Mission: Impossible

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (782 of them)
random thoughts:

i liked the shorthand of not showing the heist. it was great at keeping the tension up as the audience is waiting around w/ the IMF crew, not knowing exactly what's going on inside. I thought that it was one of the moments of economy in flick, since we didn't need to seen more heisty stuff(the Vatican took care of that), and as i mentioned, the tension was kept just by helplessly waiting outside.

some of the things that pissed me off was usual Action Movie Stupidity(i.e. a defib that took 30 secs to charge, the team apparently not having the ability to close a huey door, using a defib on your head i accept, using 3-phase 220V power lines, less so, etc)

The chopper chase thru a field of windmills was a great setpiece.

you can tell when tom is Acting becuase he tries very, VERY hard to turn on the "intense."

i was happy that the asian chick didn't have to be Stock Asian Chick.

billy crudup looks weird w/ short hair.

they did the Collateral thing of occasionally switching to green-tinged DV whenever something Dramatic or Actiony was about to happen. Lots of off-center, semi-shakey extreme close-ups, too.

Anybody get a "Escape from NY" vibe of the hero w/ ticking bomb in his head that can only be deactivated with two paddles injecting a charge?

kingfish doesn't live here anymore (kingfish 2.0), Wednesday, 10 May 2006 21:18 (eighteen years ago) link

Movie-wifey looks like Liv Tyler, not Katie Holmes.

I liked it a lot, but it felt endless at times because everything was telegraphed so far ahead, and some of the action pieces could have been shorter. I wish action directors would chop a few minutes off of each setpiece, you really wouldn't notice it, but the movies would be paced so much better.

The team was awesome, Seymour Hoffman was awesome, Cruise was about as good as he always is.

milo z (mlp), Thursday, 11 May 2006 02:51 (eighteen years ago) link

After seeing the James Bond trailer beforehand, I'm not sold on Daniel Craig as 007. He just doesn't seem suave enough, even in a thuggy Dark Bond way.

MI:3 gadgets >>>> anything Bond has worked with recently.

milo z (mlp), Thursday, 11 May 2006 02:53 (eighteen years ago) link

I would also like an entire movie about the adventures of Felicity, ass-kicking secret agent.

milo z (mlp), Thursday, 11 May 2006 03:11 (eighteen years ago) link

i've had enough of suave bond. time for a blonde shitkicker.

gear (gear), Thursday, 11 May 2006 03:35 (eighteen years ago) link

brontosaur you're insane. it's not a cop-out. jj abrams wasn't afraid to show tom cruise actually stealing the rabbit's foot. it would not have been a controversial or difficult scene. not showing it was a CHOICE that helped build tension and made the scene funny and memorable.

you can tell when tom is Acting becuase he tries very, VERY hard to turn on the "intense."

he's good at it though! it's funny, the crazier and more publically-reviled the guy has gotten the more i've been enjoying his performances.

s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 11 May 2006 14:25 (eighteen years ago) link

This thread of late reminds me of Ocean's Twelve, which I need to buy soon.

Raymond Cummings (Raymond Cummings), Thursday, 11 May 2006 14:49 (eighteen years ago) link

for god's sake why

s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 11 May 2006 14:50 (eighteen years ago) link

of course its a cop out and, duh, its a CHOICE. Its a CHOICE to skip over one scene that could have had any number of moments of "wow thats cool" or whatever the hell people enjoy in an action movie in favor of one moment of post-modern, "oh look they defied action movie convention, thats funny". Of course it also functioned like an "elevator scene with muzak" moment that pop up in action movies lately that are usually played for comedic effect, which usually create a nice stop gap and make the ensuing action seem that much more intense.

brontosaur (brontosaur), Thursday, 11 May 2006 16:26 (eighteen years ago) link

yes, that's called "pacing."

s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 11 May 2006 16:32 (eighteen years ago) link

I haven't seen this mi3 thing but apparently it doesn't pull the off-camera crap as blatantly as Ocean's 12. I think I was the only one giggling because I realized Soderberg was pissing on the audience by turning it into a cheap postmodern prank, then kind of annoyed that he was able to half-ass it that much, then mostly entertained that he did it in a way that audience members were able to "get it" without overexplanation.

