or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Other Areas of Interest › Movies, Concerts, and Music Discussion › Mission Impossible 4 confirmed
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Mission Impossible 4 confirmed - Page 8

post #211 of 398
Quote:
Originally Posted by lwright84 View Post

IMO, the problem with MI:2 was it was incredibly, tortuously, cheesy. The John Woo cliches were cranked up to 11, and it just didnt work for film material that is supposed to be grounded in reality (accomplishing the impossible with the improbable). Had it been some different IP altogether, I probably could've stomached it better. But Woo ended up wasting an admittedly fantastic intro on material that deserved better. Which is why MI:3 worked so well... it took the ultra-realism of the first film (save for the exploding helicopter jump), and added just enough stylization and romanticism that it was the best of both worlds.

Exactly.
As much as I want(ed) to like MI2, I just cant sit through the whole movie.
I re-watched 1 the other day and even though it already feels a bit dated to me, it was still very good.

3 is still my favorite...at least as of now until I see 4. The pacing of the movie was just about perfect, just the right amount of action to keep the story going.
Also, Philip Seymour Hoffman was excellent as the villian.
post #212 of 398
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoey67 View Post

Whatever haters, yack away all you want but MI 2 was and still will be the box office champ of the series. Not even this 4th one 11 yrs later with ticket prices nearly doubled cannot pass it.

It still has to beat Mission Impossible II

Budget: $125,000,000 (estimated)
Opening Weekend: $70,816,215 (USA) (28 May 2000) (3653 Screens)
Gross: $565,400,000 (Worldwide)

Could it be because everyone was excited to see a sequel? Even though it wasn't my favorite I still enjoyed it except for the limp bizket part lol
post #213 of 398
I saw it tonight at the imax, I think it was clearly the best one to date hands down. what a great film!
post #214 of 398
Ok here's the thing about MI 2 that I believed transpired. After the 1st one, the general consensus from some viewers was that it was confusing and slow. So Paramount and producers wanted to inject some life and hire an action director like John Woo and told him to give it some flair and pizazz like Face Off. it wasn't his fault really, things happen for a reason and it came from the top brasses. So it wasn't like Woo's idea to take it that direction, he doesn't have that type of power. He was just doing his job the way they wanted him to. It makes sense right because if they wanted the 2nd one to be like the 1st they would have hired someone like Scorcese or Barry Levinson.

Then after the 2nd one, folks complained that it was way over the top so they listened and toned it down for the 3rd one. Then some like myself were not happy about the dismal and tv show soap opera likeness from the 3rd one so with the 4th one they combined the best from the 2nd and 3rd one so now I think they and we have happy medium that works for most.

It took some tinkering but I think the 5th one will be like the 4th.
post #215 of 398
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoey67 View Post

So Paramount and producers wanted to inject some life and hire an action director like John Woo and told him to give it some flair and pizazz like Face Off.

It is easy to see these two movies are by the same guy.
In fact, hard to tell much of a difference.
Both are horribly over-the-top, to the point of being insulting.
John Woo's Big Jump To Hollywood was in tatters after these clunkers.
He did a couple after that (Windtalkers and Paycheck) I enjoyed, but it was, essentially, over.
post #216 of 398
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

It is easy to see these two movies are by the same guy.
In fact, hard to tell much of a difference.
Both are horribly over-the-top, to the point of being insulting.
John Woo's Big Jump To Hollywood was in tatters after these clunkers.
He did a couple after that (Windtalkers and Paycheck) I enjoyed, but it was, essentially, over.

If you hire John Woo to do a movie, you get a John Woo movie.

Still MI2 has grown on me since I saw it in theater. Once you are at peace with it being over the top and not so much a mission impossible movie. Its a decent action movie that its more character driven then action movies usually is. And Hans Zimmers score is pure magic.

And its the only MI movie I have watched more then once.
post #217 of 398
I went to see IV last night with my family. I really enjoyed it pretty much all around. I'd say it was at least as good as III ,which previously had been my favorite. I liked the action in that there was plenty of it, of course, but individual scenes didn't go on and on.

What I liked also was there were more laughs than the the other films which really broke things up.

I recommend it to anyone.

Art
post #218 of 398
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art Sonneborn View Post

I went to see IV last night with my family. I really enjoyed it pretty much all around. I'd say it was at least as good as III ,which previously had been my favorite. I liked the action in that there was plenty of it, of course, but individual scenes didn't go on and on.

What I liked also was there were more laughs than the the other films which really broke things up.

+1. I too think MI4 is extremely well balanced(humor/action).

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Spoiler  
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
It was nice to see Ving Rhames and Michelle Monaghan at the end, but it would have been even more nice to have Rhames back with the team as well, not just for a cameo.
post #219 of 398
Quote:
Originally Posted by MovieSwede View Post

If you hire John Woo to do a movie, you get a John Woo movie.

