REVIEW: MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE - ROGUE NATION

 

For many years now, Hollywood movie studios have frequently produced sequels, movie remakes, film adaptations from books and also from popular television series. Even though they have been criticized for not producing more original stories, this trend is popular as it guarantees an already existing fan-base which translates to ticket sales. White book adaptations and sequels are the most popular and profitable, adaptations from television shows are not as favourable. However, only a few, or maybe a handful of films based on television shows have been successful. One of them being Mission: Impossible, based on the television series of the same name from the 1960s created by Bruce Geller. Aired on America’s CBS network from 1966 to 1973, the show tells of a secret team of government agents known as the Impossible Mission Force (IMF) and their many mission assignments. Their methods combine espionage and using the latest available hi-tech gadgets. The theme song from the show is recognizable worldwide and has become an iconic tune. The first film adaptation of the show came in 1996 starring global superstar Tom Cruise. In 2015, there have been five films released starring Cruise and is considered one of the very few successful adaptations having got this far.

The fifth film is titled Mission: Impossible Rogue Nation. The film marks Christopher McQuarrie’s second directorial effort after Jack Reacher in 2012 which starred Tom Cruise. Once again, Cruise leads an all-star cast with Jeremy Renner, Ving Rhames, and Simon Pegg. Joining the cast are Rebecca Ferguson, Sean Harris, Alec Baldwin. McQuarrie and Drew Pearce (Iron Man 3) are responsible for the writing. McQuarrie received an Academy Award for Best Orignal Screenplay having written The Usual Suspects (1995). As with the third and fourth film, J.J. Abrams and Bryan Burk return as producers while David Ellison joins the bunch. Cruise is and has been the producer of all five films.

How will the fifth installment of this popular film series fair up with its other incarnations? Do read on…

 

Mega superstar Tom Cruise as IMF agent and leader Ethan Hunt

SYNOPSIS:
After successfully foiling a nuclear hijacking by terrorists, Ethan Hunt (Tom Cruise) discovers that his mission was orchestrated by a mysterious secret organization known as The Syndicate. As Hunt is about to take on his next mission, he is captured by The Syndicate and tortured. While in captivity, an operative of The Syndicate name Ilsa Faust (Rebecca Ferguson) helps hunt escape. Meanwhile, the Impossible Mission Force (IMF) is disbanded by a senate committee resulting in Hunt being a fugitive of the government. Together with IMF agent William Brandt (Jeremy Renner), Hunt assembles his IMF team to track down The Syndicate and clear his name.

Jeremy Renner as Agent William Brandt and Ving Rhames as Luther Stickell

 
SCRIPT:
Smart and interesting. I think the script is the best among the five films. The storyline combines old school espionage drama and engaging thrills. By writing in such a style, it creates more story-driven plots rather than depending on staging action scenes to make the film interesting. I feel most espionage films over the years has focused more on star attraction and elaborate action-packed scenes while leaving plots thinly written. This film is quite the opposite. Although the film’s dialogue may be a little heavy to digest with lots of talk, it keeps the plot explanation quite easily, provided the audience listen attentively to it. Characterization of roles were not too bad. There is a good blend of mixing action, drama, and comedy.

The beautiful and talented Rebecca Ferguson as Ilsa Faust

ACTING:

Since Tom Cruise is the major star of the film series from the first film, it is pretty common that he would take up the most scenes and dialogue lines. However, the previous third and fourth film has seen more involvement of the supporting actors. As usual, Cruise excels in his performance and persona as an action movie star. Simon Pegg provided the just the right amount of comic relief. What impressed me was the film’s female lead, the relatively unknown Swedish actress Rebecca Ferguson. Not only do I think she is very pretty, she was able to hold her own side by side with Cruise. She gave a great performance by balancing female action star, damsel in distress, and elegance pretty well. Sean Harris did really good as the villain.

One of my favourite actors Simon Pegg plays Benji Dunn

FILMING:
As I mentioned earlier, the film is more dialogue driven than action. However, a Mission: Impossible film is not complete if it did not have great action sequences and when they do, the scenes did not disappoint. Director Christopher McQuarrie managed to create action scenes that were not too elaborate and neither was it too boring. There were some great intense scenes that could make some heart-pounding moments. The cinematographer was pretty cool and the editing was quite good. Just like the previous films, the stunts are always fresh and interesting from movie to movie.

