I'm going to say this up-front: GHOST PROTOCOL consistently disappointed me.
Where do I start? For one, there is virtually no plot to it. What little plot there is is basically a retread THE SPY WHO LOVED ME ... just not done as well. Michael Nyqvist is completely wasted in this film; he has virtually no presence as the film instead prefers to concentrate on the dynamics of the team. And this would be okay, if it weren't for the fact that Hunt, Brandt and Carter are essentially dealing with the same personal problem. The only person who is his own character (and is therefore remotely interesting) is Benji. Everybody else is pretty much interchangable, and only really present because the assignment requires four people to carry it out. All of this is very disappointing, because the basic setup of the film is very good. It's a bit like EPISODE I - you want it to work, but it doesn't. Don't get me wrong; the first half of the film is very, very good. But the second half is rubbish.
There are also some remarkably silly moments throughout. For instance, Hunt survives the terrorist attack on Moscow with a "minor concussion" ... but a day later, he hits his head on the side of a skyscraper. Hard. And is then somehow able to convince a cold-blooded assassin that he is somebody else entirely. The finale in the server room is also ridiculous, mostly because it requires Jeremy Renner to be levitated into a server room that is otherwise impossible to access. Similarly, there are massive plot holes. I know there were problems with MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE 2, but at least that film tried to explain themselves. Somehow, Michael Nyqvist is 1) aware of the IMF's presence in Moscow, 2) able to transmit on their frequency and 3) do in five minutes what it takes the IMF team half an hour to do. And none of it is explained. Likewise, he has access to a facial mask, and this is never explained either.
It's a real shame, because there are some very talented people involved in making this film, and each and every one of them is let down by an incredibly weak script. It's one of the worst I've seen in years. In the end, it feels like an extended episode of the TV show, but with ten times the budget and all the original thought that was put into it unable to rescue an unoriginal concept.
Quiz Show (1994)
Its about how this game show from back in the 60's was accused of contestant fraud (meaning they rigged who would win) and there were all these federal trials about it. It was quite interesting actually. It is based on a true story.
I always fall asleep when trying to watch Star Wars movies, I just don't have the conditioning to struggle through movies I'm not really interested in.
The new series... (I, II, and III)... are so bad in parts that some of us wish we could fall unconscious and forget we ever watched them. Parts of III (Revenge of the Sith) were actually good, but you'd have to forget ever having watched I and II to actually get into it...
The first series... (IV, V, and VI)... depends on whether you're a fan. IV (Star Wars) was good for the time, but if you're only watching it now, it's so-so... V (Empire) is pretty good, any way you cut it and... VI... was... well... too much Ewok... and it doesn't really stand well on its own. Still, it's not as egregious as the current trilogy.
Quiz Show (1994)
Its about how this game show from back in the 60's was accused of contestant fraud (meaning they rigged who would win) and there were all these federal trials about it. It was quite interesting actually. It is based on a true story.
Despite being a recent graduate from MIT, Matt Franklin has no ambition in life. This all changes while working his job at a video store, when his high school crush walks in and invites him to a party. And so begins the greatest night of his life.
As a kid I was a fan of the teen sitcom That 70's Show, and since Topher Grace is in this movie, I really wanted to like it. The movie is a throwback to the teen movies of the 80's, like the works of John Hughes or Cameron Crowe. In some ways the movie succeeds in replicating those films, but it other ways it fails. The leads where very heartwarming, as was the story. But the plot was also very repetitive. And at times the movie's dialogue and storyline felt very awkward.
6/10.
Fun fact: This movie was filmed and edited in 2007. But Universal shelved the film, and didn't release it until 2011.
And...
Rango
Thrown out of his little world, an Chameleon by the name of Rango seeks refuge in a small "old west"-esque town called "Dirt". The town is in the midst of a bad drought and needs a sheriff. Rango steps up to become the towns lawman and sets out to solve the towns drought problem.
A very well done movie. Everything from the voice acting, to the dialogue, to the visual work, to the script was top notch. A very entertaining film.
