Jurassic Park: The Lost World? There was a near identical sequence with a trailer hanging off a cliff, the characters trying to climb as shít fell down on top of them.
The train set piece seemed very reminiscent ofanother movie. I think it was Wanted 2008 a movie with Angelina Jolie but could have been something else. Really bugging me. Otherwise a good if not average movie in the mi franchise
Perhaps but Abrams technique hasn't changed either. Lens flare, shake the camera, edit it like a trailer.
Though the charms of this series is there are few entries that aren't people's favourites either. Maybe John Woo's I suppose, it tends to sit the bottom of many rankings.
Yep! I absolutely hated MI:2. It sticks out like a sore thumb in the whole series, totally jars with the other 6 imo.
Loved MI3 - the rabbits foot, and the electrocution scene at the end. Haven't seen #7 yet. But #3 is the one that stands out for me from the entire series. It is probably due to having such low expectations after #2, and then being pleasantly surprised that that it was more than a decent movie. #2 was horrible. From what I remember of it, it just seemed like a Tom Cruise marketing vehicle - slow-mo of Tom's action movies, the long floppy hair, I know there are many many unbelievable moments in MI movies, but at least they try to make them as believable as possible. That scene near the end where he kicks up the gun out of the sand, and shoots the bad guy. Absolutely horrible. I watched it there out of curiosity to see was I being a bit harsh. It's actually worse than I had remembered.
I guess it was his first movie, so should cut him a little slack for that. Funny thing is, I distinctly remember watching an interview of Cruise at the time the movie came out (may even have been on MTV) when he was doing the publicity rounds, and he was SO complimentary towards JJ, saying how happy he was with him (and his abundant energy/enthusiasm) and that he was going to be doing big things in the future!
I rewatched 3 recently enough and as great as Hoffman was as the villain, the film looked like a TV pilot from the era - the action overcompensated with more shakey cam than I remember.
For me, #3 was great as it brought back the concept of the “team” working together (after the abysmal #2 where Cruise was mostly running around solo… in slow motion). There was great interaction and dialog between Cruise and his sidekicks, it was Simon Pegg’s first appearance in the series and his dialog was fresh and amusing. Laurence Fishbourne was also very good as the IMF boss. Seymour Hoffmann absolutely stole the show though as the antagonist. He made an excellent villain.
I'm kind of surprised to see so many people say that 3 is (still) their favourite. Back when it came out I remember absolutely loving it, and being a huge fan of Alias at that point, I was thrilled what JJ did with it and even excited to hear he was directing the next big Trek movie. I've since completely soured on him and his very obvious bag of tricks, so I'm sort of afraid to back to MI3 now in case the stink of JJ takes from my enjoyment of the movie......
Saw it lastnight and I was a bit underwhelmed tbh. I’d rank it as one of the weaker entries in the series.
The action sequences were very impressive for sure but there was bit of same-ness about them… we’ve seen car chases and train-top fight scenes before, both in this series and in recent Bond’s. My wife sitting next to me was bored, particularly in the drawn out middle section.
I felt that I didn’t care much for many of the characters, the interaction between Ethan and his team wasn’t as fun as previous films and I felt it lacked a good charismatic bad guy that some of the other entries have had.
That said, as a stand-alone movie in its own right it is very good. Just not to the standard of the previous couple of entries. Actually MI:3 is still my favourite of the lot.
The predictions I saw looked pretty good?
Hey also America ain't the world, I'd say internationally people will lap it up.
Box office wise maybe coming out so close to barbie (okay different demo generally) and Oppenheimer (some overlap) not the best idea
Saw it yesterday. Fell asleep momentarily a couple of times in the middle before it reached the train scene. Visually impressive film but my god some of the dialogue and acting in it is sh!te.
Very loose plot wise too. The 2 cops just looked ridiculous throughout the movie and made zero sense.
Overall it was disappointing imho.
Yeah, while not shot in one go, both Dead Reckonings have been a joint production - and, presumably joint budget.
And while there has been a lot of comments about it not being as good as Fallout, the word of mouth is still generally positive. Good not being the enemy of perfect n all that.
Doing alright really... has the highest 5-day of any MI movie so far. Looking like it'll probably clear 200m globally by the end of the weekend. And with positive reviews and word of mouth, it'll likely have decent legs over the next few weeks.
The big-budget also comes with the caveat that some of that budget will be offset between the two films, since there's a lot of overlap in production. For a 2-film shared production project like this, to get the full picture we really need the combined budget, and box-office. The extra complication in that of course is that production of the last bits (they've been shooting it since March 2022) has stopped on Part 2 with the strikes, so we just have to see how that effects things down the line.
Just back from seeing this in the ISense. Incredible execution and very entertaining but the usual "MacGuffin" everyone is chasing. Weirdly reminded me of the Roger Moore / Pierce Brosnan Bonds. Thought Simon Pegg was particularly assured in this one. Loved the grander AI theme. I suspect Part Two will be more stately and Kubrickian in nature.
Just back from this and all I can say is Wow. What a film. It explodes out of the blocks and does not let up for even a second. I kept waiting for the other shoe to drop and for film to become crap(like so many have of late)but it never lost any pace. If anything it built and built to a magnificent crescendo. I haven't enjoyed a movie this much since......well since Top Gun maverick, this time last year. And with "Oppemheimer" out next next it seems as though Tom cruise and Chris Nolan are saving the art of film making. I saw Indiana Jones and the dial of destiny a couple of weeks back and I walked of that movie deflated, it was awful but this is the polar opposite. Its genuinely thrilling, the subject matter could've been somewhat ridiculous, but Cruise and Mcquarrie have pulled something special out of the bag. My only concern now is that there is no way the second part can he as good as this.
Sadly this was one of the weakest MI movies for me, with probably only 2 lower in my overall ranking.