PACING:
Quite slow in the beginning but it picks up well towards the end for a decent climax.

An motorcycle chase scene from the film

DOWNSIDE:
Too much talk might disappoint some if you are looking for lots of action scenes.
 
UPSIDE:
Fans of the film series and the television series it was based on will love it.

Ethan Hunt (Tom Cruise) and William Brandt (Jeremy Renner) in action

OVERALL: 
I think it is the best of all the films so far. Interesting storyline.
 
RATING:
8.0 out of 10

 

 

 

REVIEW: ANT-MAN

 

 

Over the years, comic book publisher Marvel Comics has established itself as one of the powerhouse companies in the motion picture industry. It is quite unusual to see a company succeed financially in areas other than their core business. Under the company’s motion picture division Marvel Studios, they have produced several films based on their huge stable of comic book characters. These films has gone on to become financially successful and some even have received critical acclaim. In order to ensure continuity of interesting storylines and repeat business in ticket sales, they created the Marvel Cinematic Universe where every Marvel content is inter-related to one another. Marvel had great success in bringing both their popular and lesser-known comic book characters to the big screen. In 2015, Marvel is releasing two films; Avengers: Age of Ultron (May 2015) and Ant-Man, which is the movie I will be reviewing.

 Ant-Man is helmed by director Peyton Reed. The film stars Paul Rudd as the title superhero character. He is supported by Evangeline Lilly, Corey Stoll, Michael Pena, Bobby Canavale, Anthony Mackie, rapper Tip “T.I.” Harris, Judy Greer, and veteran actor Michael Douglas. Ant-Man is co-written by Edgar Wright, Joe Cornish, Adam McKay, and Paul Rudd. As with all Marvel’s feature films, Kevin Feige is the producer. Ant-Man is based on characters created by Stan Lee, Larry Leiber, and Jack Kirby.

 

Will Ant-Man be as heroically awesome as the rest of Marvel’s superheroes? Do read on…

Paul Rudd as Scott Lang checking out his Ant-Man suit

SYNOPSIS:
Back in the 1980s, Hank Pym (Michael Douglas) is an inventor working for the government protection agency S.H.I.E.L.D. who gets upset when his superiors intend to replicate a technology he developed. The technology Pym conceived, gives the ability for a human being to shrink down from a grown person to the size of an insect and vice versa in a specifically design suit. Pym, knowing that his superiors would use his technology to cause damage, is furious with S.H.I.E.L.D. that he refuses to give up the secret formula of his technology and resigns from the agency. Fast forward to the present time, petty burglar Scott Lang (Paul Rudd) is released from prison and rejoins his old crew to score a new burglary job. However, the job was a set-up by Pym who intends to find someone worthy enough to wear his shrinking technology for the good. After choosing Lang to wear the suit as Ant-Man, Pym and his daughter Hope Van Dyne (Evangeline Lilly), set out to stop Pym’s former assistant Darren Cross (Corey Stoll) who has managed to replicate the shrinking technology and intends to use it for evil purposes.

Paul Rudd having a discussion with Michael Douglas who plays Hank Pym

SCRIPT:
Light-hearted and well structured. As far back as the 1960s, Ant-Man is and always has been part of the stable of Marvel comic book superheroes. Therefore, it is no surprise that Marvel has been trying to make a film adaptation for the past few decades. The storyline and plots were well written. Despite all the tech jargon associated with the Ant-Man suit, the dialogue was easy to understand and the audience did not lose interest. Good characterization for all the main characters. Not too much of character backstories but it is kept minimal enough that it doesn’t become too boring. Great mix of comedy amidst all the action. I like the fact that the film is centered around a heist operation when the lead character is a burglar. Smart move. 

(L-R): Hope Van Dyne(Evangeline Lilly), Scott Lang (Paul Rudd) and Hank Pym(Michael Douglas)

ACTING:
A very solid performance from Paul Rudd and I feel it was the perfect casting by Marvel. His performance borderlines charm, wit, and heroism. It is very hard not to like him in this film. Rudd fits the part. Evangeline Lilly and Corey Stoll managed to hold their own with okay performances. I loved the inclusion of Michael Douglas playing Hank Pym. Pym has been an integral part in the Marvel comics and his casting is the most perfect.