Tangled - Disney's version of Repunzel. I think this movie was created after the Disney execs discovered that this is one classic fairy tale they hadn't claimed as their own. However, it isn't all bad. Zachary Levi and Ron Pearlman are the gems of this movie, though. Brad Garret stars, but his voice never really fit the character or the character's emotions, so it always looked odd. Mandy More plays a VERY Barbie-esque Repunzel. Seriously, she looks fake and plastic like a living Barbie doll. I've seen a couple Disney movies where you could tell one character wasn't animated by the other animators (Tarzan was one. The leopardess was animated by an excellent artist that went on to do the art work for Blacksad) but usually it works out better. Here, she just seems...out of place. As if she stepped out of one of Matel's Barbie movies. But, really, other than Brad Garret's odd character and Repunzel's plastic look, it wasn't that bad of a movie. However....it still gets a 3/5
Law Biding Citizen - Jamie Foxx vs. Gerard Butler. This movie also guest stars Colm Meanie, Ragina Hall and Bruce McGill. Although, personally, I would've liked to see Denzel Washington in Jamie Foxx's place, but that's my opinion. Foxx doesn't do a bad job at all, but Denzel would've done it better. Especially after doing Man on Fire.
Personally, I have mixed feelings about this movie. On one had, the acting was great, on the other hand, the story wasn't so great. I also didn't really feel as if the producers knew a thing about law enforcement and the legal system and it almost came off as anti-justice system campaign. But...it didn't. There was never really a clear message and it mainly just came off as rambling on about nothing really. It felt like a bunch of explosions tied together by a lot of useless dialog that didn't seem to go anywhere. 3/5 for the explosions and acting. But, that's about all this movie is good for. I would recommend catching on Netflix, but it goes away on the 17th of December. But, I would not recommend paying money to buy it.
EDIT: I also want to say, the ending was awesome, but there was a major flaw in it:
Wouldn't it have taken him more than 25 seconds to get out of the prison from solitary?
Footkiller, I actually didn't have a lot of issues with the Cowboys & Aliens aliens. I was actually very thankful that they weren't little green men.
I'm going to say this up-front: GHOST PROTOCOL consistently disappointed me.
Where do I start? For one, there is virtually no plot to it. What little plot there is is basically a retread THE SPY WHO LOVED ME ... just not done as well. Michael Nyqvist is completely wasted in this film; he has virtually no presence as the film instead prefers to concentrate on the dynamics of the team. And this would be okay, if it weren't for the fact that Hunt, Brandt and Carter are essentially dealing with the same personal problem. The only person who is his own character (and is therefore remotely interesting) is Benji. Everybody else is pretty much interchangable, and only really present because the assignment requires four people to carry it out. All of this is very disappointing, because the basic setup of the film is very good. It's a bit like EPISODE I - you want it to work, but it doesn't. Don't get me wrong; the first half of the film is very, very good. But the second half is rubbish.
There are also some remarkably silly moments throughout. For instance, Hunt survives the terrorist attack on Moscow with a "minor concussion" ... but a day later, he hits his head on the side of a skyscraper. Hard. And is then somehow able to convince a cold-blooded assassin that he is somebody else entirely. The finale in the server room is also ridiculous, mostly because it requires Jeremy Renner to be levitated into a server room that is otherwise impossible to access. Similarly, there are massive plot holes. I know there were problems with MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE 2, but at least that film tried to explain themselves. Somehow, Michael Nyqvist is 1) aware of the IMF's presence in Moscow, 2) able to transmit on their frequency and 3) do in five minutes what it takes the IMF team half an hour to do. And none of it is explained. Likewise, he has access to a facial mask, and this is never explained either.
It's a real shame, because there are some very talented people involved in making this film, and each and every one of them is let down by an incredibly weak script. It's one of the worst I've seen in years. In the end, it feels like an extended episode of the TV show, but with ten times the budget and all the original thought that was put into it unable to rescue an unoriginal concept.
A couple of big names in this movie, like Robert De Niro and Clive Owen starring next to Jason Statham... Typical Jason Statham action movie... Not great, but not bad either... At some points it drags on a bit, but the story is interesting enough to make you watch it until the end.
I'll watch any of the Star Wars films, none of them really bother me.
With that said..
Watched Inception again last night since I hadn't seen it in a while. Forgot how awesome that movie is. Still bugging me to know if that totem fell over at the end!