mike h. (mike h.), Thursday, 11 May 2006 16:43 (eighteen years ago) link

there's a difference between mi3 where five seconds of a heist weren't shown--to RAD effect--and the whole movie is full of great set pieces, and O12, which is a heist movie w/o any heist scenes, and the whole movie is full of julia roberts frowning.

s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 11 May 2006 17:22 (eighteen years ago) link

oceans 12 is a little too close to hudson hawk for me

gear (gear), Thursday, 11 May 2006 17:34 (eighteen years ago) link

was there singing?

kingfish doesn't live here anymore (kingfish 2.0), Thursday, 11 May 2006 17:39 (eighteen years ago) link

Well s1ocki, I'm glad we both agree the sequence was reasonably "paced".

Its still a cop-out though. You haven't exactly refuted that point, you're just calling it by a different name. As an in-the-moment audience member I went right along with the whole thing. No doubt about it, it was well done. It was only afterwards, when discussing it that it really bugged me.

x-post in MI3 i think its more like 2-5 minutes of a heist that wasn't shown.

and i think O12 is mostly a movie about watching good looking people be charming and stylish. and it works on that level. as a heist movie.. not so much.

brontosaur (brontosaur), Thursday, 11 May 2006 17:46 (eighteen years ago) link

dude, "cop-out" only applies if the director was for some reason too cowardly to present the scene on-screen. as there is no possible way that was the case, the term does not apply.

s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 11 May 2006 17:48 (eighteen years ago) link

also if you admit that you enjoyed the sequence as is then WHAT IS YOUR ARGUMENT? that because you paid for a movie you should be entitled to see everything that happened during the time period the movie takes place??

s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 11 May 2006 17:50 (eighteen years ago) link

My basic argument is this:

Action Movie Audience goes to see Action Movie to see Action Movie Shit. Action Movie Director decides to pass up perfectly good opportunity to show Audience some Action Movie Shit in order to show... less Action Movie Shit. Its not a matter of seeing everything that takes place during the time period. Its about seeing every Action Moment that Action Movie Star gets involved in.

Its not a cop-out because someone was afraid (what does making an action movie have to do with courage?) to put it in there, its a cop-out because someone was too lazy/unimaginative/unskilled to put it in there.

brontosaur (brontosaur), Thursday, 11 May 2006 18:42 (eighteen years ago) link

Why is it less imaginative to fake out the audience's expectations than to do exactly what you seem to think is expected?

milo z (mlp), Thursday, 11 May 2006 18:45 (eighteen years ago) link

Its less imaginative because you are giving the audience one moment of satisfaction as opposed to giving them multiple moments of satisfaction. Also, there is a bit of a build up to the moment of "how's he going to pull off the Impossible?", and the payoff is.. "Its done, but you didn't get to see it. quick lets move on." Its a solution, and a clever solution, but one that bugs me.

brontosaur (brontosaur), Thursday, 11 May 2006 18:55 (eighteen years ago) link

What guarantees that the heist scene is going to give someone multiple moments of satisfaction?

How are the moments of satisfaction mutually exclusive? Instead of seeing the heist, we get the Asian woman and Raskolnikov praying and Ving Rhams being Ving Rhames, plus the aforementioned juke.

milo z (mlp), Thursday, 11 May 2006 19:00 (eighteen years ago) link

Well obviously there isn't a guarantee (which is why its not there), but if you wrote and shot a heist scene with multiple moments of satisfaction...

And the moments of satisfaction are mutually exclusive because the present moment of satisfaction is derived from the absence of the other scene. You could still have everthing that is shown in the movie, there should just be a scene before that scene showing the Heist.

brontosaur (brontosaur), Thursday, 11 May 2006 19:07 (eighteen years ago) link

i think O12 is mostly a movie about watching good looking people be charming and stylish

in Europe! with lasers! and Cherry Jones! and meta-joeks!

gabbneb (gabbneb), Thursday, 11 May 2006 19:11 (eighteen years ago) link

i like hudson hawk

latebloomer (latebloomer), Thursday, 11 May 2006 19:13 (eighteen years ago) link

also, it's the true spritual predecessor to The Da Vinci Code

http://www.cinemovies.fr/images/data/films/Pfilm36321250802778.jpg

latebloomer (latebloomer), Thursday, 11 May 2006 19:15 (eighteen years ago) link

Brontosaur, pull out. Your lack of imagination is failing to give me multiple moments of satisfaction.

