Mission: Impossible: Fallout

Mission: Impossible: Rogue Nation (2015): A Revisit To My First Mission: Impossible Movie

Posted on by Jack Drees

mv5botfmnda3zjmtn2y0mc00ndyylwfly2utntq4otqxmmy1nmvjxkeyxkfqcgdeqxvyntg4ndq4ndy-_v1_sy1000_cr006511000_al_

Your mission, should you choose to accept it, has been leading up to this point. The movie reviewing community’s biggest Jackass is about to review the last available “Mission: Impossible” movie before the release of the franchise’s upcoming film, “Mission: Impossible: Fallout.” Your mission is to read through the review. You will eventually discover that this movie is directed by Christopher McQuarrie, who also directed another film starring this film’s lead actor, Tom Cruise, “Jack Reacher.” McQuarrie, believe it or not, will also be directing “Mission: Impossible: Fallout,” making him the first director to do two “Mission: Impossible” movies. As always, should you or any of your Force be caught or killed, the Movie Reviewing Moron will disavow any of your actions. This message will self-destruct in five seconds.

“Mission: Impossible: Rogue Nation” is directed by Christopher McQuarrie (Jack Reacher, Way of the Gun) and stars Tom Cruise (Edge of Tomorrow, Oblivion), Jeremy Renner (The Avengers, The Bourne Legacy), Simon Pegg (Star Trek, Shaun of the Dead), Rebecca Ferguson (The White Queen, Hercules), Ving Rhames (Pulp Fiction, Lilo & Stitch), Sean Harris (The Borgias, Prometheus), and Alec Baldwin (The Departed, 30 Rock). This film is about IMF agent Ethan Hunt as he’s back for another round of action, as he cooperates alongside his team to take down an organization known as the Syndicate, an international rogue organization.

Back before this movie came out, I remember seeing the trailer for this film. I knew what “Mission: Impossible” was, but at the time I technically haven’t been exposed to any of its material. Having seen the trailer and hearing that this film is getting a special countdown in IMAX, I felt it was necessary to go ahead and check out this film in the IMAX format while it was still in theaters, which I did.

For all who happen to be judging me, SHUT UP! That is a PERFECTLY JUSTIFIABLE REASON! I didn’t go to use my phone! I didn’t go to fall asleep! I didn’t go to chit chat with those around me! I went for the experience! Speaking of the experience, I had a really fun time, therefore making me really excited to watch this movie again on Blu-ray, especially considering it has been nearly three years since my first watch. And guys, let me just tell you, out of all the “Mission: Impossible” movies I’ve seen thus far, this is definitely my absolute favorite in the franchise!

Over the past number of days, I’ve been thinking to myself, “Mission: Impossible” is just like “Fast & Furious,” the movies just get better as they go on. The main difference however between “Mission: Impossible” and “Fast & Furious” however is that when it comes to overall quality, it feels like that is something that more associated with the “Mission: Impossible” franchise. Both movies have similar feels that will give adrenaline rushes, but “Mission: Impossible” feels a lot like a movie made for smarter audiences. I’m not saying those who go see “Fast & Furious” are stupid, I enjoy those movies, and one of my personal friends from Texas has a huge fascination towards the franchise. But what I am saying is that when it comes to “Mission: Impossible” and “Fast & Furious,” two franchises that if you look at them, have many similarities, I’d say that “Mission: Impossible” comes off as more than just popcorn entertainment. “Fast & Furious” feels ludicrous, maybe that’s because it’s lighthearted and while perhaps there is stuff at stake, you as an audience member might be more focused on chewing on your popcorn. As I watch “Mission: Impossible” however, I’m absolutely curious to know more about it. Maybe because Tom Cruise has built this reputation of being the biggest daredevil action star of his generation, but when I watch these films, they don’t feel like products meant to feed to the throats of the masses (except “Mission: Impossible II”), these feel like movies. I seriously want to know about these characters because I truly deeply care about them, for example, Ethan Hunt! How could I not care about him at this point?

Ethan Hunt is great once again in this movie, I totally bought Tom Cruise as him, and I think I cared about his character here just about as much as I did in the first one. When it comes to his character, I wouldn’t necessarily say that my appreciation towards Cruise not specifically to just Hunt himself, but I rooted for him. The way his mission is set up in this movie is brilliant, awesome, and kind of sets the stage for what’s to come. Without going into detail, the terrorist organization Hunt is supposed up against, the Syndicate, just became a whole lot more threatening in just a short matter of exposition. However, they’re not the only thing standing in Hunt’s way. Again, without going into detail, Hunt is pursued by the CIA in this movie.

Speaking of Tom Cruise and Ethan Hunt, let’s talk about one of the most disturbing scenes I’ve watched in any movie. This scene might be more disturbing than most horror movies! Remember how in the first “Mission: Impossible” Ethan had to go down into this restricted area on a wire? It might be the most famous scene in all of the “Mission: Impossible” movies. As much as I love this scene, I think I have a much softer spot for another scene in “Rogue Nation.” There’s a scene that is conceptually similar to the famous wire scene in the first movie that appears in this one. But the thing about this scene, is that while Hunt is supposed to go into a restricted area for the sake of completing a mission. And as if this task weren’t already heavy enough, it involves constantly being in an area that’s UNDERWATER. I felt like I was on the edge of my seat during this scene! I am just amazed that five movies in, I STILL manage to feel like this is the original production and I’m watching this franchise for the very first time. Then again, maybe not, because I’ve seen Ethan Hunt grow as a character, therefore I care about him a lot more than I would than if I saw him for the first time (depending on the scenario).

I will say that there are definitely action movies out there that rely on entertaining audiences simply on great action, and maybe leaving story as an afterthought. I wouldn’t say that when it comes to “Mission: Impossible: Rogue Nation.” The story in this movie is pretty solid, I cared about the characters and where this movie happened to be going. But the action scenes in this movie are nothing short of top notch.