Hayley Atwell was a great addition to the cast and practically leapt off the screen from the moment she appeared. Its a little sad that its taken Hollywood 12 whole years since she first appeared as Peggy in Captain America to give her another (semi) leading role in a big movie. Her scenes with Cruise were a definite highlight of the film.
It was also great to see Pom Klementieff having such a ball with all her scenes, a totally bonkers breath of fresh air. I always enjoyed her in Guardians, but thought she did a fantastic job here too, getting a character across with just hugely animated expressions and a potent physicality.
And while we've seen countless chase scenes before (even within the MI franchise itself), I thought the extended Rome set-piece was excellent, elevated by Cruise deftly playing up the whole comedic side of the on-screen chaos.
However......this is the one where the plot just jumped the shark for me. It was certain clever (and timely) to incorporate AI into the narrative, but to have
the main villain of the piece basically be Skynet
was just pushing it too far into the realm of sci-fi for me. I also thought a lot of the dialogue this time around was particularly cringe-worthy, with awkward exposition scenes (the backstory of Atwells Grace spring to mind) and extended monologues that almost felt laughable. This movie was sorely missing the wry delivery of lines from the likes of Baldwin and Renner in previous movies in order to offset the sometimes po-faced dialogue they are given (even though I know Czerny, Elwes and the always excellent Whigham are more than capable of delivering on this front).
And as much as I love Rebecca Ferguson, I'd have preferred that they didn't bring her back, given her role was so slight. It felt like she had two lines of dialogue at most.
I'm also surprised to hear people complementing the score. I am not a fan of Balfe at all and felt that the music took a nosedive since he came on board (especially after Joe Kraemer knocked it out of the park in Rogue Nation, but I'd take Giacchino back in a heartbeat as well).
Another $300m flop. Numbers in US are not looking good.
Enjoyed it, but not a patch on Ghost Protocol or Fallout IMO. But IMAX, sweet jesus, simply unreal.
Saw this morning overall really enjoyed it, but I didn't think it was that tight plot wise (a few holes to say the least), dialogue a bit meh, action was terrific (up there with the last wick film but on a different scale for good and bad), whole train section especially, car chases, surprising highlights for me were a lot of the female cast tbh, despite not always being given tonnes to do! Hayley Atwell (she oozes charisma and her and Cruise excellent chemistry), Vanessa Kirby really good fun, Pom Klementieff excellent too. Henry Czerny reliably snarly! The guy playing Gabriel was a bit bland.
Looking forward to part 2. But not quite getting the insane hype it's maybe a 7.5/10 for me.
Shame they killed off the Faust character (at least it seems..but who knows!) but I suppose that is a pretty regular thing in mission impossible films...Cruise ages...his opposite woman get killed off and replaced by younger models.
Could "the entity" not just end things at any stage lol...for a start f#ck the Simon Pegg character over a cliff in his self driving car.
Actually the main Gabriel bad guy reminded me of Eric roberts in Michael Flatleys blackbird as did an awful lot of the clunky dialogue- just boring as opposed to funny in blackbird.
enjoyed blackbird more overall
Alas, Dead Reckoning Part One didn't really work for me at times and frankly, isn't a patch on Fallout in its execution. I was smiling once the opening credits kicked in and I liked it on an emotional level, mostly. It sets up the next one well, but it is certainly missing an ingredient or two - I can't put my finger on what. The hyper-marketing of the stunts took away some of the enjoyment.
I fell for they hype - would recommend people to buy not go into screen until there’s 30-40 minutes left on this (from start of train scene) as everything before that is tough, tough going- I was bored out of my mind.
Boring nonsensical plot , unbelievably stilted exposition heavy dialogue (bing Thames in particular phoning it in) and nothing special action for most of the film- tbf the action scenes in last 40 mins are something else but like everyone I’d already seen the main stunt from every conceivable angle already
Yeah, agree with most of the above - good fun, but doesnt' quite hit the heights of Fallout. I'd actually have it slightly behind Rogue Nation as well, about on par with Ghost Protocol. Better action than GP, but GP had more charm and wit.
One thing that continuously bugged the bejesus out of me, and kept taking me out of the film, was the way almost every longer 'conversation' was just a series of people continuing on a sentence from the previous person. Each person saying a line and the next person continuing the thought instantly as if they'd all learned a monologue off by heart and just split it up. It never felt like people talking TO each other, it felt like the writer talking AT us. It happened in so so many scenes, and just felt very lazy and weird.
On way to see this morning!
Rewatched fallout yesterday such a fun film.
Not sure how I feel about this one. As it's a part one it doesn't feel as wholly complete as previous entries. I would also say it feels like it's pulling punches on one hand, but on the other hand, it makes story choices that feel unnecessary.
I'm hoping part two elevates this a bit or redeems in a way that's akin to Johnny Ultimate's comments.
Some random thoughts:
Lorne Balfe's score does a lot of heavy lifting.
I would also say the big bad in this feels underwhelming and weirdly reminded me of I Robot, Transformers (the sound effect) and Sauron of all things.
Another incredible experience. I got lost in the time that I was expecting another big set piece then it dawned on me that it was Part 1. Hope it does well at the box office
It should also be pointed out that "Ilsa Faust" remains a fabulously silly, but awesome name.
In response to that:
I hope they don't go that way. I completely agree that there are signs that it could be pointing that way, and to add to your reasons, I did think that in the "recruiting Grace" scene following there wasn't much grief on display from Ethan and the team. It was very much back to the job for everybody.
But it will definitely feel very cheap if they do it. A contrived and meaningless scene to kill her just to get her out of the way, it could only end up in a cheap reveal if she comes back in the end.
I will say the streets of Rome have gotten some battering between this and Fast X.