Still MI2 has grown on me since I saw it in theater. Once you are at peace with it being over the top and not so much a mission impossible movie. Its a decent action movie that its more character driven then action movies usually is. And Hans Zimmers score is pure magic.

And its the only MI movie I have watched more then once.

Precisely, and that was my point is,.. that was the direction Paramount wanted to take the MI franchise. They knew Woo was going to do his thing which is 'action' galore. I'm fairly certain It was obvious Cruise also had some say in wanting more action and adventure in the sequel. They do listen to audience reaction more than you think.
post #220 of 398
Thread Starter 
^^^ besides if I'm not mistaken many critics praised the spectacular action and the 'fresh air' Woo brought to the franchise back then. It's like Armageddon but the other way around: when it came out in 1998 it was the worst film ever and now almost 15 years later everyone says guilty pleasure and all-around spectacle... With MI2, looks like it sucks in 2011 but was cool in 2000...

[edit] oops, I meant 2012!
post #221 of 398
Found this review and thought it was summed up well from all the series:

So, I loved the whole retro/stylized/conspiracy vibe that the Brian DePalma brough to the first film but I also loved the hyper-balletic melodrama that John Woo brought to the second.

MI3 is the only one I HATE. For me, that movie was no damn fun. It tried to be more "realistic" but was still ludicrious and it's attempts at exploring Ethan's relationship with his wife failed misrably and just meant the movie wastes a ton of time with the same tired "he wants to quit and live a normal life" theme that we've seen a million times before. Not to mention Abbrams had no idea how to direct and action sequence at that point so everything is just super-close shaky-cam. All the amazing sense of adventure that i wanted from the series went out of the window with this one and boy did I miss DePalma and Woo.

MI4 I thought was fairily succsesful. I liked how it's the first one to really focus on the team as a whole and give a bit of the vibe of the show. I thought it was a good update to the franchise and liked lot of the sequnces. If I have one minor complaint, I wish Brad Bird had been a bit more rero stylized in some of the action sequences. They were good bu I remember watching the Incredibles and feeling how some scenes just oozed with that old-fashioned spy movie vibe. I wish he had pushed that further n this film. Also the climax was a bit of a let down. Still, great flick.
post #222 of 398
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoey67 View Post

Found this review and thought it was summed up well from all the series:

So, I loved the whole retro/stylized/conspiracy vibe that the Brian DePalma brough to the first film but I also loved the hyper-balletic melodrama that John Woo brought to the second.

MI3 is the only one I HATE. For me, that movie was no damn fun. It tried to be more "realistic" but was still ludicrious and it's attempts at exploring Ethan's relationship with his wife failed misrably and just meant the movie wastes a ton of time with the same tired "he wants to quit and live a normal life" theme that we've seen a million times before. Not to mention Abbrams had no idea how to direct and action sequence at that point so everything is just super-close shaky-cam. All the amazing sense of adventure that i wanted from the series went out of the window with this one and boy did I miss DePalma and Woo.

MI4 I thought was fairily succsesful. I liked how it's the first one to really focus on the team as a whole and give a bit of the vibe of the show. I thought it was a good update to the franchise and liked lot of the sequnces. If I have one minor complaint, I wish Brad Bird had been a bit more rero stylized in some of the action sequences. They were good bu I remember watching the Incredibles and feeling how some scenes just oozed with that old-fashioned spy movie vibe. I wish he had pushed that further n this film. Also the climax was a bit of a let down. Still, great flick.

To me MI3 was like a long Alias episode. And since I really liked Alias, I really enjoyed MI3.

We just saw MI4 today. This one is even better. I hope Brad Bird does some more great things wit his future live action movies.

EDIT: Abrams had been directing actions before he did MI3, it was just on TV. A few epsiodes of Alias and he did a great job with them like he did on MI3. But his directing style is very similar on everything I've seen that he directed.
post #223 of 398
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoey67 View Post

MI3 is the only one I HATE. For me, that movie was no damn fun. It tried to be more "realistic" but was still ludicrious and it's attempts at exploring Ethan's relationship with his wife failed misrably and just meant the movie wastes a ton of time with the same tired "he wants to quit and live a normal life" theme that we've seen a million times before. Not to mention Abbrams had no idea how to direct and action sequence at that point so everything is just super-close shaky-cam. All the amazing sense of adventure that i wanted from the series went out of the window with this one and boy did I miss DePalma and Woo.

I can't fathom how someone could walk away from MI3 with this perception. To each his own indeed.
post #224 of 398
Quote:
Originally Posted by lwright84 View Post


I can't fathom how someone could walk away from MI3 with this perception. To each his own indeed.

+1 I also enjoyed them all and MI4 was spectactular in every way.
post #225 of 398
Quote:
Originally Posted by aaronwt View Post


edit: Abrams had been directing actions before he did mi3, it was just on tv. A few epsiodes of alias and he did a great job with them like he did on mi3. But his directing style is very similar on everything i've seen that he directed.

