Mission: Impossible - films and tv series

1116117119121122303

Comments

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Color timing? What is that?
    They time the colors.
    boldfinger wrote: »
    So that the colors appear in the correct order, and not all at once.

    Of course...I actually knew that. Obvious when you think about it.
    Someone should have mentioned that to the SP team. They seem to have forgot about it.
  • Posts: 12,526
    Looking forward to the next encounter!
  • Fire_and_Ice_ReturnsFire_and_Ice_Returns I am trying to get away from this mountan!
    edited May 2018 Posts: 25,047


    I need to watch this silly film again, see how much I can tolerate now.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,392
    I really dislike mi2. Strange because I love mi3 a lot, and also 4 and 5 are good too. 1 is okay, but 2 I have never enjoyed.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    2’s problem is that it’s too cheesy. It’s got a decent plot, but the John Woo-ism completely ruined it.

    3 is the one I despise most. I can’t enjoy that one at all. A Bourne pastiche with soap opera plastered all over it.
  • Fire_and_Ice_ReturnsFire_and_Ice_Returns I am trying to get away from this mountan!
    Posts: 25,047
    My rating (I don't think this has changed at all since Rogue Nation's release.
    1.
    4.
    5.
    3.
    2.

    I watch 1, 4, and 5 quite alot the other two films can be a chore. 3. Has its moments though not keen on the melodrama.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited May 2018 Posts: 8,392
    2’s problem is that it’s too cheesy. It’s got a decent plot, but the John Woo-ism completely ruined it.

    3 is the one I despise most. I can’t enjoy that one at all. A Bourne pastiche with soap opera plastered all over it.

    You must"t enjoy the love scenes in CR if you think mi3 is soap opera, ROFL. :))
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited May 2018 Posts: 23,883
    2’s problem is that it’s too cheesy. It’s got a decent plot, but the John Woo-ism completely ruined it.

    3 is the one I despise most. I can’t enjoy that one at all. A Bourne pastiche with soap opera plastered all over it.
    I'm pretty much in agreement with this. 2 could have been a lot better if Woo had just dialled it back a little and Scott hadn't overplayed it (Huuuunt!).

    I find 3 very difficult to get through due to the domestic angle. Sadly, it reminds me of TWINE. I'm not comfortable with metro heroes looking like they are about to break into tears over a woman.

    Craig, due to his brutish and thuggish manly rugby player look, can get away with it.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    2’s problem is that it’s too cheesy. It’s got a decent plot, but the John Woo-ism completely ruined it.

    3 is the one I despise most. I can’t enjoy that one at all. A Bourne pastiche with soap opera plastered all over it.
    You must"t enjoy the love scenes in CR if you think mi3 is soap opera, ROFL. :))
    Like that one scene about the "stripped armour" talk?

    You guessed right, Watson. Elementary, I say.

    ROFL
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,392
    2’s problem is that it’s too cheesy. It’s got a decent plot, but the John Woo-ism completely ruined it.

    3 is the one I despise most. I can’t enjoy that one at all. A Bourne pastiche with soap opera plastered all over it.
    You must"t enjoy the love scenes in CR if you think mi3 is soap opera, ROFL. :))
    Like that one scene about the "stripped armour" talk?

    You guessed right, Watson. Elementary, I say.

    ROFL

    Basically all the dialogue between Bond and Vesper is pretty cringey. Like how people say LTK has a televisual look, CR has love dialogue that sounds like it was off the set of a soap opera. :))
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited May 2018 Posts: 23,883
    2’s problem is that it’s too cheesy. It’s got a decent plot, but the John Woo-ism completely ruined it.

    3 is the one I despise most. I can’t enjoy that one at all. A Bourne pastiche with soap opera plastered all over it.
    You must"t enjoy the love scenes in CR if you think mi3 is soap opera, ROFL. :))
    Like that one scene about the "stripped armour" talk?

    You guessed right, Watson. Elementary, I say.

    ROFL

    Basically all the dialogue between Bond and Vesper is pretty cringey. Like how people say LTK has a televisual look, CR has love dialogue that sounds like it was off the set of a soap opera. :))
    I can't disagree with this. It's quite uncomfortable and just marginally above the shame of Attack of the Clones, scenes from which still give me nightmares. It's saved by the acting though and as mentioned earlier, Craig can get away with this sort of thing better than most.