You know how I said that the exposition for the Syndicate really set the tone for what’s to come? Well, I was referring to a moment after the opening credits in a record shop. There is one scene that takes place before the opening credits involving a plane, and my gosh, it is one of the best openings to a movie I’ve ever seen. Everything from the cinematography, the music, the writing, it kind of gives you tension as an audience member, I just ate it up! Afterwards, the movie does its opening credits, and while I will give “Mission: Impossible: Ghost Protocol” some credit for being the most creative opening of the “Mission: Impossible” movies, I thought this opening might have been better. It’s a lot like the first movie’s opening, but the music is slightly different. While I did praise the first movie’s opening because it had a TV show feel, I may sound like a hypocrite here, but I really don’t care, this one deserves my praise for its movie feel. With five installments that are technically movies and not TV shows, I personally think that’s a fair sentiment to have.

Speaking of scenes with vehicles, let’s take about that scene where Tom Cruise rides a motorcycle! It’s awesome! It’s quite an amazing ride! Seeing Cruise blaze through the streets in this bad boy is nothing short of a treat, and it’s definitely better than that climax in “Mission: Impossible II.”

Screenshot (351)

One last scene I’m gonna talk about is the action sequence inside the Vienna State Opera. Before this whole scene begins, there is one line uttered by Ethan to Simon Pegg’s character of Benji that I will probably use so many times for the rest of my life.

“You want drama? Go to the opera.”

And drama there was indeed! This is one of the slower-paced scenes in the movie, but it completely worked. The intensity got higher and higher by the second, it was almost as if I didn’t know what was going to happen even though I watched this movie once, and it just reminds me why I think opera might be an underrated art form. In fact, this scene probably wouldn’t have worked if there was a different form of music. If this were a pop concert or jazz band or something, there would be a lot less intensity. The scene might still work and be effective, but it wouldn’t have that oomph that it got here.

In the end, “Mission: Impossible: Rogue Nation” is DEFINITELY the best the franchise has had to offer in all of its movies. Tom Cruise shines as Ethan Hunt, supporting cast members like Jeremy Renner, Alec Baldwin, Rebecca Ferguson, and Simon Pegg all do a great job as well. The direction and screenplay was probably what I’d want out of a summer blockbuster such as this, and speaking of that, Christopher McQuarrie, a screenwriter and the director behind this film, has his name on the credits of the next film, “Fallout,” which is set to come out not long after this post’s publication, once again in the director’s chair and as a screenwriter. Given the job he has done on this movie, it makes me extremely faithful in this upcoming installment. I’m going to give “Mission: Impossible: Rogue Nation” a 9/10. Thanks for reading this review! Be sure to stay tuned for my review of “Mission: Impossible: Fallout.” This completes my series of older Tom Cruise “Mission: Impossible” movie reviews, most of the movies have been good, one although has been a near-death experience. And I don’t know how long it’ll take me to get my “Fallout” review up and ready to go, but I’m making sure I can do it as soon as possible. As for other series’ of older movies I can review, I wanted to do a Jason Statham series since “The Meg” comes out August 10th, but I wanted to do one movie per week, and I’m not quite sure I actually have the time for that, so that’s cancelled. If I do come up with another series of older movie reviews, I’ll make an announcement in a future post, until then, stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, what are your thoughts on “Mission: Impossible: Rogue Nation?” Or, have you gotten a chance to see “Mission: Impossible: Fallout?” Tell me your thoughts on that! Also, if you want to check out my other “Mission: Impossible” reviews, links to those will be provided below! Check em out, follow me, enjoy your day, all that jazz! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE REVIEW: https://scenebefore.wordpress.com/2018/03/30/mission-impossible-1996-this-movie-review-will-self-destruct-in-five-seconds/

MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE II REVIEW: https://scenebefore.wordpress.com/2018/04/29/mission-impossible-ii-2000-impossible-to-enjoy/

MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE III REVIEW https://scenebefore.wordpress.com/2018/05/24/mission-impossible-iii-2006-the-young-and-the-fearless-spoilers/

MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE: GHOST PROTOCOL REVIEW https://scenebefore.wordpress.com/2018/06/18/mission-impossible-ghost-protocol-2011-your-movie-review-should-you-choose-to-accept-it/

Mission: Impossible: Ghost Protocol (2011): Your Movie Review, Should You Choose To Accept It

Posted on by Jack Drees

mv5bmty4mtuxmjq5ov5bml5banbnxkftztcwntuymzg5ng-_v1_sy1000_cr006751000_al_

Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to read the fourth post brought to you by the ultimate Jackoff of movie reviewers in his Tom Cruise “Mission: Impossible” review series. This fourth review, appropriately, is for the fourth chronological movie in the series, “Mission: Impossible: Ghost Protocol.” If the number four does not give you any sort of satisfaction, click away from this review, and avoid reading the same Jackoff’s review for “Sharknado 4: The Fourth Awakens.” Although if you have a fondness for the numbers 1, 2, and 3, be sure to click the links below to go to the previous installments to this particular review series. You will eventually find that this movie is directed by Brad Bird, and the fact that the Jackoff has worked on this review the same weekend that his latest film, “Incredibles 2,” hits theaters, is purely coincidental. As always, should you or any of your Force be caught or killed, the Movie Reviewing Moron will disavow any of your actions. This message will self-destruct in five seconds.

MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE REVIEW: https://scenebefore.wordpress.com/2018/03/30/mission-impossible-1996-this-movie-review-will-self-destruct-in-five-seconds/

MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE II REVIEW: https://scenebefore.wordpress.com/2018/04/29/mission-impossible-ii-2000-impossible-to-enjoy/

MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE III REVIEW: https://scenebefore.wordpress.com/2018/05/24/mission-impossible-iii-2006-the-young-and-the-fearless-spoilers/

“Mission: Impossible: Ghost Protocol” is directed by Brad Bird (The Incredibles, Iron Giant) and stars Tom Cruise (Risky Business, Top Gun), Jeremy Renner (The Hurt Locker, The Town), Simon Pegg (Shaun of the Dead, Star Trek), and Paula Patton (Deja Vu, Precious). This film is the fourth installment in the “Mission: Impossible” film franchise. After the Kremlin is bombed, Ethan Hunt is in trouble. So much trouble in fact, that he is charged with bombing it! Not long into this mess, IMF is shut down and Hunt along with his new team have to go rogue.

As of now, I’ve only watched “Ghost Protocol” once and that one time was specifically for this review. Going into it, I was somewhat excited. I love Brad Bird, he has done some of the best animations I’ve ever seen. Not to mention, that moment when Tom Cruise is on the skyscraper was something I was highly anticipating. Also, this movie was partially shot with IMAX cameras. Some of my favorite movies have been shot on that sort of camera and part of me wanted to see how the crew behind “Ghost Protocol” would utilize that sort of technology. Disappointingly however, I didn’t get to see that. Some movies like “The Dark Knight” if you have the Blu-ray would differentiate the aspect ratio to allow you see which scenes were shot in IMAX, this movie didn’t have that. It’s a minor inconvenience but it still somewhat disappoints me. On the bright side, the movie was enjoyable. I wouldn’t call it the best “Mission: Impossible” movie however.

Maybe this is all because I was watching this at home and not in a theater, maybe it’s because I started this movie near the 10PM mark, but there were just small moments that I thought could have been slightly improved in terms of pacing. And that complaint is somewhat sad because this is a fast-paced movie and it should really keep your eyes glued towards the screen. There were definitely moments where my eyes were glued towards the screen, there’s no doubt to be given about that. However, at random times, I didn’t exactly check out, nor did I lose interest, but I kind of wanted the movie to move along.

The rest of the movie although is mostly positive as far as my thoughts are concerned. I think it’s well shot, well lit, the music is awesome! Seriously, Michael Giacchino is back and his work here makes me continue to appreciate him. Giacchino also did the score for “Mission: Impossible III,” and the more I think about it, I think this “Mission: Impossible” score might be better. As far as characterization goes here, I feel that was executed better in other movies. Obviously it’s better than the second one, but not as good as the first one. I will say that on the bright side that this movie was slightly less cringeworthy than particular moments of “Mission: Impossible III.” Although on the dark side of things, what was cringeworthy in “Mission: Impossible III” probably made me care a tad more for Ethan Hunt than I did in “Ghost Protocol.” Another downside is that my favorite recurring character in the franchise aside from Ethan Hunt, Luther Stickell, is barely in this movie at all. If you don’t know who I’m talking about, he’s played by Ving Rhames and has been present in the franchise ever since the first movie. Maybe I like him a lot because he does the voiceovers for the Arby’s commercials, which are some of my favorite commercials on television, but seriously, he adds a lot of charisma to the film. He’s in the movie, but if you look at IMDb, it’ll state that Ving Rhames’s role was “uncredited.”

Seriously though, one of the most enormous admirations I have for this movie, much like all the others in the franchise is Tom Cruise’s performance and overall commitment to his role of playing the character Ethan Hunt. “Mission: Impossible: Ghost Protocol” just continues to reveal why I love Tom Cruise. I’m no Scientologist, but with that aside, Cruise is one hell of an actor. He may not have the greatest ability to turn himself into another character, but with this “Mission: Impossible” franchise, Tom Cruise has really gotten to a point with the character of Ethan Hunt where he’s just synonymous with the man behind the mask that makes you appreciate both the character and the actor just a bit more. Not to mention, a number of the stunts you see in the film are real and Cruise is just one actor I continue to associate at this point with what one would call “real stuntwork.”

Speaking of characters, one problem I have here that kind of stands out is that the antagonist of the film is pretty forgettable. It might actually be in the conversation for the worst antagonist as far as “Mission: Impossible” movies go. The antagonist is known as Kurt Hendricks and while the villain wasn’t exactly flimsy or stupid, he was just rather disposable. This is not the villain of the franchise that would invest you more than any other, and if you read my review for another Brad Bird film, specifically “Incredibles 2,” this upcoming comment will sound rather reminiscent. Hendricks is coming after a certain point of the franchise where we got one particular awesome villain. Sure, the one in the first film was fine. The second film? Eh, I don’t want to talk about that crap ever again! The third film however, has a villain that just means BUSINESS. There’s one scene on a plane where Hunt is just trying to talk with him, the antagonist is giving threatening answers, it’s a whole thing. There’s a saying that a movie is as good as its villain, as much as I disagree on that statement, because I ended up giving “Mission: Impossible III” a 6/10 and yet it turned out to have the best villain in the franchise, I would agree in the thought that this movie would ultimately be better had the villain been better.

I feel like there a couple of reasons why I’m not liking this movie as much as I kind of hoped I would have. Starting off with Layman’s terms, and I can’t believe I’m saying this… Brad Bird.

Let me just say that Brad Bird is one of my favorite filmmakers working today, but most of the work I adore from him are in the realm of animation as opposed to live-action. He did my favorite animation, “The Incredibles.” He did a worthy follow-up, “Incredibles 2.” He also did another great Pixar film, “Ratatouille.” Before all of that, he did “Iron Giant.” Not only did he direct all of those films, but he also wrote them. This is Brad Bird’s directorial vision off of somebody else’s script, which is a normal thing in filmmaking nowadays, however, I don’t think that’s Brad Bird’s style. “Mission: Impossible: Ghost Protocol” is one of the first times has done something that’s entirely live-action. The only other movie that I can come up with which he’s done that is 2015’s “Tomorrowland,” which to me, is just about as good as this movie. It’s watchable, but I don’t want to go back to it right away. Although interestingly, unlike this film, Brad Bird actually wrote “Tomorrowland.” My advice to Brad Bird is to focus on where his strengths seem to lie. To be specific, animation. Whether it’s “Incredibles 3” (PLEASE START THAT SCRIPT) or something completely new and original, I imagine Brad Bird would make all of our wings fly into the theater.

