I HATE how people say MI4 is the best one…its the WORST!
-
yurenchu — 11 years ago(March 23, 2015 04:50 AM)
Funny. The complaints you have about MI4 are basically the same that I have about MI3. MI3 felt like a drawn-out episode of "Alias". I still consider the first movie the best one.
I like that the Mission: Impossible movies explore a different style and tone in every new installment. So Ghost Protocol was a welcome surprise to me. The Kremlin hallway scene was quite inventive, suspenseful and memorable. Moreover, I think the collaboration between Ethan, Benji, Jane and Will presented the best teamwork in the movie series so far. (I also liked the teamwork scenes between Benji, Jane and Hanaway.) I haven't watched the original Mission: Impossible TV-series (I've only watched one episode on youtube), but I think MI4 matches it the best in terms of tone/atmosphere.
I think that Philip Seymour Hoffman was underused in MI3. His best scene was when he let his other self read aloud the pan-phonemic poem on the card (that was a very cool scene).
MI2 was a movie that I absolutely loved, despite the poor, dumbed-down plotline and the least team-effort (Luther had literally nothing to do, which was a shame). The movie had the best stunts and most riveting action scenes. I don't care much for Metallica, but Hans Zimmer's score and Heitor Pereira's guitar playing are unforgettable and definitely on par with Danny Elfman's score on the first movie.
I'll be curious to what new elements the next M:I movie will bring.
Joe Satriani - "Always With Me, Always With You"
https://y2u.be/VI57QHL6ge0 -
jawsfan007 — 11 years ago(March 23, 2015 06:54 PM)
the new one looks amazing and I'm excited about Christopher Mcquarrie Shepherding the picture.
He did great work with Tom Cruise on Jack Reacher and the Way of the Gun is a fantastic film with a incredibly great shoot out at the end. -
T-eschberger — 11 years ago(March 26, 2015 06:54 PM)
Agreed. Something about MI4 felt verylax. It just didn't have much energy. Its a very leisurely kind of moviethe tone is just too light for anything to feel high risk or suspenseful. I appreciate that Bird shot the action with a steady hand, but the staging of it didn't take advantage of the situations presented. The only mildly exciting moment is the Burj climband even that wasn't all it was cracked up to be.
MI1, while lighter on action, is a much more tense film with a genuine classic spy thriller plot and tone.
MI2, while probably the most loosey goosey of the franchise still has the amazing John Woo behind the camera. The man can create damn good action.
MI3 is energetic and has great emotional pull. It's action is a great mix of modern and old school techniques.
I wish I could like MI4 more than I do. Objectively, it's a damn well written movie. It's streamlined narrative is welcome but too much light humor and a lack of energy in the action let it down. -
Deftone315 — 10 years ago(May 01, 2015 06:19 AM)
Well the rating sure proves otherwise. The worst one was the 2nd one, and the third was an improvement but ultimately boring and quite pretentious. You're kidding yourself if you think this is the worst one; to me this one embodies the best thing about this franchise: A great time at the theater
-
slch112 — 10 years ago(May 24, 2015 06:21 AM)
I agree with everything you said except the ballet Kung foo gun fightsvery out of place for Ethan and the franchise. Also, I was definitely rocking out to those tunes as well! I hate Limp Bisquit but DAmn I loved that song.
-
freshboy3001 — 10 years ago(June 21, 2015 01:35 AM)
I don't know why it's rated the highest, because it's just standard Hollywood action-movie schlock with a preposterous, pointless story. After watching Tomorrowland in theatres recently, I've realised Brad Bird is an overrated lackey for the studios. His visual style is bland, his set-pieces are forgettable and his editors are morons, as his films are at least 20 minutes too long. Stick to animation, bro.
Never let others dictate your opinion on a film:
http://www.imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=13340299 -
EJverh — 10 years ago(August 05, 2015 01:48 AM)
Yep. I agree 3 was by far the best, then 1 then 4 then 2. The opening of the original first was the best of all. Everything about that whole sequence was exceptional and darkly suspenseful. 3 had everything in it and yes Hoffman was so very good which upped the stakes for us caring about the main actor and the subplot (the wife).
-
slyle — 10 years ago(August 05, 2015 10:27 AM)
The opening of the original first was the best of all.
No argument there.
I also like that each movie is purposefully different from the others. One thing that gets overlooked quite a bit about 4 is that it's partially a parody of the other movies. Hunt has to do the ridiculous stunt even though it's crazy, which is the opposite of how it happens in the other movies. Early on Hunt declares that everything has to go perfect for the plan to work, yet pretty much nothing goes as planned. They didn't get to use the masks this time. Hunt, rather than being in control the entire time, actually has to rely on his team for everything to work. Heck, he didn't even get to be the one to break the suspense on when they'd stop the missile. He had to wait for the rest of the team to get the relay working.
Combining that theme of nothing working right except for relying on the team with the subtle jabs at the previous installments ads a layer of depth that can be easily missed. That's one reason I think 4 deserves to be considered a great installment.
Personally, I do think 3 is superior. I have a hard time ranking 1 and 4 against one another because of how different they were. When the goal of the franchise is to force us to compare apples to oranges each time a movie comes out it's hard to put them in order when the quality of two of them is at all similar. -
peter_t_2k3 — 10 years ago(November 02, 2015 04:43 PM)
After finally watching 4 I find it a great improvement over 3.
3 didn't seem to do to we'll with the critics. It's been a while since I've seen it but I found it too action packed. As the op mentioned I do find it like a Michael bay film. The problem with Michael bay is he throws too much action at the screen. The way the camera moves, the editing etc. Just didn't do it for me.
Min is a lot less serious and quite a fun film.