I'll watch any of the Star Wars films, none of them really bother me.
With that said..
Watched Inception again last night since I hadn't seen it in a while. Forgot how awesome that movie is. Still bugging me to know if that totem fell over at the end!
My only problem with Inception is that it's one of those movies you continuously have to watch. If you look away or get up to get a snack, when you come back, you'll just be going, "Okay...Now I'm completely lost." And it's a LONG movie. I'm sure after a few watches you'd know where you're at...but...the first watch through kinda sucks.
I never get up when watching a movie...and I loved Inception the first time. Made complete sense to me...but I think I would catch more if I watched it a 2nd time.
I don't get why Inception is so highly regarded. Way too long to elaborate an essentially simple idea, and not very original. Pretty good acting, but too special-effects heavy. Tighten it up and I'd give it a 9/10 for production values and a good story, but 8/10 as it was executed. So I'm not saying it's bad, but it seems like many people including award presenters thought it was a 10/10. My only explanation for this they're easily dazzled either by effects or by science/a little bit of philosophy (ooh! that's smart! wow!)
Find yourself a copy of Dreamscape (1984) starring Dennis Quaid. Not quite as intricate as Inception, but the invasion of dreams is used for political purposes.
Anyway,
Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol - (5/10)
I was going to give this a typical action film 6/10 but then a massively glaring plot hole appeared about 3/4 of the way through. It isn't really a major spoiler, but I will use tags just in case.
He is chasing a henchman of the main villain and then the henchman turns out to be wearing a mask. The atmosphere (literally, the weather was crappy) makes it impossible to see his real face clearly, but it looked like the main villain. After regrouping with his team Tom Cruise is seen looking at the mask. The next time we see the main villain the henchman is with him and throughout the rest of the movie the mask is never brought up again. In fact, they act like that is his real face. Otherwise it is your typical action film where action sequences are the heart of the film and the story is just used to make up excuses for them to switch from one exotic location to another.
The one other issue I had is Josh Holloway's inclusion. He is even given main credit in the opening credit sequence, but his involvement lasts a total of two minutes.
EDIT: My rant on Hollywood having no ideas left has been moved to a more appropriate thread.
Midnight in Paris (Woody Allen, 2011) -- A surprisingly entertaining rom-com about a family traveling to Paris, including a young engaged couple who confront the illusion that a life different from their own is better, among a time-traveling backdrop. Honestly, and despite what people may say about it, I think Owen Wilson is a very good Woody Allen, despite being quite different from his usual style; his ingenuity make it funny and his nerdiness makes him convincing. The nostalgia bit of the movie is a nice touch and makes it very fun and different from the usual Allen style, as something that really sparks the creative of people who's job it is to work at it, while still being very funny. A truly brilliant movie. 7.5/10
Super 8 (J.J. Abrams, 2011) -- During the summer of 1979, a group of friends witness a train crash and investigate subsequent unexplained events in their small town, and what happens next is an awesome and exciting adventure story of how the movie recreates the great Spielberg child-adventures of the 80s, to the point the movie also has some bits of 80-esque cinematography cues that make it even more fun for a 30-something year old to watch. Movies like this one, though not necessarily excellent filmmaking, are the reason I've been so much into movies since I was a kid. In an age when trailers usually give away most of the interesting bits of a movie, Super 8 unfolds before the viewer, because it's the type of movie that you have no idea what it's about, and you should make it a point not watching the trailer prior to it. 8/10
If you've ever seen a movie involving a small group of people trapped in a tense situation who decide to try to work together to resolve their dillemma, but ultimately end up turning on each other... you've seen this movie before, more or less. You've at least seen something so similar that it'd be a waste of your time to bother watching this particular version of that formula.
If you haven't seen a movie like that, or if for some peculiar reason you love the formula I described, then by all means check out Exam. It's a watchable flick, although like a lot of movies that adhere to this formula, it does get a little silly towards the end.
Find yourself a copy of Dreamscape (1984) starring Dennis Quaid. Not quite as intricate as Inception, but the invasion of dreams is used for political purposes.
Anyway,
Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol - (5/10)
I was going to give this a typical action film 6/10 but then a massively glaring plot hole appeared about 3/4 of the way through. It isn't really a major spoiler, but I will use tags just in case.