In the end, I didn’t hate “Mission: Impossible: Ghost Protocol,” I thought it had some creative ideas behind it, there were definitely stakes, and Brad Bird’s reason to shoot the film in IMAX is spot on. He believes that it would bring back a level of showmanship that theaters are starting to lose given how most movies nowadays are shown in multiplexes, where screens are less grand and everything from the vibe to theater itself is shrunken down. And part of me wishes that I actually went out and saw this in theaters. That would have been tricky though because I was twelve years old at the time this came out and the movie is PG-13. Not only that, but I wouldn’t have watched one other “Mission: Impossible” film prior to this had I gone out and witnessed “Ghost Protocol” in a theater. If I went out and got the theatrical experience that I’m quite sure this movie probably deserved, I would probably have enjoyed it just a little bit more. I feel I like I should watch this movie again at a different time of day where I don’t feel the need to have anything else to worry about, perhaps my opinion will change then. I’m gonna give “Mission: Impossible: Ghost Protocol” a 7/10. Once again, a fairly enjoyable movie with some neat qualities behind it, I wouldn’t mind watching it again. Although as of now if I were to watch it again, it would for two reasons. 1. To see if the movie improves over the first watch. 2. I would probably have no distractions surrounding me, allowing myself to further immerse into the movie. As far as watching this movie again goes, only the future can decide such a thing for me.

Thanks for reading this post! If you currently have Brad Bird fever right now, feel free to go to the link at the end of this post and read my “Incredibles 2” review! I feel like I went over a lot that the movie has to offer without exactly giving away spoilers. So if you feel like checking out that review, hit that link below!

Also, this “Mission: Impossible” review series is almost at its closing point. The next entry will be the last review I do in the “Mission: Impossible” franchise prior to the release of “Mission: Impossible: Fallout.” So for the first time ever on Scene Before, I’d like to say, please stay tuned for my review for “Mission: Impossible: Rogue Nation.” That review will be up sometime in July before the release of “Mission: Impossible: Fallout,” which comes out on the 27th. I’ll give you all a warning though regarding my review for “Fallout” if you follow my blog. I don’t know when exactly I’ll be reviewing it. Because on the day it comes out I have to leave early to catch a train for New York City, which is part of a trip that will take several hours. And I also return home that same day. Once I get home, I’m going up to Maine with my family for a couple nights. Trust me, I WANT to see this movie. I know there are some theaters in the area, I’ve done my research. However, based on what the majority intends to do, I’m not quite sure I’ll be able to reach a theater during my stay. I’m not gonna make any guarantees because I’m not exactly sure how this stay is going to go down, but let me just say that for now unless I’m invited to an early screening of “Mission: Impossible: Fallout,” if you are expecting an early review of this particular movie, don’t get your hopes up. Nevertheless, be sure to stay tuned for those reviews, which I do want to post on here at some point, and other great content! I want to know, did you see “Mission: Impossible: Ghost Protocol?” What did you think about it? Or, do you think I should watch the movie again to see if my thoughts change? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

INCREDIBLES 2 REVIEW: https://scenebefore.wordpress.com/2018/06/14/incredibles-2-2018-too-late-fourteen-years-too-late/

Mission: Impossible III (2006): The Young and the Fearless *SPOILERS*

Posted on by Jack Drees

Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to read the third review in some jackass’s series. The series can go by a number of names, might not even go by a name at all, but it makes up of all “Mission: Impossible” films starring Tom Cruise. If this mission is unacceptable to you, there are other “Mission: Impossible” films which the particular jackass has reviewed prior to this one. Those include the two films released earlier in the franchise, also starring Tom Cruise. As always, should you or any of your Force be caught or killed, the Movie Reviewing Moron will disavow any of your actions. This message will self-destruct in five seconds.

MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE REVIEW: https://scenebefore.wordpress.com/2018/03/30/mission-impossible-1996-this-movie-review-will-self-destruct-in-five-seconds/

MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE II REVIEW: https://scenebefore.wordpress.com/2018/04/29/mission-impossible-ii-2000-impossible-to-enjoy/

mv5bothhnta1yjityzk2ny00m2y1lwjlywutzdqyzdu0ymy5y2m5xkeyxkfqcgdeqxvynju0otq0oty-_v1_sy1000_cr006731000_al_

“Mission: Impossible III” is directed by JJ Abrams (Star Wars: The Force Awakens, Lost) and stars Tom Cruise (The Last Samurai, The Firm), Philip Seymour Hoffman (Almost Famous, The Big Lebowski), Ving Rhames (Pulp Fiction, Lilo & Stitch), Billy Crudup (Big Fish, Princess Mononoke), Michelle Monaghan (Kiss Kiss Bang Bang, The Bourne Supremacy), Jonathan Rhys Meyers (Match Point, Vanity Fair), Keri Russell (Felicity, Malibu Shores), Maggie Q (Nikita, Live Free or Die Hard), and Laurence Fishburne (The Matrix, Mystic River). This film is about Ethan Hunt, who is marrying Michelle Monaghan’s character of Julia, while at the same time, he has to face an arms dealer who threatens both him and the girl whom Hunt intends to marry.

