my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film Handlers' Movie Reviews   » Mission Impossible 3 (2006) (Page 2)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3

Author Topic: Mission Impossible 3 (2006) Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 05-06-2006 09:28 PM                        Why would anyone name a theater the "Firewheel"?  |  IP: Logged Jennifer Pan THE JEN! Posts: 1219 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: Nov 2003 posted 05-06-2006 11:44 PM                        I was wondering the same thing. Hey Jason, is Frank running that place? As for Mission Impossible 3... I'm actually tempted to go see it... for the fact that they will do a parody of it on Scary Movie 5, I'd like to know what scene they will be referring to.  |  IP: Logged David Stambaugh Film God Posts: 4021 From: Eugene, Oregon Registered: Jan 2002 posted 05-07-2006 09:41 AM                        How about Fireweed. I am not all that anxious to see this movie, not sure why.  |  IP: Logged Ian Price Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1714 From: Denver, CO Registered: Jun 99 posted 05-07-2006 12:21 PM                     Joe, Apropos of MI:III when the fuck did American Furniture Warehouse become AFW? That Jake Jabs is just a Da Bomb! Shortening things to just initials is just a sign of laziness or thumb fatigue from cell phone messaging. (says the guy who is famous for sending 7-page emails. ) Well I'm off to see Mission Impossible III this afternoon. IP  |  IP: Logged Adam Martin I'm not even gonna point out the irony. Posts: 3686 From: Dallas, TX Registered: Nov 2000 posted 05-07-2006 12:30 PM                     Maybe they wanted M:i:III to seem healthier, like KFC? That must be it.  |  IP: Logged Jason Winn Expert Film Handler Posts: 131 From: Mesquite, TX, USA Registered: Jan 2006 posted 05-07-2006 07:21 PM                     quote: Jennifer Pan Hey Jason, is Frank running that place? Unfortunately, yes!  |  IP: Logged Matt Fields Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 545 From: Ohio, United States Registered: Jun 2005 posted 05-07-2006 07:29 PM                     Its better then 1 or 2...3 out of 4 stars.  |  IP: Logged Ian Price Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1714 From: Denver, CO Registered: Jun 99 posted 05-07-2006 11:53 PM                     I found Mission Impossible III (M:I:III) to be pedantic and derivative. It appeared to me to be a two hour allegory about Tom Cruise's new found nuptials to the child like Katie Holmes. I can only assume that Ms. Holmes was otherwise engage in the manufacture of the TomKat baby and couldn't participate in this debacle. I found the emotion portrayed to ring false. And I thought the other actors phoned in there performances just for the paycheck. The story made no sense and the dialog could have been in Chinese for all I cared. There is a scene in Thank You for Smoking where Rob Lowe says that the plot point problem can be “easily fixed, it's one line of dialog Thank God we invented the whatever device.” This seems to me to be how the entire Mission Impossible: III script was written. (Spoilers: If you have never seen a mindless action film before.) Or How to make an Action Film: Tense situation, happy back story, troubling development, thrilling action, tragedy, angry boss, troubling development, thrilling action, inevitable obvious plot twist, hero in peril, impossible escape, pointless set-up, less thrilling action, hero runs through scene, amazing rescue in three parts, unexpected heroism, happy conclusion. So we need three big action sequences strung together with a tenuous story. Since our producer/star seems to be interested in marriage and family, we will have our protagonist interested in the same things. Come to think of it, this movie was structured just like a porn without the nudity. And why wasn't there nudity? Look, I like mindless action perhaps more than the next guy, but this was not very good, or bad enough to be fun. I liked Maggie Q however. I look forward to seeing her in more movies.  |  IP: Logged Lyle Romer Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1400 From: Davie, FL, USA Registered: May 2002 posted 05-08-2006 08:20 AM                     I thought this was a great "popcorn" movie. Sure there wasn't much in the way of plot, but who cares. It was pretty much start to finish action. I thought all the action sequences were extremely well done. It moved very well, didn't feel like 2 hours at all. If you're looking just to get out of the house and have fun for a couple of hours without having to think, MI:III is great. 4 out of 5 stars  |  IP: Logged Dennis Benjamin Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1445 From: Denton, MD Registered: Feb 2002 posted 05-08-2006 02:09 PM                        "Come to think of it, this movie was structured just like a porn without the nudity. And why wasn't there nudity?" They wanted the PG-13 rating. Come to think of it the PG-13 rating has ruined many films in the last ten to fifeteen years. They want the gross that will generated from the influx of cell phone using, text message your friend sitting next to you in the movie, teenagers! [ 05-09-2006, 04:58 PM: Message edited by: Dennis Benjamin ]  |  IP: Logged Mike Schindler Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1039 From: Oak Park, IL, USA Registered: Jun 2002 posted 05-08-2006 03:47 PM                     This is a perfect example of how movies differ from TV. Almost all of the same people worked on both MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE III and ALIAS, and the similarities between the two are crazy. The differences are like a microcosm for the differences between TV and film. The stories are essentially the same. But ALIAS' works better because it has the time to be much more complex. On the other hand, MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE III has the money to spend on action, and the result is a much more visceral experience. But aside from that, despite M:i:III's somewhat formulaic writing, it's still as good as it can be given the restrictions. What if you were to disregard any sort of social relevance and compare the script for M:i:III with this year's Oscar winning screenplay CRASH based solely on technique? I think it would be pretty clear which was written by the creator of LOST and which was written by the creator of WALKER, TEXAS RANGER.  |  IP: Logged Kyle Anderson Film Handler Posts: 86 From: Tyler, TX, USA Registered: Dec 2005 posted 05-10-2006 08:26 PM                     ... Maybe I'm not being stingy enough, but I was thoroughly surprised when I watched this movie (yes I too expected it to suck ass) - it didn't suck; the story (yes there was one if you'd pay attention - not gigantic or convoluted or anything cool like that, but there) was actually interesting and followable.  |  IP: Logged Pravin Ratnam Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 844 From: Atlanta, GA,USA Registered: Sep 2002 posted 05-11-2006 02:37 AM                     I enjoyed it. It's a good start to the summer. Monaghan's crying face is annoying to look at(I had my fill of it in Northcounry). And this is where Tom Cruise's tainted star power in recent months has an effect on the movie's power. Scenes where a big star's identifiable acting tics can come across as appealing to the masses can wear thin once the actor's star power dies. And the scene where TOm Cruise struggles to hold off his identity to his fiancee right before they marry and he is shown just staring in frustration came across as laughable and there were snickers in my audience at his facial expression. But there are many things to like about the movie. The best thing is the team assembled to support Cruise. Maggie Q is damn sexy. Jonathon Rhys Myers fits right in. Keri Russell is surprisingly effective. Fishburne is Fishburne. Crudup. And the Cruise tumbling down the building scene was filmed great.  |  IP: Logged Lyle Romer Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1400 From: Davie, FL, USA Registered: May 2002 posted 05-11-2006 08:22 AM                     quote: Pravin Ratnam And the Cruise tumbling down the building scene was filmed great. I thought the whole jump from building to building sequence was done unbelieveably well. ****VERY MINOR SPOILER**** Even though you know he's going to make it, they did it so well there is actually "intensity" to the scene where you are almost wondering if he will make it.  |  IP: Logged Phil Blake Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 558 From: esperance western australia Registered: Nov 2003 posted 05-14-2006 07:58 AM                        Strange after my earlier comments where I made reference to the Bond films now after hearing MI 3 soundtrack many times I could not help but notice the similarity of some of the music to that of "Thunderball"  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.