Hank Pym (Douglas) faces up to villain Darren Cross (Corey Stoll)

FILMING: 
It was widely publicized last year that writer Edgar Wright was supposed to direct the film. However, he left the project due to creative differences. Peyton Reed did well by stepping into the hot seat. He managed to carve an interesting story which can be enjoyed by adults and kids alike. Cinematography was alright. Editing was not too sappy but just enough to feel all the drama and excitement. The high points of the film are the visual effects which were really awesome. One can only imagine how cool the visual effects are since the lead character is able to shrink down to the size of an insect. Kudos to industry giants Industrial Light & Magic (ILM).

On set with Paul Rudd and director Peyton Reed

PACING:
Moderate pace. Not too slow, not too draggy, and not too fast either. Just nice to enjoy the movie.

 
DOWNSIDE:
Could be a little difficult to understand if you do not know about the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

UPSIDE:

For comic book fans, and Ant-Man fans in particular, this is a good beginning for the character. Great popcorn film while satisfying all types of fan base for Marvel.

Ant-Man in the shower?

OVERALL: 
Go and watch it!

RATING:
8 out of 10

 

 

REVIEW: TED 2

When major Hollywood movie studios releases a comedy film, they usually take the ‘safer’ route. There is a tendency to produce more family-friendly comedy films compared to foul-mouthed adult restricted films. Movies restricted to adults could dampen ticket sales at the box-office. However, there are several instances when R-rated comedy films were a commercial and critical success. One such instance was the 2012 hit Ted starring Mark Wahlberg and Seth MacFarlane. I will be reviewing its sequel titled Ted 2.

Ted 2 sees Seth MacFarlane return as the film’s director. Mark Wahlberg also returns as the lead star. Rounding up the supporting cast are MacFarlane, Amanda Seyfried, Giovanni Ribisi, Jessica Barth, and Morgan Freeman. The writers include MacFarlane, Alec Sulkin, and Wellesley Wild.

 
How will Ted 2 fair up to its predecessor? Do read on.

John Bennett (Mark Wahlberg) and Ted (voice of Seth MacFarlane)

SYNOPSIS:

The film tells the story of a man named John Bennett (Wahlberg) who grew up with a teddy bear named Ted which, through an unexplained miracle wish from the first film, can talk, interact, and do physical activities like a human being. The film begins with Ted (voiced by MacFarlane) who is about to get married with Tami-Lynn, his girlfriend from the first film. Not long into the marriage, Ted and Tami-Lynn decides to have a baby through John as a sperm donour. However, the state of Massachusetts where they reside won’t recognize Ted as a person because he is a toy. John and Ted engages a young lawyer named Samantha Jacksoon (Seyfried) to represent them in the legal battle with many funny consequences along the way.

Ted and his wife Tami-Lynn (Jessica Gerth)

SCRIPT:

Very funny and mildly interesting. It is one of those films where the ending of the story is predictable. The writing style of the script is basically a rehash of the previous film. Title character gets into trouble while his human counterpart helps him. There is no backstory explanation for the characters as it is assumed that the audience has watched the first Ted film. I liked the first Ted film. Not only was it very funny, the film had good emotional drama which audience can feel symphatized. This sequel lacks that emotional connection. However, the comedy moments and jokes are just as funny as the first one and guaranteed to have a lot of laughs. There are a lot of  inside jokes that  references pop culture which was creative. The dialogue is full of profanity and not suitable for children under 17 years old.

Amanda Seyfried  as Samantha L. Jackson

 ACTING:

Wahlberg did well in this film. His performance is not much of a stretch when it comes to comedies. In this sequel, he has less scree time compared to the first film. Seyfried is a welcome addition to the cast but she did little to showcase her performance. Established actor Morgan Freeman was just there to give the film some boost in terms of star-power.

Samantha, John, and Ted in a diner

FILMING: 
Seth MacFarlane is famously known as the creator of Family Guy, an animated TV series on the FOX network in the United States. He did well for the first film, which marked his directorial debut, but I feel he slack a little bit on this sequel. The focus was more on specific funny scenes and moments. Sometimes it felt like there was a lack of emotional connection from scene to scene which is essential in keeping an audience interested. The visual effects for Ted the teddy bear is as usual very good.

Filming Ted with a stuffed teddy bear being used as a visual effects reference marker

PACING:

Moderate pacing. Good start, good middle, and good ending.

DOWNSIDE:
Lots of profanity is used in film and some drug use. Talking foul-mouthed teddy bear on screen is not for kids.

UPSIDE:

A very funny film that will guarantee laughs.