    As an example, I didn't feel anything when he got slapped by Lucia in SP, but I felt it each time Brozza got slapped in his films, as though he was going to cry.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    2’s problem is that it’s too cheesy. It’s got a decent plot, but the John Woo-ism completely ruined it.

    3 is the one I despise most. I can’t enjoy that one at all. A Bourne pastiche with soap opera plastered all over it.
    You must"t enjoy the love scenes in CR if you think mi3 is soap opera, ROFL. :))
    Like that one scene about the "stripped armour" talk?

    You guessed right, Watson. Elementary, I say.

    ROFL
    Basically all the dialogue between Bond and Vesper is pretty cringey. Like how people say LTK has a televisual look, CR has love dialogue that sounds like it was off the set of a soap opera. :))
    I have to agree. Whereas the conversation and the performance between Rigg and Lazenby is executed better, without having to appeal to teenagers' emotional worldview and fangirls who'd fawn over that Romeo & Juliet wannabe romance. The third M:I film did the same but only worse - it extended the dilemma and expanded on it, which I can't appreciate I'm afraid, just the opposite.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited May 2018 Posts: 8,392
    2’s problem is that it’s too cheesy. It’s got a decent plot, but the John Woo-ism completely ruined it.

    3 is the one I despise most. I can’t enjoy that one at all. A Bourne pastiche with soap opera plastered all over it.
    You must"t enjoy the love scenes in CR if you think mi3 is soap opera, ROFL. :))
    Like that one scene about the "stripped armour" talk?

    You guessed right, Watson. Elementary, I say.

    ROFL
    Basically all the dialogue between Bond and Vesper is pretty cringey. Like how people say LTK has a televisual look, CR has love dialogue that sounds like it was off the set of a soap opera. :))
    I have to agree. Whereas the conversation and the performance between Rigg and Lazenby is executed better, without having to appeal to teenagers' emotional worldview and fangirls who'd fawn over that Romeo & Juliet wannabe romance. The third M:I film did the same but only worse - it extended the dilemma and expanded on it, which I can't appreciate I'm afraid, just the opposite.

    Actuàlly mi3 did it right, just like OHMSS. The key is too establish a connection early on. The worst mistake is introducing a "love of my life" character half way through the movie, and then scrambling to have them fall for each other as the run time ticks down. If they met sooner in the story, them growing close and spewing metaphors at each other wouldn't feel so out of left field. :) In the case of Ethan Hunt there is never any doubt from the start that the relationship is deep and meaningful. They get married in the first act. After that, there is more leeway that can be afforded for a certain type of dialogue. And mi3 isn't supposed to be taken as seriously as CR to begin with, it's a big summer popcorn film, and a very well executed one. CR has pretensions beyond that with its constant debates about "you want me to be half monk half hitman", and a exploration of who and what Bond truly is. It's tolerable, I just wished it wasn't something they picked up and ran with in the next installments. ;)
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited May 2018 Posts: 23,883
    For me it's about the actor. Much as I love Cruise, he couldn't sell that romance convincingly without coming across like a sappy wuss. Craig nailed it, despite the terribly cringey 'little finger' 'broken armour' dialogue. It didn't hurt that Green is in a class of her own either.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,392
    Regardless, mi4 and 5 have trounced the last two Bond films for me. :))
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Regardless, mi4 and 5 have trounced the last two Bond films for me. :))
    Without a shadow of doubt.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Regardless, mi4 and 5 have trounced the last two Bond films for me. :))
    Without a shadow of doubt.
    I liked SF, but on average, and with some regret given my lifelong Bond fandom, I must +2.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,959
    Spoilers ahead: raw footage of the big jump in Fallout:

  • edited May 2018 Posts: 3,333
    AMAZING!! So am I right in saying that Henry Cavill also did those halo jump freefall scenes for real alongside Tom?
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,959
    bondsum wrote: »
    AMAZING!! So am I right in saying that Henry Cavill also did those halo jump freefall scenes for real alongside Tom?