This is my third installment in my Tom Cruise “Mission: Impossible” review series. I’ve already covered my thoughts on the first installment, which I thoroughly enjoyed and the more I think about it, the better it actually gets. The second movie, honestly was a fail and a half. It had some neat cinematography and some neat action with real cuts added to Cruise’s face during the final fight by the way. The “Mission: Impossible” movies, regardless of how good or bad they are when watching them, can become more interesting once you take a gander at the work put into them. This third installment is no exception. Tom Cruise once again does his own stunts, very pleasing to hear personally. This is also the first feature film directed by JJ Abrams, and its budget believe it or not is quite an expensive one for a first time feature film director coming in around $150 million. And the best part about this movie is that it is better than “Mission: Impossible II.” However, it does not mean that this film is perfect. I’ve actually watched the film in two sittings. I did so for two reasons. First, the Celtics-Cavs Eastern Conference Finals game was on. Second, I was kind of bored during the first half-hour at times. As I watched this movie, there were some times where I almost thought about checking out. I came close, but I survived. The story of the movie is nothing I raved about, in fact at times I almost got angry with it because it didn’t feel like an action movie like it’s supposed to be and felt more like a soap opera at times. And there’s your reason for my review title “The Young and the Fearless.” I may be cheating with this because I never watched the whole movie, but it kind of reminded me of “Jaws: The Revenge,” but nowhere near as excessive or terrible.

Say what you want about JJ Abrams. I know a friend who saw his “Star Trek” reboot, she’s a massive “Star Trek” fan and couldn’t be more dissatisfied with it. I am a huge “Star Wars” lover and I found his film, “The Force Awakens” to be one of the best “Star Wars” films ever made. Regardless of how pissed my friend is about “Star Trek” and how happy I am about “Star Wars,” I found “Mission: Impossible III” to kind of be in between those two in terms of the score. Ultimately, “Mission: Impossible III” is somewhere around the average range.

“Mission: Impossible: III” serves its purpose as an action movie where Tom Cruise kicks ass and takes names. Although with that comes some moments where you wonder how much longer the movie has left in terms of runtime and a relationship you kind of WANT to care about, but simultaneously when it comes to that part of the movie you can’t help not giving a single s*it. I buy into the chemistry between Cruise and Monaghan’s characters, but if I had to pick something that I believe deteriorates the film’s overall quality and my ability to fully enjoy it, that would be the #1 aspect of the film I’d choose.

In fact, when it comes to this movie, my favorite things about it have nothing to do with story and characters. I like the characters in the movie, but the real thing that keeps this movie going is the action, Michael Giacchino’s awesome score, and something I never usually point out, the lighting. The lighting in this movie is vivid and colorful at times and felt very suitable for a modern day action flick such as this one. His version of the “Mission: Impossible” theme is similar to Danny Elfman’s, who did the theme for the 1996 “Mission: Impossible” film. And honestly, it’s just as good, which is saying something because I really do admire Danny Elfman’s theme. I also gotta say that when it comes to choosing someone to score this movie, Michael Giacchino’s a great pick, because this is the same guy who did the score for 2004’s “The Incredibles,” and thinking about both intellectual properties, the ideal music I’d think of when it comes to both sound rather similar to each other. I mean, over the years, Giacchino has shown that he has more range in his music than the sounds and visions presented in “The Incredibles” and “Mission: Impossible: III,” but if I heard Giacchino was announced to do the score for this movie back in the 2000s and I had already seen “The Incredibles,” I’d be completely sold.

I know I already said a lot about Tom Cruise, but seriously, I gotta give credit where credit is undoubtedly due, the dude can act, he can do stunts, he can do action, just give him any movie script and he can automatically make the movie better. I will say though, as much as it is a treat to see the character of Ethan Hunt on screen, I wouldn’t say his reasons for having anything to do with the movie made him shine like a star. He, just like a lot of the characters in this film for the most part, feel somewhat wasted. There’s something about them, but I can’t put my finger on what exactly that something could be.

And while I will say that most of the characters feel like they don’t stand out, one character who not only stands out, but also stands tall is Philip Seymour Hoffman’s character of Owen Davian. I… LOVE. THIS GUY. If I weren’t into the technical aspects of movies or action and mainly focused around movie characters, Owen Davian, the film’s main villain, was spectacular in just about every sense of the word. His interactions with other characters, his threatening presence that you as a viewer are automatically subjected to during the film’s beginning, and Hoffman’s performance. Davian is probably my favorite character in the movie, and I gotta say, RIP Philip Seymour Hoffman, you knocked this character out of the park.

Last but not least, this is getting into spoiler territory, so you have been warned. But I want to talk about how Hoffman dies in this movie. He and Cruise are fighting each other and it’s kinda thrilling. They’re outside, and at one point, Cruise is lying on the road. Hoffman is on top of him. Then this truck comes in, it’s very fast, and SHABANG! It makes contact with Hoffman, Cruise is lying under it avoiding the possibility of getting ran over, then seconds later, you see a black shoe that is obviously Hoffman’s. F*cking brilliant. That death is perhaps the one of funniest I’ve seen in the movie, at least for a major villain. The only thing that would make the death funnier is if the truck actually happened to be an ice cream truck playing music, or when Hoffman got hit, you’d hear a Wilhelm scream.

In the end, “Mission: Impossible III” is definitely a much more watchable movie than the gosh-awful “Mission: Impossible II.” Tom Cruise is great, JJ Abrams had a great movie directorial debut, and I have to praise a lot of the technical aspects of the film as well. However, this movie to me does have its issues, and the issues absolutely deteriorate the score. As much as I appreciate the script being about character building, I just wanted more action. And somehow when I was going through the action, it just didn’t satisfy me. I felt like it was just going on for a tad too long in certain sequences. That’s just me though. So for now, I say for now, because this definitely might change in the future depending on what happens. I’m going to give “Mission: Impossible III” a 6/10. This is not a bad movie, very enjoyable indeed, and I’d probably give it another watch in the future, but if the movie adjusts a few things here and there, the score would definitely boost. Thanks for reading this review! Pretty soon I’ll have my review up for “Solo: A Star Wars Story,” I’m seeing that movie tonight and as I promised, I’ll have my review for it up tomorrow. As for other reviews, I still have to see “Deadpool 2,” I might go see a movie this weekend, maybe that’ll be the one, we’ll have to see. But summer’s comin’, which only means I have a lot more free time, and a lot more content that can definitely be produced. So with that in mind, stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, what are your thoughts on “Mission: Impossible III?” Or, as sick as a question as this may sound, I’m somewhat curious to know your opinions on this. What is the funniest death you’ve ever seen in a movie? Now don’t kill me for saying that, I have no motivation to kill any of you, so I don’t see why you should have a motivation for doing the same to me. If you all have a perfectly sane mindset, just jot your thoughts down in the comments section, I’d appreciate hearing them. Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Mission: Impossible II (2000): Impossible To Enjoy

