You are currently browsing the monthly archive for January 2012.
I’m feeling a bit guilty for waiting until now to post my thoughts on Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol given that I saw it more than two weeks ago, but life gets in the way sometimes; the delay is definitely not because of any problems with the film.
Just to get the thing out of the way, I have said it before and will say it again: I like Tom Cruise, actor and film star. I’m going to pass over what I know about Tom Cruise, real life person because it’s not really relevant here. This is all about whether he can still make good films. And on this evidence he certainly can.
So, film starts with The Cruiser being broken out of a Russian prison, then a whole load of nastiness happens in the Kremlin and TC and his team are totally disavowed and have to get themselves out of all types of horrible trouble without any support. Stop the bad guys, clear their names, save the world and get reinstated – just another day at the office, your mission should you choose to accept it.
Cue gadgets, country-hopping and TC doing his own stunts, some of which were really pretty spectacular. I was lucky enough to see this at the IMAX cinema on the South Bank in London and can really recommend watching it on such a big screen – some of the shots are truly breathtaking and vertigo-inducing on occasions. Money has been liberally chucked onto the screen and it shows. And Brad Bird does a fabulous job of directing the whole thing.
The rest of the team is excellent; Simon Pegg is amusing without being at all annoying which is often really difficult in that type of role (he got away with it in Star Trek too, to be fair), Paula Patton is very good indeed and once again Jeremy Renner was great, proving himself to be one to watch (I’ve enjoyed everything I’ve seen him in so far) – he would have been a good replacement for Cruise as was I think the original intention.
As for the star, well, he’s still cool on screen but beginning to look his age (as indeed he should); I love him in this type of role, the big grin was rarely in evidence and he carried off the thoughtful, under-pressure team leader brilliantly. And I have to say that if he has had “work” done it has been really subtle because that was a really big screen and I think we might have noticed a nip or tuck.
So in summary this is a strong action movie which is now on my DVD to buy list.
But not surprisingly what really generated a lot of interest was the six-minute prologue to The Dark Knight Rises which was shown before the main feature and introduced us all to Bane; the sound is as horrible as I had been led to expect but boy, that was some six minutes. Now very excited indeed!
This was an accidental watch, in that we were channel-hopping and came across this on one of the satellite movie channels that we often overlook, and it seemed interesting so we recorded it and watch it after Christmas.
Megamind tells the story of, well, Megamind who arrives on earth as a baby, sadly at the same time as Metro Man, and unable to compete with his stronger, better looking and more popular rival, decides on a career in evil. Until, that is, the day that he wins and with no-one to battle against, realises that he needs to create a new hero.
And of course that’s when it all goes horribly wrong.
This is quite good fun. The voice acting is really good but I found the visuals a little off-putting (I couldn’t get away from the idea that Roxanne, while an excellent leading female character was, well, an odd shape….). My absolutely favourite character was Minion, a great sidekick if ever there was one. The story worked well but you could see where it was going to end up from quite early on, though that’s not necessarily a bad thing.
I just think that, compared to Despicable Me, which I absolutely loved and which we watched again as our New Year’s Eve feel good movie, Megamind seemed slight.
I think we’re talking damned with faint praise here.
But as always with animated films, not being or having a child, I’m probably not the key demographic so can safely be ignored.
I’ve been looking forward to this one for a while as I wanted to see how Guy Richie and co would handle the Moriarty thing. First thing to say is that I really enjoyed the film, but it isn’t without its problems, which sounds a bit churlish I know given that it was fun experience but I just have a nagging feeling that it could have been a bit more than that.
Of course I may be taking a slightly jaundiced view because since seeing A Game of Shadows at the cinema I’ve had the great pleasure to watch the first episode of the second series of the BBC modern-day Sherlock which also featured both Irene Adler and Moriarty and was a real gem. But I guess that’s how it goes – the film-watching experience is always affected by what you have seen before or afterwards and this is a Holmes-heavy few weeks.
So getting the nagging stuff out of the way:
- humour was too heavy-handed and slapsticky at time for my taste
- Robert Downey Jr in drag is not something I ever want to see again
- I love Stephen Fry to bits but not as Mycroft, it seemed a bit of stunt casting
- there wasn’t enough of Noomi Rapace
So shoving all of that to one-side, I thought the story took a while to get going and wasn’t at all clear at first, but then really kicked off and ran full pelt until the end. I thought that the set-pieces were magnificent, the look of the film was great, the little sub-plot with Irene Adler worked well and although I still don’t warm to him Jude Law was very good.
But the standout for me was Jared Harris as Moriarty, he was just magnificently evil and I adored him, not quite to the extent that i actually wanted him to succeed but close enough. The final showdown with Holmes was very well done indeed.
I will be very interested to see where this franchise goes next, assuming that more are going to be made. Don’t be put off by my little doubts, give this one a try as it has much to commend it.
In preparation for the new Guy Richie Sherlock Holmes movie which I saw and enjoyed and will be reviewing later, I decided to watch one of my old favourites.
Murder by Decree came out in 1979 at what seems in hindsight to have been the peak of “who was Jack the Ripper?” fever, and stars Christopher Plummer as Holmes and the great James Mason as Watson. It largely follows the theory that there was a masonic conspiracy to protect Jack from being discovered because he was a distinguished surgeon who was acting in the best interests of the UK – I won’t say too much more, but its worth noting that the same theory (using real names) is the basis for the graphic novel and Johnny-Depp-starring From Hell.
I love this film. It’s a bit dated now but I still enjoy it, largely because of Plummer’s portrayal of Holmes, full of sympathy and righteous indignation (and an overly bouffant hair-do, but we’ll skip over that) and the glory that is Mason, all whiskers and silky voice and loyal companionship, urging Holmes to carry a revolver while at the same time deploring his impatience (“squashing a fellow’s pea”). Their partnership is very convincing.
The film is also chock full of stalwart British actors of the period, from Frank Finlay via David Hemmings to John Gielgud, each a delight in their own way. And of course Donald Sutherland’s cameo as a medium, all staring eyes and exotic whiskers, has to be mentioned. And it’s great to see parts of south London as they were before their recent gentrification.
As a story it’s as full of holes as the theory it’s based on but I still think it works for me, mostly because it’s a great opportunity to see Christopher Plummer in his element; he is one of my absolutely favourite actors and a bit underrated in my opinion. This is worth a try if you have an interest in Holmes and/or Jack the Ripper .
