Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Mission: Impossible

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

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Community » Film Handlers' Movie Reviews » Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol (2011) (Page 2)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2

Author

Topic: Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol (2011)

Jeffry L. Johnson
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 809
From: Cleveland, Ohio, USA
Registered: Apr 2000

posted 12-26-2011 11:53 AM

quote: Joseph L. Kleiman
DTAC and DDP-II are two different systems that share common software.

Okay, what's the difference?

Does DDP-II use DVD-ROM discs?

| IP: Logged

Tom Petrov
Five Guys Lover

Posts: 1121
From: El Paso, TX
Registered: Jan 2003

posted 12-26-2011 12:24 PM

quote: Jennifer Pan
Here is my video review of Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol

Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol (Review)

Great stuff!

| IP: Logged

Tom Petrov
Five Guys Lover

Posts: 1121
From: El Paso, TX
Registered: Jan 2003

posted 12-26-2011 10:55 PM

Mission Impossible : Ghost Protocol THE IMAX EXPERIENCE

****

Now thats a Tom Cruise movie.

MI4 is the best Tom Cruise movie I have seen a long, long time. This is the movie star type movie that I want to see. Totally in it from beginning to end.

Jeremy Renner and Paula Patton were outstanding. It was kind of cool that they brought the Russians into the plot.

Special effects were top notch and all of the stunts were pretty cool. Kind of reminding me of Firefox for some strange reason.

Overall, this movie will do well for word of mouth.

The most interesting thing was that you could tell Tom Cruise trusted his director and supporting cast around him. Its great to see Tom Cruise back in top form.

| IP: Logged

Victor Liorentas
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 800
From: london ontario canada
Registered: May 2009

posted 12-28-2011 05:38 PM

I visited the Toronto Scotiabank 15/70 Imax to see this.I heard it is the best of the 3 in Toronto.It looked like 5 or 6 stories tall but the screen was silver so hot spotting was very evident and I truly hate this effect.

The sound was way too loud and though great was straining and ear fatiguing in the upper mids at that level.
My guess is nobody has checked how too loud it is.

The Dark Knight Rises Prologue looked awesome but Mission looked very digital in comparison.As if it were a low res scan.

The movie was good and yes the Dubai skyscraper scenes were great x 2!
I will go back to this theater to see Titanic and Dark Knight Rises.

| IP: Logged

Jonathan M. Crist
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 531
From: Hershey, PA, USA
Registered: Apr 2000

posted 12-30-2011 11:05 AM

James Bond thrown into the middle of a Road Runner/Coyote cartoon. Wackiness ensues.

Similar in tone and spirit to "Fast Five" which was also basically a live action Road Runner cartoon.

A good popcorn flick. Just dont try and analyize or explain what you saw happening.

| IP: Logged

Aaron Garman
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1470
From: Toledo, OH USA
Registered: Mar 2003

posted 12-30-2011 12:51 PM

quote: Connor Wilson
The film itself looked pretty good. The 15/70 scenes obviously looked amazing compared to the embarrassingly bad 75% of the DMR'd film, but those select scenes actually looked inferior to The Dark Knight Rises Prologue. It looks like it was made on a digital intermediate, rather than DMR'd IMAX film and pure IMAX film spliced together, like how it should have been done. And because of this I'm starting to think the DKR prologue actually did go back to the cutting room for editing, rather than taking it digitally.

Couldn't agree more. It's kind of a waste to film in IMAX if you're just going to do a low rez DI. I remember reading about Inception (and the Dark Knight before it) and how Nolan does his editing the old fashioned way without DI to preserve the resolution of the source. No doubt the same thing was done for the Dark Knight.

I saw the film at Navy Pier IMAX in Chicago, and overall the presentation was good. Some very good low frequency, and the highs felt just right to me (no crazy over the top harshness as some have reported).

The movie was a blast, and the definition of popcorn flick. My two favorite sequences were of course the climb on the building, but also the scene in the Kremlin.

AJG

| IP: Logged

Victor Liorentas
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 800
From: london ontario canada
Registered: May 2009

posted 12-30-2011 01:25 PM

I should add that the sound was excellent but just too loud at the Scotiabank Imax.
It sounded like the amps were running out of steam at the level they were playing it during the loudest parts.
Maybe it's set to make the Bane DKR prologue sound more intelligible or perhaps the mix is louder than reference.

I was in a big hurry to get over to the Tiff Lightbox to watch 2001 in 70mm D.T.S on Kinotons! I visited the booth and it was very impressive! Douglas Trumbull was there a year ago when they premiered this new print they paid for.
It was scratched in Ottawa a little bit but looked great.
The screen is way too small but bright,I had little nit pik issues with lamp focus on one machine and focus on the other but the changeovers were flawless.Excellent sound!

| IP: Logged

Sam Graham
AKA: "The Evil Sam Graham". Wackiness ensues.