Sentenza says, You're not digging (witchy), Thursday, 11 May 2006 19:34 (eighteen years ago) link

One thing I think you're overestimating is just how enjoyable the heist can be. At this point, in a heist movie (or scene), I think it's more enjoyable for it to be about everything but the heist. Those scenes are almost always boring, just because you know what's going to happen even in a well-written sequence.

milo z (mlp), Thursday, 11 May 2006 19:38 (eighteen years ago) link

it's a joke like at the beginning of the good the bad and the ugly, where three gunmen dart into a saloon and eli wallach crashes out the window holding a leg of chicken, wearing a bib. except on a much larger scale.

gear (gear), Thursday, 11 May 2006 19:41 (eighteen years ago) link

Why did Sergio Leone have to be so unimaginative? Why couldn't he have written an exciting shootout, etc.

milo z (mlp), Thursday, 11 May 2006 19:49 (eighteen years ago) link

yeah all we get to see is eli wallach looking freaked and riding off on his horse. what the fuck?

gear (gear), Thursday, 11 May 2006 19:50 (eighteen years ago) link

"Brontosaur, pull out."

latebloomer (latebloomer), Thursday, 11 May 2006 20:07 (eighteen years ago) link

I don't think I can overestimate anything. We're talking about something that doesn't exist. In my imagination it could have been fucking awesome, in everyone else's its boring run-of-the-mill stuff. I would have liked to see an attempt instead of a write around. It peeved me... sort of. Things like that do.

I'm really defending my tossed off comment and minor thought about a movie too much. My argument is also sort of like, "Man that Movie would have been better if all those girls were topless."

uhm.. I really liked that scene where Tom Cruise ran. I was impressed.

brontosaur (brontosaur), Thursday, 11 May 2006 20:27 (eighteen years ago) link

did cheers cop out by never showing vera?

s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 11 May 2006 20:33 (eighteen years ago) link

finally non gay dino porn

latebloomer (latebloomer), Thursday, 11 May 2006 20:34 (eighteen years ago) link

...I mean, all the girls in that movie were really attractive, and no doubt they all had glorious breasts. Unfortunately, for us, the Action Movie Audience the filmaker's did not have the Courage to demand that the actresses were topless through the whole film. Instead they made a CHOICE for them to be clothed. Sure, there is no reason for them to be topless, but the screenwriter's are working with a blank slate, ANYTHING can happen. And sure after a while breasts aren't all that titillating, but as I said they can do anything they want. I can't think of how they could do it, but thats not my job. I PAID to see their movie, and I think topless girls would have made it better. If the filmaker's had one whit of imagination then they would have done this, but instead they were too fucking lazy and too fucking stupid to make it happen. I mean seriously, what a fucking a cop-out.

brontosaur (brontosaur), Thursday, 11 May 2006 21:07 (eighteen years ago) link

finally non gay dino porn

latebloomer (latebloomer), Thursday, 11 May 2006 21:07 (eighteen years ago) link

Which role was he auditioning actresses for? wasn't Scarlet Johansson originaly supposed to be involved, but he creeped her out?

kingfish doesn't live here anymore (kingfish 2.0), Thursday, 11 May 2006 21:23 (eighteen years ago) link

i think he auditioned her for the role of Wife. but then he creeped her out. im not sure about which role in the movie though.

brontosaur (brontosaur), Thursday, 11 May 2006 21:33 (eighteen years ago) link

My random thoughts...

-Helicopter chase through windmills was asinine. They are in HELICOPTERS, fly ABOVE the blades. Also, how did they get from Germany to the windmill farm in Tehachapi so damn fast? Note to filmmakers - don't use an easily recognizable landmark and say it's somewhere other than where it is.

-Hooray for Simon Pegg! When's the next Shawn Of The Dead movie?