+1
post #226 of 398
My brother told me this movie is brilliant, i must watch it as soon as it goes blueray.
post #227 of 398
Quote:
Originally Posted by lwright84 View Post

I can't fathom how someone could walk away from MI3 with this perception. To each his own indeed.

-1

Lol. Add me to the very short list of MI:3 haters. I'm sorry but it just doesn't do it for me. Though it does put me to sleep so I guess it's not all bad.

Love MI:1
Love MI:2

Saw MI:4 and I gotta say it was very good! Most of the positive things said can be mirrored here. Not sure if I have anything else to add that hasn't been said already. Went to the local IMAX to see it all proper-like. Thankfully we have a real IMAX theater here so the image, especially when it went full frame was absolutely epic. Hope the BD has the variable AR so we can get as much of that frame for home viewing. I know 2.35 screen owners hate that but... hey, what can I say? Get a variable aspect screen. Or something.

The sound was awesome too! Can't wait to get this one on BD.
post #228 of 398
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Simonian View Post

Hope the BD has the variable AR so we can get as much of that frame for home viewing. I know 2.35 screen owners hate that but... hey, what can I say? Get a variable aspect screen. Or something.

Eck!
Another d!ck move by Abrams to draw attention to himself...
Other than Newt Gingrich, I don't know if anyone is more enamored with himself than JJ Abrams.
post #229 of 398
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

Eck!
Another d!ck move by Abrams to draw attention to himself...
Other than Newt Gingrich, I don't know if anyone is more enamored with himself than JJ Abrams.

You have issues oink, lol.
post #230 of 398
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

Eck!
Another d!ck move by Abrams to draw attention to himself...
Other than Newt Gingrich, I don't know if anyone is more enamored with himself than JJ Abrams.

Using IMAX to draw attention to himself? Huh wut?

No love for Christopher Nolan then?
post #231 of 398
MI:2 is the weak link in the MI chain. It's almost comical now to watch it. You can make a drinking game out of it. Every time Cruise kicks someone in slow motion you have to drink. Everyone would be passed out a half hour in.
post #232 of 398
Take the time to watch this:

http://vimeo.com/33566791
post #233 of 398
Quote:
Originally Posted by Waboman View Post

MI:2 is the weak link in the MI chain. It's almost comical now to watch it. You can make a drinking game out of it. Every time Cruise kicks someone in slow motion you have to drink. Everyone would be passed out a half hour in.

I get the same effect from just watching MI:3.

MI:2 might be silly but it's good fun. MI:3 just isn't, imo.
post #234 of 398
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Simonian View Post

Using IMAX to draw attention to himself? Huh wut?

Nope, the changing AR.
Shoot in one or the other...why is his movies consistently a platform for the dude's ego?
Switching AR adds nothing, except the look-at-me effect (something Abrams seems incapable of NOT doing).


Quote:


No love for Christopher Nolan then?

His use of it doesn't help The Bat flicks neither.
post #235 of 398
I was gonna say, that isn't a method exclusive to JJ. It was also done in Tron Legacy.

You have a 2.35 projection system, Oink?
post #236 of 398
JJ was just the producer on this film guys. Oink, you need to try and find valid reasons to hate on Abrams (or you know, like him instead).
post #237 of 398
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

Eck!
Another d!ck move by Abrams to draw attention to himself...
Other than Newt Gingrich, I don't know if anyone is more enamored with himself than JJ Abrams.

hey, I do love myself quite much thank you

...ok seriously now, in MI4 I thought the imax-gimmick was actually effective in dubai. Yes I do think it's a gimmick, but I kinda like it; much more than 3D in fact. From a technical standpoint, the level of detail is at times so jaw-dropping...I don't know, I just like it! (and I really don't mind the shifting AR Blu-rays either...)
post #238 of 398
Quote:
Originally Posted by lwright84 View Post

JJ was just the producer on this film guys.

Exactly. And with Abrams, being a "producer" means: "Sure I'll put my name on the movie so that you can get financing, if you put one of my buddies in it for 3 minutes of screen time. Deal? Great! See you later. Good luck."

Abrams had nothing to do with the direction of this movie.

Next, oink will say that the asepct ratio changes in this movie are all the fault of the HD DVD format war. That inevitably enters the argument whenever he doesn't like something.
post #239 of 398
The lack of lens flare is a giveaway Abrams wasn't too involved with this film.
post #240 of 398
Quote:
Originally Posted by Waboman View Post

The lack of lens flare is a giveaway Abrams wasn't too involved with this film.

Star trek...mucho lens flare. Was ok but in super8 eh
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Other Areas of Interest › Movies, Concerts, and Music Discussion › Mission Impossible 4 confirmed