Logging

Film: Mission Impossible, Ghost Protocol

Here was my logic - I wanted to see a movie. Girl With A Dragon Tattoo was the obvious choice, but I looked it up and it was 2 hrs and 40 minutes long. This, for a story I've already read, already seen a previous version of the movie, and don't really care for. There are no actors in the film that make want to go see it - the only reason to go to this film, for me, is to see what David Fincher was able to do with the material. I love Fincher. He might be the best working filmmaker in Hollywood, but he is fundamentally, a technician, a visual master, and not someone with something vital to say about the world. I couldn't imagine really enjoying myself while watching this film. I already know what is going to happen and I already know it is not a masterpiece just by the reviews and word of mouth, etc. So what is the point?

Instead, I decided to see Mission Impossible, figuring lower expectations, maybe I'll actually enjoy myself. I was sort of right. The movie had some good wide shots. A few good action sequences in the first half of the movie. But ultimately, it was just exhausting. It felt like they tried to cram in 4 heist movies into one. The entire last act is simply a repeat of the second act. The stakes are preposterous and make ZERO sense. The movie was totally bereft of any ideas. Strange, considering Brad Bird did The Incredibles, a cartoon which was rich with ideas about middle aged angst, impotence, recalling past glory, rising above the crowd, all sorts of good stuff. To like this Mission Impossible is to accept such a narrow and small concept of what a movie can be these days. Non-stop nonsensical action. By the end, when the nuclear missile is flying around the world, not for one second am I thinking "Oh, no, don't let it explode." Stupid. Totally tension-less in the 3rd act.

The only thing worse were the previews. I believe I saw three movies where the "stakes" were the world was going to be destroyed. Is this the only goal that the studios think will get the audiences out of the house? Must the world be actually destroyed for people to go and see a movie? Whatever happened to just a bad guy killing someone or stealing some money? Isn't that enough to root against? Is it really that the entire world is going to be destroyed by some sort of creatures from another dimension or the past or some crazy technology? These plots strike me as "little man's" syndrome, excessive overcompensation for lack of story telling ability.