Posted on by Jack Drees

Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to read through some jackass’s review of “Mission: Impossible II.” Make sure you read through everything if your enjoyment levels are high. If your enjoyment levels are not high, please seek some counseling or other reading material. This is one of five reviews being done in preparation for the same jackass’s review for “Mission: Impossible: Fallout.” As always, should you or any of your Force be caught or killed, the Movie Reviewing Moron will disavow any of your actions. This message will self-destruct in five seconds.

mv5bn2rkywvkzdqtntmxmi00nwq4lwe2odctnmqzowm2njqzyzdlxkeyxkfqcgdeqxvymjuzoty1ntc-_v1_

“Mission: Impossible II” is directed by John Woo (Hard Boiled, The Killer), stars Tom Cruise (Risky Business, Top Gun), Dougray Scott (Ever After: A Cinderella Story, Deep Impact), and Thandie Newton (Gridlock’d, Beloved) in the sequel to the 1996 mega-hit “Mission: Impossible.” The first movie took a popular TV show, brought it to the big screen with Tom Cruise as the star, and a lot of people ate it up. So naturally, a sequel was released four years later, and this time there’s a genetically modified disease that goes by the name of Chimera. The creator of this disease is killed and stolen by IMF agent Sean Ambrose. Now it is up to Ethan Hunt and Nyah Nirdoff-Hall to go undercover and find out whatever they can about the disease. It’s not an easy task, but if the task is completed, the disease can eventually be brought down.

This movie is the sequel to the highly successful “Mission: Impossible” released in 1996. During its theatrical run it made a final box office total of over $457 million worldwide. This final result made it the third highest-grossing film of the year, just below “Twister,” sitting at #2, and “Independence Day,” taking the cake at the #1 spot. “Mission: Impossible” also made more than any motion picture release from Disney that year, which if your film is doing that nowadays, it says something. Four Disney films released that year were in the worldwide box office’s top 10 by the way. The Disney releases included “The Rock,” “The Hunchback of Notre Dame,” live-action “101 Dalmatians,” and “Ransom.” Now it’s 2000, and “Mission: Impossible II” is on the horizon. Once it came out, guess what happened? It made more than the original! It made a worldwide total of over $546 million. According to Wikipedia, this film’s reviews were “mixed to positive.” Me personally, I felt like I was getting cavities filled on all my teeth at once, so I really did not enjoy what I saw. I did a couple things related to this review before I saw the movie (mainly some stuff that wouldn’t require me to watch the movie), but once I got down to the nitty-gritty, I kind of forgot what I just witnessed on screen. It’s kinda like a dream, ya know. Unless the dream is truly significant depending on what the dream is, not to mention when, and maybe where it happens, or if you keep track of your dreams in a journal, you won’t remember anything about it. I could just say that this is a fun action movie, and at times it is, but a movie like “Kingsman: The Golden Circle” was a fun action movie. Not to mention, it was also a more memorable and admirable sequel than this. This kind of feels like a fun movie, but also made because the studio likes money.

Tom Cruise is the star of this movie as Ethan Hunt, and yes, he is fun to watch without any doubt whatsoever. But sadly, he might be one of the only good things you remember about this movie. Seeing Cruise in various action sequences is a delight, but when it comes to him as a character, talking to other people, that’s when the movie’s weaknesses start to show.

And I feel like this is why the movie falls flat on its face as an overall product, Cruise steals the show as an action star, and the scenes where action is happening sometimes stand out positively like a t-rex in a museum. But when it comes to any sort of moment that needs to trigger with the audience’s thoughts, emotions, anything like that, the movie just doesn’t know what to do. There’s some great direction, some great cinematography, and if you find out some what happens behind the scenes when it comes to the action sequences, the movie might just get better. If you’re coming into this movie, expecting some great character moments, times where you can root for everybody on screen, scenes where there are stakes, that’s not going to happen, at least that’s not what I felt happened.

One of the worst parts of the movie is the romance between Ethan Hunt and another character who goes by the name of Nyah Nirdoff-Hall. I don’t own this movie on DVD, my only source of watching this movie is a Blu-ray disc which is part of a 4 movie “Mission: Impossible” collection, and on the case I have dedicated to said collection, it doesn’t give a single full description for one of the movies. But according to the DVD, it describes the character of Nyah Nirdoff-Hall as “beautiful.” Sadly, that’s the only thing they got right about her. Other than her beauty, nothing else really stood out about her. I kind of bought her as a spy, but there were times I didn’t care about her, I didn’t buy the romance between her and Ethan. That side of the story improved a bit towards the climax, but during the beginning it sucked. It felt really forced, and it almost reminded me of Anakin and Padme in “Star Wars Episode II.” It’s two people who are working together, and somehow they force themselves into a romance because, well, apparently there’s nothing better that can be put in the script! If you had to one day ask me what Nyah was like, I’d either answer to you, “What are you talking about?”, “Who is this?”, or “A Bond Girl.”