Ted at his job in the supermarket

OVERALL: 
I feel the first film was much better than this sequel. Good laughs and light-hearted storyline. However, please note that you MUST see the first film in order to understand Ted2.

RATING:

7 out of 10

 

REVIEW: JURASSIC WORLD

 

I would like to apologize to my regular blog readers for not updating for so long. I have been busy with working on two projects simultaneously and it has taken a lot of my time. I will try to update more movie reviews from now on. Jurassic Park was released in cinemas June 12^th, 2015.

In 1993, a movie title Jurassic Park made film history by setting a benchmark in standards of how movies are made to this very day. The film was directed by legendary director Steven Spielberg based on a novel written by the late Michael Crichton. Back then, the production value (design, cinematography, visual effects, practical effects, etc.) was ahead of its time. I was awed when I watched it then and still feel the same way when I watch the movie now on satellite TV or DVD. Two sequels have since been made, The Lost World and Jurassic Park 3. Now, there is a third sequel (fourth film) titled Jurassic World which features an extension of the initially story with a whole different vibe to it, at least that’s what I see based on the film’s trailers.

The fourth installment is directed by relative newcomer Colin Trevorrow. The film stars Chris Pratt, Bryce Dallas Howard, Vincent D’Onofrio, Ty Simpkins, Nick Robinson, B.D.Wong, and Irrfan Khan. The writers for the film are Trevorrow, Derek Connolly, Rick Jaffa, and Amanda Silver. Spielberg serves as Executive Producer while Patrick Crowley and long-time Spielberg collaborator Frank Marshall produces.

How will the fourth film fare compared to its predecessor? Do read on…

Claire Dearing (Howard) and Owen Grady (Pratt)

SYNOPSIS:

Set a couple of decades into the future, a fully functional theme park attraction based on the previous proposed Jurassic Park is opened to the public on a remote island with a new name Jurassic World. Besides being a theme park attraction, the island also consists of a research facility which monitors the many species of dinosaurs on the island. In order to boost attendance, a new dinosaur species is created by lab scientists. Theme park manager Claire Dearing (Bryce Dallas Howard) is tasked to oversee this new ‘creation’. When things start to go wrong, she seeks the help of resident dinosaur trainer Owen Grady (Chris Pratt) to investigate.

 

Dearing nephews played by Nick Robinson and Ty Simpkins

 

SCRIPT:

Quite organized and enjoyable. The script has a quite a good structure as it follows three separate plots which connects into one major plot. Despite several loopholes in the plots, it is easily understandable and does not lose so much attention. Some plots can be a little far-fetched but it is meant to be that way. The dialogue was a little overblown with scientific jargon but still understandable. There were good comic relief moments but too little of them to even out the mood of the film/ I liked that the film explored a ‘unique’ relationship between humans and dinosaurs.

 

Owen and Clair make a discovery

 

ACTING:

Pretty fair and exciting. The film’s lead actors Chris Pratt and Bryce Dallas Howard did very well in their roles. The supporting actors were fairly mediocre was just there to fill in blanks. Most of their performance were based on the element of fear for dangerous situations. After the recent success of Guardians of the Galaxy, Pratt puts in another fine performance to enhance the film.

 

Bryce Dallas Howard as park manager Claire Dearing

 

FILMING: 

Director Colin Trevorrow is relatively new to the Hollywood scene. I think he did an exceptional job in handling a big budget Hollywood studio film. The action was good and exciting. However, he lack the ability of carving a smooth story which eventually became a little messy. The production design was great and the visual effects were top notch.

 

Director Colin Trevorrow directing Chris Pratt

 

PACING:

A little slow at first but picks up pace in the middle which slowly build to an exciting climax.

TONE (MOOD):

Innocent lives are faced with deadly danger and tensions build among the heroes as they aim to stop more destruction from threatening lives.

 

Director Colin Trevorrow using his viewfinder to compose a shot

 

DOWNSIDE:

The plot can seem a little too far-fetched and ridiculous. A bit too ‘kiddy’ for adults to enjoy at times.

UPSIDE:

Great visual effects, sound design, and action.

Owen Grady (Chris Pratt) the Velociraptor trainer

OVERALL: 
It is a summer ‘popcorn’ film. Semi-okay story and full of adventure.

