Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Mission Impossible 2

This is topic Mission Impossible 2 in forum Film Handlers' Movie Reviews at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=4;t=000036

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 05-23-2000, 11:42 PM:

This is exactly what I expected: lots of fun eye- and ear-candy. Not a "great" film, but no one would expect it to be one. It's a fun "popcorn" action flick that's of above-average quality.

The print that I saw of this wasn't so hot. I'm not a fan of Deluxe Hollywood, and this print is a good example of why--lousy timing, a fair amount of negative and print dust, and milky blacks. I've seen worse, but this should have looked a lot better. The mix was good. Editing is a bit sloppy in some scenes. Watch for the R4->R5 changeover...there's a quick cut after the second cue mark.

Not bad at all for a sequel, though the original was better.

Posted by Chad Souder (Member # 343) on 05-24-2000, 01:47 AM:

As typical Woo films go, this was much more remedial than the first M:I. There were definately some far-fetched stunts, and the standard "slide-across-the-floor-while-shooting-two-guns" bit, but it was full of action. A great no-brainer summer movie, and it should do good business. Man, was that girl hot or what.

------------------
"Asleep at the switch? I wasn't asleep, I was drunk!" - Homer Simpson

Posted by Tyler Skinner (Member # 229) on 05-24-2000, 02:43 AM:

Give me a bucket....

Now, I'm a fan of Woo's older films, The Killer, and Hard Boiled are classics, since he has come hollywood it seems like the producers have his balls hidden in a vault somewhere. What heppened to the continuous shots going through hallways and extravagant shootouts lasting 30 minutes with 50,000 bullets???

This film was his worst yet, no wait that one with nic cage was pretty bad too. The only scene I liked was when he was taking on those guys in the chem-lab, it was almost up to what woo was, then it just ended. what a waste. And the whole motorcycle thing was boring as hell.

As far as the mission impossible theme goes, so he changed his mask a few times... big deal. As far as I could tell this was just a Bond movie with Tom Cruise.

tyler

Posted by Dwayne Caldwell (Member # 417) on 05-24-2000, 04:49 AM:

Hard Target was Woo's worst film. This is actually one of his better American films. But that's certainly not to say it is a really good film. I thought some of the scenes in the beginning were kind of boring. The rock climbing intro. was a load of shit. But the movie actually had a few surprises it sprung on me.

But it also had a LOT of predictable scenes, with Woo pouring on the dramatic Zimmer music (which is good, but Elfman would have been better) in some of those scenes which I'm sure will further insult the intelligence of the audience members.

The action was very well directed and edited. Particularly the Biocyte and end chase sequences. But the part where the main bad guy and Cruise speed towards each other is just stupid. How many bones in their chests would have been BROKEN if they really flew into each other at sixty or seventy miles an hour. I'm sure that will be a big qualm with many audience members.

Ving Rhames did a good job reprising his role as Luther, and I thought that new Aussie IMF member was going to serve as interesting comic relief, but nothing really happened with the guy's character. And Cruise's love interest only seemed capable of displaying three different facial expressions. Happy, sexy, angry. Just the essentials for her role, and she's boring because of it.

I haven't been very impressed with Woo's American action films, but this one enterained me, and in the end, isn't that the only thing Woo is trying to do? His Hong Kong films excel in that department far better than his attempts here, but he's here to stay, so I might as well get used to his American interpretions of action. I can say that MI2 was better than I thought it would be and was definitely better than the first one.

------------------
The man with the magic hands.

Posted by Scott Magie (Member # 368) on 05-25-2000, 12:26 AM:

I'd just like to report that I REALLY enjoyed this movie. Maybe it was due to the fact that I was actually sitting in the theatre instead of peering thru the porthole (which is unfortunately how I've watched a lot of movies lately), but I was thoroughly entertained from start to finish.
The more I think about the movie, the more dumb stuff I can think of, but WHILE watching the movie, I just enjoyed it and none of those questions entered my mind (except how do their eyes change when they put on and take off their masks?... but I've been wondering about THAT one since Jim Phelps).
Dwayne, what was wrong with the rock-climbing scene? Are you a rock-climber... 'cuz I could see how an actual climber might take offense, but I (as a non-climber) really enjoyed that scene. I thought it was shot extremely well. Now, I know the stuff he was doing was pretty much impossible, but as Tony reminded us, "it's not "Mission: Difficult"... it's "Mission: Impossible". It's definitely a lot more believable than most Bond intros!
I'm surprised no one's complained about all the slo-motion yet, but maybe we all went into it knowing the inevidability of this... seeing that it's John Woo. I know I did. And I enjoyed it. Sure, it's melodramatic. Sure, it's unbelievable. But I allow things like Mission Impossible and James Bond and Indiana Jones to be this way. They've earned it over the years, I guess. If this movie had come out with no-name actors and no one had heard of John Woo and they called it something besides Mission Impossible... I probably wouldn't have enjoyed myself. This post would've been filled with my gripes about the egocentric direction, overused slo-motion, and illogical stunts... but it's Mission Impossible... it's Tom Cruise... it's John Woo. If you go into the movie knowing and expecting these three things... you will enjoy it. Just leave Mr. Critic at home, cause he would never be able to enjoy a movie that's this much fun.

