Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol - Page 7

Bought the Best Buy version for the extras and watched it tonight... Image quality is stunning. While I would have liked the dual IMAX video format like TDK, the single format used was fine and did not detract from the overall experience. As for the audio, the 7.1 sound was amazing.

Say what you will, Tom Cruise has a tremendous amount of guts and talent and as was previously mentioned he has a large breadth of quality work (love Collateral).

Brad Bird's first live action film was nothing short of outstanding. He has a good eye and whether animation (The Incredibles, Iron Giant), or live action, Brad Bird has the innate ability to put a good story on film. I am sure he is in high demand as a result of MI4. It was interesting to note in the supplemental material how helpful Tom Cruise was towards Mr. Bird at times on the set during filming and his added live action expertise pays off in the final look and feel of the film.

Definitely a must buy.

This BD is reference IMO.
The movie is somewhat meh.

oh nice!

Same here. Reference in cinematography and lush scenery. This is a must own for any HT. The movie though didn't fleshed out like I hoped. I think you summed it pretty well and I explained more in the dvd thread as some will have hissy fits if I do it here.

The audio on this BD is ridiculous...reference through and through.

I blind bought anyway. OCD since I have the first three and the wife is doing a viewing party this weekend. REALLY hit or miss to get a new release bluray at my local Blockbuster inside the fist couple of weeks.

This is a great BD to show-off your HT with.

Haven't watched this yet or seen it in theaters. Picked it up yesterday and will be watching it on my new 60" Elite (at 8 feet) with my M&K surround this weekend. Warning to my neighbors - it will be loud. Very loud

watched it last night and was disappointed. the plot was so absurd i couldn't buy into the flick at all.

didn't use my surrounds so can't comment on the audio, but while the br looked stunning in some scenes, it was just ok in others.

with everyone posting how the video is reference, i am starting to wonder about redbox brs. i swear the dragon tattoo br i rented was a dvd, and now
the video on ghost protocol was a little better than middling.

wonder if redbox is buying chinese knockoff brs.

I thought the movie was a solid B. Definitely worth watching.

The Audio/Video on the blu-ray is some of the best I've ever seen. Visuals were razor sharp and the surround sound was awesome.

We can't watch movie like MI for story. The story will always be absurd. If it not, the action wouldn't make sense. Seriously, someone will drive their cars into each other just stop the other? And get away with a minor headache? With most audience today who loves action movies, they don't want realistic story. When you get injured, you stay injured, not magically healed after a few minutes later. That's video game.

Is Redbox still renting "rental" edition Blu-rays? I read the "rental" edition uses BD 25 only which highly compress the picture.

LOL, well said. This storyline is even more preposterous than most, however. The russian vs. u.s. tensions angle goes beyond being implausible to just being plain silly. It is such a transparent excuse for the action sequences (blowing things up, car chases and such), it really does insult the audience.

Can actors pushing 50 really serve as plausible action heroes? I suppose so. To me, it doesn't make a lot of sense, but fans of this movie are willing to overlook quite a bit it seems, for the sake of 'action.'

To me, 'action' sequences should always serve an interesting, compelling storyline. And ghost protocol's premise is so goofy, it was difficult, if not "impossible" to suspend disbelief.

And this is unique to MI4 how within this genre? Please detail how many of the 22 Bond films premises are anywhere short of "goofy"? Seems like they've enjoyed a TON of success with those. Or the "new bond": the Bourne trilogy with its absurdly convoluted plot schemes deliberately designed to birth sequels?

National Teasure. Indiana Jones. Jurassic Park. The Matrix. In just about any comic hero series you will find tons of plot/premise "believability" there, right? Extraordinary stories are not immune to extraordinary circumstance just because they involve humans and the humans who enjoy them are not mouth breathing dolts because they do.

This is because movies- especially those within this ilk- reserve the right to be extraordinary. If this bothers you, I'd suggest looking elsewhere. And also shelving: fantasy, science fiction, horror, epic/myths, etc.

Sitting around dissecting a film like this for its political or other social/worldly realism is what's really pointless to me.

It's make believe. A story. Fiction. If it was a painstaking account of reality we'd end up with more "English Patients" than most could stomach.

The film received overwhelmingly positive critical and popular acclaim...it wasn't because we just all like to see things blow up.

My 2% of a $1.

James

Made me LOL. Overreact much?

Well, here's the thing: Which disc did you play? The packaging on the last few titles I've gotten has been VERY odd - when you open the package all you see is the disc on the right - any sane person would just assume that's the Blu-ray without even giving it thought because you can't even SEE the disc on the left because it's covered with a paper for the digital copy. Why would anyone make the first thing you see in a package the fershluganah DVD. Anyway, my point is, maybe you played the DVD rather than the Blu. It happened to me recently on another disc - I couldn't understand all the PQ raves because what I was watching looked like an upscaled DVD - which, of course, I later found out, it was.