You know how in all the “James Bond” stories they have a girl in there that’s basically exclusive to that story? Well, that’s what Nyah feels like to me. And as I do research on this movie, I feel like I like her less. Because this movie actually made a chase scene which was basically inspired by a race featured in “Goldeneye” between Bond and Xenia Onatopp. I can’t talk too much about it considering how I haven’t watched “Goldeneye,” but on IMDb’s trivia page dedicated to “Mission: Impossible II,” it suggests what I just said. It just feels like the crew behind this movie didn’t have any idea how they can define Nyah through an original thought. They just said, “Hey! A lot of people like James Bond, let’s put some of its s*it into our movie!” I’m not saying that “Mission: Impossible” and “Bond” aren’t similar in ways, but I am saying that if you aren’t careful, you can become a ripoff.

I could talk about the villain. But you know what? He’s forgettable. So let’s move on. Enough said.

As suggested, the action in this film is great at times, but then there are times when it just gets–um–yeah I don’t give a f*ck about my life anymore, this movie is s*it! The action just gets so silly and stupid that it’s hilarious!

There comes a point in the movie, that Ethan Hunt and Sean Ambrose are on motorcycles. You can BARELY tell who is who. I was almost even questioning which person I was looking at during certain moments of the film! It was kind of like “The Girl on the Train!” You ever seen that movie? I know, f*cking bats*it crazy! I can let that complaint slide, because it’s more on the nitpicky side, but I don’t know if I should be complaining more about that, or about what I’m going to explain to y’all. Although I will say, part of me… is doing cartwheels of excitement over this! So there’s a point where both bikers stop, they’re looking at each other on their vehicles, and after preparing their motors, they charge forth! Each operator hopes they can annihilate their opponent, both do a wheelie, when all of sudden, they jump off their bikes, making contact with each other, getting violent as they fall off a cliff, all the while both bikes explode, as both beings land on the sand, and they get back up in little to no time whatsoever!

That scene… may have been worth the watch. It’s one of the STUPIDEST things ever, but at the same time, one of the FUNNIEST things ever. But yeah, I gotta say it, f*ck this movie!

In the end, “Mission: Impossible II” was impossible to like. There were several scenes of boredom that made me avoid enjoying myself. Some of the stuff behind the scenes may improve the movie a little bit, but when it comes to the script, that’s the Achilles Heel. “Mission: Impossible II” honestly just feels like a studio film. Created solely just to make money. Maybe some passion was put into it, but based on what was presented to me, I wasn’t able to see any of that passion. This movie took out elements of what made the prior one enjoyable, such as the layers behind it, the characterization, etc, and just stuck to action. Stupid. I’m gonna give “Mission: Impossible II” a 3/10. I enjoy action movies, and I also enjoy Tom Cruise, but this movie felt like an impossible mission to get through. I have heard though that this movie is rather divisive so I’m curious to know some thoughts from the people who actually enjoyed the movie.

Thanks for reading this review! Since next month is May, that means I’ll have another “Mission: Impossible” review for you all to read, this time I’ll be doing “Mission: Impossible III,” directed by JJ Abrams, who according to one of my best friends, “ruined ‘Star Trek'” and according to another group of people I know, “saved ‘Star Wars’.” So I’m interested to see where Abrams is going with this movie. Speaking of “Mission: Impossible,” if you want to read my review for the first Tom Cruise “Mission: Impossible” film, the link to that is down at the end of this post.

Also if you are bored and want to read something that I promise you won’t have spoilers that will ruin the entire meaning of your life, check out my review for “Avengers: Infinity War.” Click the red box below if you want to read it. If you’re reading this and this is the last post I made, you’ll only see one red box and that’s the one you should click on. If you’re reading this and this is not the last post I made, click the red box on the bottom left. Stay tuned for more great content, should you choose to accept it! I want to know, did you see “Mission: Impossible II?” What did you think about it? Where do you personally stand on this movie’s divide? Or, do you think I’m too hard on Nyah Nirdoff-Hall? I mean, she is gorgeous and the movie certainly gets that notion right, but I seriously want to know your thoughts! Leave a comment below, and I just hope I enjoy “Mission: Impossible III” more than I enjoyed “Mission: Impossible II.” Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE REVIEW: https://scenebefore.wordpress.com/2018/03/30/mission-impossible-1996-this-movie-review-will-self-destruct-in-five-seconds/

Mission: Impossible (1996): This Movie Review Will Self-Destruct In Five Seconds

Posted on by Jack Drees

Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to read through the first of the “Mission: Impossible” reviews from Scene Before. More are on the way, such as “Mission: Impossible 2,” a movie whose review shall be published a month after this one. As always, should you or any of your Force be caught or killed, the Movie Reviewing Moron will disavow any of your actions. This message will self-destruct in five seconds.

mv5bmtc3nji2mju0nl5bml5banbnxkftztgwndk3odyxmte-_v1_sy1000_cr006751000_al_

“Mission: Impossible” is directed by Brian De Palma (The Untouchables, Dressed to Kill) and stars Tom Cruise (Top Gun, Risky Business) as an American agent who goes by the name Ethan Hunt. In this movie which is inspired by the television series of the same name, Hunt must find out who framed him for murder of the entire Impossible Missions Force.

This is the first movie of the ongoing Tom Cruise “Mission: Impossible” series, and I imagine there’s a good number of people out there like myself who has seen this movie or another movie in the series and couldn’t compare it to the original TV series. As far as which incarnation is better, I can’t say, but I can say that this movie is super thrilling! Let’s dive into it a bit deeper.