------------------
Scott A. Magie

scoooot@hotmail.com
"Anybody wanna peanut?"

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 05-25-2000, 02:59 AM:

Other than the two flying into each other after their little "chicken run" which Dwayne commented on earlier, my biggest problem is the inevitable John Woo "two guys turning around and WHAM each one has a gun in each other's face" thing. I like John Woo's over the top style of action (Hard Boiled is his best), but I'm getting sick of that one.

At least they didn't rub down each other's faces like in Face/Off.

Posted by Ethan Harper (Member # 472) on 05-25-2000, 03:07 PM:

John Woo rules!

have you ever seen "Killer"? That too is a classic.

Unfortuantely i can not say this about Broken Arrow. it seemed to americanized to be john Woo.

Posted by Dwayne Caldwell (Member # 417) on 05-26-2000, 04:00 AM:

Actually, Scott, I'm not a rock jock. Not too many scalable things in Texas.

. And I don't think I'll tackle the Rockies anytime soon while I'm living here in Colorado.

I understand the purpose of showing Ethan Hunt climbing without safety gear is most likely to point out his propensity for living on the edge, both on vacation and in the field. And I know I shouldn't have taken the rock climbing intro. so seriously, especially if it's a John Woo film. I guess it just bothered me that he was climbing without any gear whatsoever. He didn't even have a rope to rappel down, so he would have to climb back down. But Cruise needs to keep those muscles working anyway, right?

No, I wouldn't say the scene offended me. I just didn't care for it very much. Sorry if I gave the wrong impression.

------------------
The man with the magic hands.

Posted by Greg Anderson (Member # 235) on 05-26-2000, 03:12 PM:

"Tom Cruise is Ethan Hunt as James Bond 007 in Mission: Impossible 2."

This movie had all the classic blunders of a sequel. First, you fire almost everyone both behind-the-scenes and from the cast of the first one. Then you give the returning characters some off-the-wall quirk which was never part of the first movie (like an agent who's more concerned about his clothing than his mission. Hello? You did realize you were coming here to WORK on something, didn't you? Where are your work clothes?).

Then you reduce the plot to just the most basic thing for people to understand. Then you try really hard to top the first movie in other elements. I mean, let's have more incredible stunts. Let's repeat a stunt from the first film (dropping into a room on a cable) and make it even more incredible. Let's go to exotic locations which are more breathtaking than in the first film (but, apart from that, there's really no reason to be there) and, while we're at it, let's hire a bad guy from the "Cookie Cutter Bad Guy Agency" where so many people get their bad guys.

After a few minutes, I thought I was watching a sequel to The Last Action Hero because they were going, almost step-by-step, over the action movie elements which were skewered in that film.

Is there a law somewhere which says that each action movie made today must have a) at least one slow-motion shot in each scene or b) several shots where the action freezes during a "dolly move" or c) many slow motion shots during a dolly move?

Someone already mentioned it but WOW there was some sloppy cinematography. Is this because most post-production is done on small, video monitors? There were several close-ups where the character's face wasn't in sharp focus (except I can't really remember a fuzzy shot of Tom Cruise like that. Go figure). I noticed several hairs in the gate (and I wasn't even watching for them).

Save your money, folks. Trust me, you've seen this movie before and, when you did, it was usually done a lot better than this.

Posted by Tim Reed (Member # 137) on 05-27-2000, 11:20 AM:

I've only seen the beginning, but did you notice how he wasn't 'cool', until he put on the sunglasses?

------------------
Better Projection Pays!

Posted by Richard Quesnelle (Member # 391) on 05-27-2000, 04:13 PM:

Well, what a let down. I am a gigantic John Woo fan, and to my excitement when I heard he was directing MI=2. Well, my brother and myself went and seen the movie last night as i have been dying to see it since it's opening on Wednesday. Two hours later and horribly let down by the action meastro himself.

Another case of the Fifth Element syndrome. You get psyched-up for a movie but then get all let down by the horrible outcome.

All I have to say is that the X-Men movie better be good or I'll be pissed off.

Reg

Posted by Bryan Redemske (Member # 354) on 05-27-2000, 08:03 PM:

this movie sucked. explosions, yes. guns, yes. big freakin' deal. hot chick (not THAT hot), so what? nothing 'new' happened in this whole movie. it's all been done before. i was confused by the first movie - very complex, like real spies. this one...too easy.

not so great acting by the bad guys. and the whole love thing...cheesy. sooo...basically a piece of crap.

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 06-01-2000, 06:25 PM:

Well...Sydney looked nice. Pity about the rest of the movie though

I thought the action scenes were okay. The fight at the end went on WAY too long and the dialogue... woof! And this is the same guy who wrote 'Chinatown'?????

I would like to have seen what Brian DePalma would have come up with. He does use slow motion, but not every other scene.