-The most unbelieveable part of the movie wasn't Cruise, the action scenes, or the over-reliance on masks. It was Keri Russell as superagent Felicity "I couldn't find a guy at NYU so I'll join the CIA."

-Abrams didn't appear to take advantage of film all that well. Much of it was framed like a TV show.

-There's a mole in the organization? This is only the plot of every episode of Alias ever.

-Vatican scene was exceptionally well done. Felt like a different movie all of a sudden. The bridge scene was also great, but like the windmill scene Cruise could have just run around to the half of the bridge that wasn't missing instead of wasting our time by jumping across.

-I like the no-show of the heist too. Reminded me of that Neal Stephenson chapter that ends "everything else was just a chase scene." Negative points for the ridiculous line about "it's the prayer I used for my cat to come home" though.

LOL Thomas (Chris Barrus), Monday, 15 May 2006 06:22 (eighteen years ago) link

Much of it was framed like a TV show... There's a mole in the organization? This is only the plot of every episode of Alias ever.

When I heard Abrams, those were two things I was expecting, and he delivered.

Helicopter chase through windmills was asinine. They are in HELICOPTERS, fly ABOVE the blades.

The helicopter being chased was "trynna lose 'em" among the windmill blades, and I loved the way they established that the windmill blades were massive and threatening before they had a helicopter run into one of 'em. Pretty great scene, actually.

sinful caesar sipped his snifter (kenan), Monday, 15 May 2006 06:36 (eighteen years ago) link

It was a blast. I expect the next movie I see to be one continuous action scene. Kind of like 24, but, like, 2.25.

I agree that the wind farm scene wasn't all that hot, but who cares if the wind farm was actually in CA. This is an American movie. If we can export our pop culture, we can export our disdain for geography. For M:I:X, I hope a computer-generated Tom Cruise jumps from the top of the Eiffel Tower onto the Kremlin. California? Is that the one shaped like a boot, or the one that invented clocks?

Fluffy Bear (Fluffy Bear Hearts Rainbows), Monday, 15 May 2006 13:16 (eighteen years ago) link

WINDMILLS DO NOT WORK THAT WAY GOODNIGHT!!

and what (ooo), Monday, 15 May 2006 13:30 (eighteen years ago) link

the windmill scene was great, i don't care how believable it was, i bought it

s1ocki (slutsky), Monday, 15 May 2006 13:41 (eighteen years ago) link

The more I hear about this movie the more I think it's actually Around the World in Eighty Days. Maybe Cruise and Jackie Chan shoulda switched roles.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 15 May 2006 13:46 (eighteen years ago) link

WINDMILLS DO NOT WORK THAT WAY GOODNIGHT!!

What, they don't fall over when they are struck by missiles that just missed the good guys, and their blades don't blow up bad guy hellicopters? 'Cause that was the important part. I'm pretty sure they work that way when TOM CRUISE IS KICKING ASS.

Besides, these are German windmills. Didn't the Germans invent them to run their dikes in La Mancha? I suppose you think think THEY DON"T KNOW HOW TO BUILD COPTER KILLING MACHINES IN LA MANCHA.

PWN3D!

Fluffy Bear (Fluffy Bear Hearts Rainbows), Monday, 15 May 2006 13:53 (eighteen years ago) link

The more I hear about this movie the more I think it's actually Around the World in Eighty Days.

Who would play Cantiflas?

Alfred, Lord Sotosyn (Alfred Soto), Monday, 15 May 2006 14:08 (eighteen years ago) link

http://www.jacneed.com/PhotoFile/Carrot_Top.jpg

Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 15 May 2006 14:10 (eighteen years ago) link

you know it's kind of pointless to make jokes about that when this actually exists:

http://www.film.ru/img/shots/arnold_schwarzenegger--around_the_world_in_80_days.jpg

s1ocki (slutsky), Monday, 15 May 2006 14:12 (eighteen years ago) link

two years pass...

The wife pissed me off.

― uptoeleven (uptoeleven), Monday, May 8, 2006 6:17 AM (2 years ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

nu-uh.

sort of think 1 is better than 3, but only marginally. they should have used PSH more.

^^ one of enriques sincere posts (special guest stars mark bronson), Sunday, 15 February 2009 21:48 (fifteen years ago) link


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.