    Appears to be the case! So impressive that he went through with it.
  • Posts: 3,333
    Wow! That's our next James Bond right there then. Auditions over.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited May 2018 Posts: 23,883
    There is the small matter of acting ability, where Cavill has yet to impress me at least. I hope he finally delivers in MI:F. If so, I'd be open to him as JB #007.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    I already am, actually. Since seeing him in UNCLE, I’m definitely open to see him as Bond.
  • Posts: 3,333
    bondjames wrote: »
    There is the small matter of acting ability, where Cavill has yet to impress me at least. I hope he finally delivers in MI:F. If so, I'd be open to him as JB #007.
    No offence intended @bondjames, but you're just one fan in amongst absolutely millions that might feel that way about Cavill. Tom Cruise clearly thinks he's a good enough actor to appear alongside him in his latest MI movie, so it all depends on whose perspective we want to base our opinions. Again, no offence intended.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited May 2018 Posts: 23,883
    None taken @bondsum. My comment was intended purely as my opinion, although I'm sure I'm not alone in thinking Cavill is a bit of a plank based on the evidence to date. A good looking plank mind you, but one nonetheless. A grade above the Sam Worthingtons of this world.

    Cruise has proven that he can bring out the best in people and that he sees potential. Perhaps this is the film where I'm finally convinced that Cavill is ready for the big leagues.

    Anyway, my opinion is not important and I'm keeping an open mind on him until I see MI:F
  • Posts: 5,767
    Like I said before, Cruise and McQuarrie know how to sell a film. I hope Eon has a contract on that camera guy.
  • Posts: 3,333
    I agree, here on this site, there's a small minority that don't care much for Cavill's acting abilities and tend to be quite vocal about it. However, I have to disagree, I don't think that he's "a bit of plank of wood"— good looking or otherwise. Trouble is once you adopt that particular mindset about a certain actor, it's pretty hard to shake-off. My guess is that you'll more than likely go into Fallout, whether it be subconsciously or intentionally, and put Cavill under the microscope, trying to find faults. Fortunately, I won't have such problems as I'll be able to sit back and enjoy this movie for what it is without any such expectations. At least Cruise didn't employ that popinjay Hiddleston, and for that I am eternally grateful.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    bondsum wrote: »
    I agree, here on this site, there's a small minority that don't care much for Cavill's acting abilities and tend to be quite vocal about it. However, I have to disagree, I don't think that he's "a bit of plank of wood"— good looking or otherwise. Trouble is once you adopt that particular mindset about a certain actor, it's pretty hard to shake-off. My guess is that you'll more than likely go into Fallout, whether it be subconsciously or intentionally, and put Cavill under the microscope, trying to find faults. Fortunately, I won't have such problems as I'll be able to sit back and enjoy this movie for what it is without any such expectations. At least Cruise didn't employ that popinjay Hiddleston, and for that I am eternally grateful.
    I think that's a bit unfair @bondsum.

    I very much intend to enjoy MI:F and Cavill in it. I honestly don't feel passionately about him one way or the other. In fact, I'm waiting for him to impress me because to a degree a part of me wishes he had been cast as Bond back in 2006 (I had seen Tudors and thought he might be a good fit). I even eagerly sought out The Cold Light of Day to see how he would fare in the spy genre.

    One's impressions of actors can change of course. After all, George Clooney went through his head bobbing phase and overcame it. After seeing his Batman film I thought he was an awful actor, but then I saw Out of Sight and my perceptions changed.

    Anything is possible.
  • edited May 2018 Posts: 3,333
    Just pulling your leg @bondjames. I know how you love Hiddleston, which was why I included him within my own summary of Cavill, and as an example of an actor that I personally cannot abide, and how it is impossible to see beyond one's own criticism and foibles. This is why I am so fortunate that he's not in Fallout to ruin the overall movie experience for me. I was so lucky Hiddles was only in Infinity War for a smidgen.

    As for Clooney, he's managed to do a 360 degrees turnabout for me. I first watched him in From Dusk Till Dawn (as I had zero interest in ER) then I caught him in Batman & Robin, a terrible movie. I liked him in FDTD, hated him as Batman. Liked him in Out of Sight, Three Kings and O Brother, Where Art Thou? Now I can't stand the man, head wobble or not.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited May 2018 Posts: 23,883
    I'm of course disappointed to read that Hiddles wasn't able to sway you after his all too brief (imho) appearance in IW @bondsum. I had hoped that you would see the light. I thought he was great, as usual.
    "We have a Hulk"
    was a nice touch I thought, especially 6 years on from when the phrase was first used.
Sign In or Register to comment.