-hour cut of MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE II with added plot (no way would they have originally gone for a running time of 180 minutes or so, even at the height of the M:I franchise's and Cruise's box office pulling power), although I'd certainly love to see it if it exists.
I love MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE II anyway, though. It does what it says on the tin.
I've never seen a Woo movie yet that had a coherent plot, so I doubt MI2 was any different
I can overlook that in his Hong Kong efforts, because most Hong Kong movies have sketchy plots (except Infernal Affairs), but my expectations of a Hollywood movie are slightly higher and he never met them
Prisoner Monkeys Potential 00 Agent
Posts : 2849 Member Since : 2011-10-29 Location : Located
Subject: Re: Mission Impossible - Ghost Protocol ::: December 16, 2011 Sat Nov 19, 2011 10:40 pm
FACE/OFF wasn't that bad - though it would have worked better as a psychological thriller rather than a straight actioner.
Blunt Instrument 00 Agent
Posts : 6210 Member Since : 2011-03-20 Location : Propping up the bar
Subject: Re: Mission Impossible - Ghost Protocol ::: December 16, 2011 Sun Nov 20, 2011 12:08 pm
FACE/OFF had some of the most easily spottable stunt doubles that I've seen outside of the last couple of Moore's Bonds.
Prisoner Monkeys Potential 00 Agent
Posts : 2849 Member Since : 2011-10-29 Location : Located
Subject: Re: Mission Impossible - Ghost Protocol ::: December 16, 2011 Sun Nov 20, 2011 12:24 pm
Which is one of the reasons why it would have worked better as a psychological thriller. When the film was in production, a couple of actor combinations were considered before settling on Travolta and Cage. There were a couple that would have been standard action fare - Schwarzenegger/Stallone, van Damme/Segal, Baldwin/Willis, De Niro/Pacino and so forth - but at one point, they were considering Michael Douglas and Harrison Ford. I very much doubt that these two would have made an action film. In fact, I think it would have been a lot closer to HEAT than anything else.
Seve Q Branch
Posts : 610 Member Since : 2011-03-21 Location : the island of Lemoy
Subject: Re: Mission Impossible - Ghost Protocol ::: December 16, 2011 Mon Nov 21, 2011 12:13 am
Prisoner Monkeys wrote:
Which is one of the reasons why it would have worked better as a psychological thriller. When the film was in production, a couple of actor combinations were considered before settling on Travolta and Cage. There were a couple that would have been standard action fare - Schwarzenegger/Stallone, van Damme/Segal, Baldwin/Willis, De Niro/Pacino and so forth - but at one point, they were considering Michael Douglas and Harrison Ford. I very much doubt that these two would have made an action film. In fact, I think it would have been a lot closer to HEAT than anything else.
it would have been less lurid and more down to earth with them involved, but then those two would probably have changed director as well
Harmsway Potential 00 Agent
Posts : 2801 Member Since : 2011-08-22
Subject: Re: Mission Impossible - Ghost Protocol ::: December 16, 2011 Mon Nov 21, 2011 1:50 am
Sharky wrote:
Easily the best MI score to date, IMHO.
Hm. Now there's an opinion I didn't expect. But you're increasingly unpredictable these days.
Personally, I'm partial to Elfman's score for the first 'un. Not that it's overly impressive, but it has cues/moments that are fairly striking.
FourDot 'R'
Posts : 484 Member Since : 2011-03-14 Location : There, not there.
Subject: Re: Mission Impossible - Ghost Protocol ::: December 16, 2011 Mon Nov 21, 2011 8:14 am
Harmsway wrote:
Sharky wrote:
Easily the best MI score to date, IMHO.
Hm. Now there's an opinion I didn't expect. But you're increasingly unpredictable these days.
FWIW, Sharky doesn't complain all that much about earlier Zimmer. Or at least, not that I can remember.
Largo's Shark 00 Agent
Posts : 10588 Member Since : 2011-03-14
Subject: Re: Mission Impossible - Ghost Protocol ::: December 16, 2011 Fri Dec 02, 2011 4:54 pm
Some new clips:
Makeshift Python 00 Agent
Posts : 7656 Member Since : 2011-03-14 Location : You're the man now, dog!
Subject: Re: Mission Impossible - Ghost Protocol ::: December 16, 2011 Fri Dec 02, 2011 5:06 pm