He is chasing a henchman of the main villain and then the henchman turns out to be wearing a mask. The atmosphere (literally, the weather was crappy) makes it impossible to see his real face clearly, but it looked like the main villain. After regrouping with his team Tom Cruise is seen looking at the mask. The next time we see the main villain the henchman is with him and throughout the rest of the movie the mask is never brought up again. In fact, they act like that is his real face. Otherwise it is your typical action film where action sequences are the heart of the film and the story is just used to make up excuses for them to switch from one exotic location to another.
The one other issue I had is Josh Holloway's inclusion. He is even given main credit in the opening credit sequence, but his involvement lasts a total of two minutes.
EDIT: My rant on Hollywood having no ideas left has been moved to a more appropriate thread.
LOL! I didn't even think of that! I was so numb to any form of a story by the time they got to the climax.
Next MI's subtitle is going to be "MI: I thought we shut down those Swedes."
So, yeah, I saw the movie. Great action. Paula Patton looks great. Story is totally predictable and cliche-- Ethan Hunt is basically this kid. But it's Mission Impossible. That's pretty much all you need to know.
Just watched The Mothman Prophecies, which was a very enjoyable horror/thriller flick. I didn't know that the movie took place around Christmas when I decided to watch it, so that was a fun coincidence. 👍
Anyway, one of the reasons I watched it was because I knew it was one of many inspirations to the Silent Hill series of games. The influence it had was crystal clear in less than 15 minutes. For a little while I was thinking it was gonna go in a certain direction, which would've made it essentially Silent Hill 2 in movie form. It later became apparent that it was going in a different direction, which kept me from knowing how it would all pan out in the end. Nonetheless, seeing all the influences this movie had on the first two Silent Hill games was pretty interesting and enjoyable for me.
Edit: Watched another flick... The Negotiator. Leonard Maltin hit the nail on the head when he said, and I'm paraphrasing, that The Negotiator is a highly watchable but not entirely believable movie, with Samuel L. Jackson and Kevin Spacey giving very worthwhile performances.
G. I. Joe: Rise of the Cobra - It was on Netflix streaming, so I finally watched it and...it was pretty bad. ALL the flashbacks were redundant and unnecessary. What made them worse was they implied what happened...and then they explained it, just to be sure you understood.
The acting was bad...the women...well...they did more than the women in X-Men First Class, at least, but still seemed to be a dominate male movie. I mean, in the end, both guys got the girls who ended up being the exact opposite of who they started out as.
It also stars a Wayans brother....which gives you an idea of how good this movie is....it's not.
It was like it was made by a toy company...oh...wait...it was...a 2/5
Stumbled on a couple of gems while searching IMDB for fantasy/action flicks with 1500+ ratings and over 6.0 average. The one that made the list was The Gamers: Dorkness Rising, which led me to it's predecessor The Gamers.
These are not what you'd call Hollywood fare. The original was made for $1,000 and is only 40 minutes long, and the acting is pretty rubbish. What they are is fan made homages to Dungeons and Dragons. Now, if you're not a "dork" and have never played DnD, avoid these movies at all costs. But if you do have a roleplaying past you remember fondly, there's nothing else like them out there, and while not great by any standard, you'll probably enjoy giving them a quick watch.
The first became a cult hit, and so the second actually had a budget backed by gaming companies (of maybe $40,000 this time I'm guessing.) It still took 2 years after the movie was finished to find a distributor, though! Both are quite simple in concept, just a group of guys (plus a girl in the 2nd) sitting around a table in a small gaming room and going through an adventure, with scenes cutting between them in the room and their characters in the fantasy world doing their business. Lots of inside references and humor that only a gamer would get.
So again, if you're not into DnD, don't bother with these, but I thought I'd bring them to light here just in case there are a couple of other gamers in the GTP community who'd never heard of them. You couple of uber-dorks like myself should definitely check these movies out!
👍
Both are quite simple in concept, just a group of guys (plus a girl in the 2nd) sitting around a table in a small gaming room and going through an adventure, with scenes cutting between them in the room and their characters in the fantasy world doing their business. Lots of inside references and humor that only a gamer would get.