Posts: 1431
From: Waukee, IA
Registered: Dec 2004

posted 12-30-2011 02:49 PM

CINEMA: 13th Avenue Warren, Wichita, KS
AUDITORIUM: 16
PRESENTATION: Dolby Digital Cinema/THX
PRESENTATION PROBLEMS: None [Cool]

RATING: Two and one half stars (out of four)

THE PLOT: Nuclear war. ("Wow. Really?" "Yes, really.") Wackiness ensues.

Loads of action surrounds campy chick flick style dialogue, which is par for the course with all the Tom Cruise MI films. WHY does the dialogue in these things always have to be so fucking campy?

As with the previous films, it was fun to watch, but it won't find a home in my personal collection, and I will have forgotten it completely be the end of today.

| IP: Logged

Stu Jamieson
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 524
From: Buccan, Qld, Australia
Registered: Jan 2008

posted 12-31-2011 06:46 AM

After cutting his teeth on Pixar's The Incredibles, Brad Bird applies his ample talent and requisite enthusiasm for spy thrillers to live action in this, the latest installment in the foundering Mission: Impossible franchise. And the result is a resounding success, at least on par with the first film which also favoured the "spy thriller" element to ground its story. Its abundance of butt busting action also easily trumps the last two feeble sequels.

Also like the first film, the faux technology is intelligently utilised with just enough realism to help us gloss over the implausible details - the technological principles are sound even if their implementation is a stretch.

Tom Cruise is starting to show his age but he's still remarkably fit for an old fella - hell, he's remarkably fit for a young fella! He's well renowned for personally performing as many stunts as his insurance policy allows (or is it as many as his agent allows?) and, again, he doesn't disappoint. The stunts are utterly breathtaking in their scope and application. They're thoroughly ridiculous in their credulity too but, you know, this is "Impossible Mission" after all.

The villain (Michael Nyqvist) is thinly drawn but it matters little. We know what we need to know: he needs nuclear launch codes and an operational satellite to bring on a holocaust. Why? Well, because he's bad, and that's what bad guys do! In a lesser film, this shallowness of character would be a distinct flaw but here our minds are kept busy following the affairs of our side of the team with their intricate plotting, their wild gadgets and their "almost dying at every turn" in their bid to save the world. Simon Pegg is also a most welcome addition on comic duties.

With its seductive combination of seat-of-your-pants action, fascinating gadgets and spy thrills, M:I4 is a holiday blockbuster winner.

8 out of 10

| IP: Logged

Frederick Lanoy
Film Handler

Posts: 88
From: North of France
Registered: Aug 2009

posted 12-31-2011 10:13 AM

I saw the movie on a very big screen (much more bigger than some LieMax screens here in France). The projector is a Barco DP2K32. Nice picture, very sharp. Even with a 2 K DCP and a 2 K projector, IMAX scenes (especially aerial shoots in Dubai) look better than 35 mm scenes.

I like the movie : entertaining. For his first live action picture, Brad Bird did a pretty good job.

| IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99

posted 01-27-2012 01:22 PM

Well there is a link to a video review of this movie by Jennifer Pan on the tail end of page 1. I wrote this following post in response to her review before realizing there was another whole page of comments.

You need to split that review into two videos, one for the movie and one for the crappy Denver theater experience. Then send the latter to all the people in those companies you can.

Maybe the future of this industry IS the single screen theater. That way you only have one screen to worry about and you can manage to keep an eye on it and adjust things, and keep it working properly. Course there's not much money in it, but hey the world isn't perfect.

About the movie -- I liked it a lot. I was ready to hate it but was pleasantly surprised. I'm surprised they didn't put the Dubai scene more toward the end, considering that's the scene that got the most attention. I agree with all the comments that the story wasn't anything wonderful but the great action scenes made up for it. Definitely never a dull moment. Brad Bird sure proved he knows his way around live-action.

The Dubai tall building climbing scene reminded me of the scene in "Sneakers" where Robert Redford has to walk verrrrrry slowly through a room to steal a device.

Overall, great popcorn flick. It was funnier than I thought it would be, too.

The opening credits were great, I thought. Way to take the original TV show concept and update it for the 21st century. (They might have done this in the past couple of movies too, but I didn't see them so I don't know.)

Overall, 3.5 out of 5 stars for me. Plus a bonus [thumbsup]

for Paula Patton's cleavage.

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99

posted 02-11-2012 10:53 PM

I'm going to give this 4.5 out of 5 stars. Sure some of the dialogue is corny and the scenarios are ridiculous, but as has been pointed out in this thread, this IS Mission Impossible and is to be expected.

Fantastic sound mix, well paced action and good performances by all.

Although I don't watch too many movies these days (like Joe, the Warhorse trailer made the movie look too awful to give it a chance), this may end up as my favorite film of 2011.

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2

Printer-friendly view of this topic

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.