RATING:
7.5 out of 10

 

REVIEW: AVENGERS: AGE OF ULTRON

For the longest time ever, I have been a fan of comic book superheroes and have taken a liking to Hollywood film adaptations of them. Therefore, it is no surprise that I am extremely eager to watch this movie I am about to review. After a tremendous billion dollar box-office success with The Avengers in 2012, comic book publishers Marvel green-lit a sequel for release in 2015.

The sequel in titled The Avengers: Age of Ultron. Joss Whedon returns to the helm to direct and write the film. The sequel reunites the cast from its predecessor; Robert Downey Jr., Chris Evans, Mark Ruffalo, Chris Hemsworth, Scarlett Johannson, Jeremy Renner, Paul Bettany, Samuel L. Jackson, and Cobie Smulders. Joining the assemble cast are Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Elizabeth Olson, and James Spader. As with all Marvel films, Kevin Feige returns as producer.

Will the sequel be better than the first film? Do read on…

Avengers Assemble!

SYNOPSIS:
The assemble of Earth’s mightiest heroes known as The Avengers is on assignment to retrieve Loki’s (villain from previous film) scepter hidden by Hydra in an Eastern European country. After successfully completing their mission, Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) and Dr. Bruce Banner (Mark Ruffalo) decides to use the energy from the scepter to create a robot with artificial intelligence named Ultron. To their surprise, the robot Ultron begins to take a life of its own and is hell-bent on destroying Earth. It is up to our superheroes to stop it.

Bruce Banner/The Hulk (Mark Ruffalo) and Tony Stark/Iron Man (Robert Downey Jr.)

SCRIPT:
Scattered and mildly strong. Following the success of the first film which received raved reviews for its storyline, uncommon for comic book superhero films, this sequel was slightly disappointing. Although the storyline is pretty straight forward, at times it tends to cramp a lot all at once. It seems that Marvel is trying to set-up multiple storylines for future films involving each individual superhero character. In other words, there are too many sub-plots to supplement the main storyline plot. This eventually led to more dialogue scenes to explain a lot of what is going on in the film. On the bright side, the wit and humour is as good, and maybe even better, than the first film. Quite good characterization of roles as we get to see more of the human side of our heroes rather than focus on their special abilities.  

Captain America (Chris Evans) and Thor (Chris Hemsworth)

ACTING:
With an ensemble cast of established actors in one film, it is expected for each and every actor to bring their best to the screen. I am happy to say that all perform well. I particularly liked the performance of the new cast in Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Elizabeth Olsen, and James Spader. Although we only hear Spader’s voice, he sounded menacing as the main villain of the film. Paul Bettany, who in previous Marvel films only provided the voice of Stark’s artificial intelligence software Jarvis, is given a bigger role as a live-action member of the cast. His performance is remarkable and somewhat a scene stealer for the film.

Natasha Romanoff / Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson)

FILMING: 
Excellent but can be a little over the top. Director Joss Whedon is known to be true comic book fan. In my opinion, Whedon brought comic book artistry to life in the first film. He does it again with the second film and it is just as exciting. As with blockbuster movie franchises such as this, movie studios tend to provide more budget to produce sequels. Whedon took advantage of this by staging more spectacular action sequences and included more visual effects compared to the first film. Everything is on a bigger scale this time around. The visual effects are top notch and there are some very creative shots.

Director Joss Whedon on set with Clint Barton / Hawkeye (Jeremy Renner)

PACING:
Moderate at best. When there is a lot of dialogue to explain the film’s plot, it feels a little slow. However, it is balanced out with some wit and humour the Joss Whedon ‘style’.

Tony Stark / Iron Man building Ultron

TONE (MOOD):
As the world is faced against an unpredictable force of evil, our Earth’s mightiest superheroes must put aside their ago and petty differences to protect humanity from what could be a global disaster.

Newcomers Aaron Taylor-Johnson and Elizabeth Olsen as twins Quicksilver and Scarlett Witch

DOWNSIDE:
The editing could have been better. Multiple sub-plots can be turn-off for audiences.

Director Joss Whedon giving some pointers to Elizabeth Olsen

UPSIDE:
Great action sequences and visual effects which is complemented by some nifty sound effects design.

Captain Amerca / Steve Rogers (Chris Evans) in action

OVERALL: 
Personally, I feel the first film is better than this second film. However, it is worth a watch because it is highly entertaining. It is not necessary to watch the first film in order to understand the second film but it would be a better experience have seen both.


RATING:
7 out of 10.