As for the film, well, loud and reference doesn't equal good. In fact, it's pretty terrible every step of the way. I always find it amusing when action fans can accept the most absurd plotting, awful acting, terrible writing, and stunts that no human being could ever do, but then will complain in a classic musical when people start to sing. I find people bursting into song more believable than someone leaping fifty-feet, smashing themselves on the ground, then getting up with a few scuff marks, let alone being alive. It is to laugh. And sorry, Russians and nuclear threats may have been effective in the 1960s but in 2012 if that's the best that the writers could come up with then they should perhaps look for another line of work. I also laughed out loud at the score - in Russia? Sure, just add the cliche Russian chorus. In India? Whip out the sitar. Whatever happened to real film scoring. This film felt much more like the insufferable J.J. Abrams rather than Brad Bird.

Watched it at my friends house but overall i kind of enjoyed it. The picture looked good and the sound was ok for his setup, but the story seemed a bit more over the top than the past 3. Will watch it again, only on my projector 106" setup with proper 7.1 TrueHD sound. Friends 50" and 5.1 setup just doesn't work for me anymore with my setup being available to watch anytime.

Again ok movie but another viewing might improve upon my initial take of the film.

Or perhaps you're a bit sensitive.

Although I suppose my post was in response to yours, my overriding thought is that most of the threads here on films like this are littered with the "clever clan" that seem anxious to flex their intellectual (and historical) depth by tearing down these kinds of films. Kinda pointless to me.

Now that doesn't mean I give every one of them (films) a blank check to go off the deep end for 2 hours, but I feel a considerable amount of leeway is inherently required to take these films in/enjoy and if people haven't figured that out by now, I would liken them at least a bit masochistic to continue to bombard their sensibilities with what has become a bona fide way of life for modern film...especially Hollywood blockbusters.

I'm sorry if my retort was a bit over the top- it probably was. I think I just read a few posts similar to yours and my tea got a bit over boiled.

EDIT: whaddya know, ANOTHER post essentially alluding that the millions of people who enjoyed the film are artistically opaque. Go figure. If you actually paid to see (which, barring sneaking into the theater, you did) what has to be the greatest known quantity in the industry after 10 yrs, and (unsurprisingly) walked away disappointed, the egg's on your face, not ours.


James

Like a lot of folks here, I enjoyed Ghost Protocol, But it's not as deserving of the critical praise it has received. Rt, currently has it at 93%. I liked MI3 more and it definately had a better screen play. I feel MI3 has a better replay value as well. I think Brad Bird is a bit of a victim of his own success. Bird, was day dreaming too much of an Incredibles sequal, while developing MI4.

As far as the BR disc is concerned. The visuals were on par with the current crop. Nice sharp picture with good contrast. The audio was good too. Nice punch when needed during heavy action. I would have liked for the musical scores to punch through a little more, they seemed a bit veiled to me.

Your second great post of this page. Right on!

My two cents.

I liked it, probably my 2nd favorite after 1.
Almost a tie with 3, which was absurd but had great action.

I loved:

The gadgets (making them almost realistic)
Making Hunt more "human" and less of a super hero.
Getting back to the reliance on team.
Toning down the personal revenge stuff.

Disliked:

Even though they are disavowed, they can still jet set all over the place at a moments notice.
They have all the tools at their disposal, a train is just a mile away with everything you need.
The revenge factor is still there somewhat
(I mean really, the people in these jobs that have close personal ties would be weeded out, would they not?)
The villain (I love the actor) is almost secondary, is never really fleshed out, very paper thin character.

Illustration of the aspect ratio differences:



I'm also running a poll where you can vote on your thoughts about the aspect ratio, if anyone were so inclined.

I may just agree with you on some points...especially replay value. For as much as I liked 4, it's not a concise film and sitting through some of the scenes that are all-but required for a first-time viewing could get a bit tedious down the road. Time will tell though...second viewing tonight, lol.

Still, when it's firing- which it spends the lion's share of its time doing- it's hard to rebuke within its genre.

James

Part 2 is the best sequel.

Ah.....humor.

Personally for me:

#1: 3 and 4 are a virtual dead-heat for me right now. #3 was pretty damn good and still easily re-played.

#2: 1

#3: 2


James

I'm a John Woo freak, MI:2 is awesome.

I loved this film. it kept me entertained right to the end fantastic. I enjoy the MI's and i hope they do another one.

"Last" for me by no means implies it's bad, actually underrated, IMO. 3 & 4 just have a lot to offer. 1 & 2 can prolly easily flip-flop too.

James

I can't think of a proper reply this, that wouldn't result in a ban.

I really missed certain characters that may or may not have been in the franchise. They may or may not have killed Zed.