The movie starts off with the crew on a mission. One character, Jack, played by Emilio Estevez (Young Guns, Repo Man), is watching the surveillance, doing his job, and we see one guy in a white tank top being interrogated. The guy asking all the questions is Tom Cruise who eventually reveals his true self, Ethan Hunt by taking his snobby, Spanish-looking Agent Smith mask off. We see Tom Cruise going over to Claire, played by Emmanuelle Béart (Nelly & Monsieur Arnaud, 8 Women), injecting a needle, then we hear Claire, all bloodied up, asking Ethan, “Did we get it?” Ethan responds, “We got it.” Great exchange, great timing, and a great transition to the title sequence featuring the endlessly famous “Mission: Impossible” theme song. Just… perfect. That’s all I gotta say. The intro doesn’t really show all too much except for major characters, but the transition from the intro to the main events of the movie probably couldn’t have been done better.

The “Mission: Impossible” theme used for this movie by the way, was composed by none other than Danny Elfman, and if you have known me, I love Danny Elfman. I will say that sometimes his scores are somewhat underwhelming and don’t deliver the goods that they should (Avengers: Age of Ultron, Justice League), but when his scores are well done from my personal view, they stand out like Marilyn Monroe in a beauty pageant. Elfman from my personal view did a fine job on the movie’s score and this is definitely one of his better ones. Although one interesting thing about it is that it wasn’t supposed to be his.

Alan Silvestri, another terrific composer who has new work coming out in films such as “Ready Player One,” “Avengers: Infinity War,” and “The Women of Marwen,” was originally supposed to do the score, but his was ultimately rejected. That’s not to say that Danny Elfman made a bad score, I think it is very well done. But I listened to Alan Silvestri’s “Mission: Impossible” theme, and I think it is an interesting rival to Elfman’s. For how this movie turned out, I gotta say that Elfman’s is a bit more appropriate for something like this, but Silvestri’s is just killer. The reason why Elfman’s theme works for this movie is because the movie had an intro that made it feel like we were watching TV, and his song was short and effective. Silvestri’s felt really grand and epic at times, especially with the drums. I’ve been looking around online and I don’t think there’s been a single announcement as to who will officially score “Mission: Impossible: Fallout.” Silvestri’s got some stuff up his sleeve as we speak, but I would love to see him come back and score this upcoming movie with the use of his own theme that would have been inserted back in 1996 if no conflict got in the way. By the way, be sure to let me know which of the two “Mission: Impossible” themes you prefer: Elfman’s or Silvestri’s.

Funny thing about these themes is, I gave a compliment to the Elfman one for feeling like a TV show and that is something I usually DON’T want in my movies. The rest of the movie feels like a film, but with this TV-like theme, I can’t help but praise it.

Now I talked a little bit about Tom Cruise here, but I can’t really say I’ve dived into too much depth about him. Tom Cruise’s character of Ethan Hunt has defined the movie and Cruise probably had no idea how much this character would make a newfound path in his acting career. Cruise delivers a fine performance as Hunt in this movie. It’s believable, you feel his pain, you buy him as this agent and his performance maintains a fine line between fun and serious which totally worked for the movie. A couple of other standout characters include Luther, played by Ving Rhames (Pulp Fiction, ER) and Jim Phelps, played by Jon Voight.

Fun fact about Jon Voight by the way, he would have never been in this movie if it weren’t for one thing. Believe it or not, Voight wasn’t the goto as for who would be cast as this character. If you watch the original show and its revival (where he appears as only original cast member to return), you’d know that the character of Phelps is played by none other than Peter Graves and there was a point where he found out about some actions that his character did in the movie. Once he found out about them, he didn’t want to be a part of the project.

Now let’s get to the best part of the movie, and it is probably the part that you all know about if you’ve seen the film, or maybe even if you haven’t seen it, and it’s the wire sequence. Like, holy crap! This is my second time watching this movie, and my jaw literally dropped! Tom’s performance in here is pristine! He’s silent, he’s mentally terrified, but also somewhat determined. The suspense levels during this scene just happens to be unbelievable! It has the environment, if you can call it that, of a library, but it also has the feel of a boxing match! I talked about the music in this movie and how well done it was, but there’s barely any music during this sequence and the movie as a whole is all the better for it! Just… wow! My favorite Tom Cruise movie is “Risky Business,” but if you ask me which scene from a Tom Cruise movie might be the best, this one, I cannot guarantee is my favorite, but it’s certainly a contender, I need to probably make a conclusive list before I decide whether or not it is my favorite.

Also, it’s not just Tom Cruise who has the spotlight here in this scene, some of it is given to a minor character by the name of William Donloe, played by Rolf Saxon (Saving Private Ryan, Woman in Gold). In this scene, he headed to the secure area where Cruise is downloading files, but the fact that he pretty much had a bad meal allows Cruise, conveniently, to carry on the mission with slightly less worries.

In the end, “Mission: Impossible” the second time around actually turned out to be better than the first time. I didn’t hate it the first time, but I’m just saying. “Mission: Impossible” is certainly a fun movie, but at the same time, somewhat dramatic. The tone works overall. On one hand you have a story where the main character has to deal with his crew dying, and on the other hand, you have a story where that same character fights someone on a train with a wind machine going at 140 miles per hour so his face gets distorted, a speed so fast that Tom Cruise himself approved of it because wind at that speed could possibly knock him off the train. The more I find out about this movie and the more I think about it, the more interesting it gets. I’m gonna give “Mission: Impossible” an 8/10. This in my mind, is currently a low 8 on a scale of 1-10, but this could increase overtime. It would probably be a 7 though if less passion were injected and less standout moments and characters were inserted into the final product. I’m honestly willing to bet that next time I’ll watch it, I’ll like it even more. And speaking of products…

*SPONSORSHIP ALERT* (although I’m not getting paid)

Call kids what you may. You can call them what I just said, or you can call them children, offspring, products of two parents, etcetera. You might as well say these products are newly realized each and every day. And one day, the realization will arrive to a male and a female. For example, a gal named Genevieve, and a guy named Paul, will achieve that realization in a number of months. But before that, they had to suffer through the seemingly neverending process, which might as well now be a neverending story, of something that their child will ultimately thank them for. Making them. This is all explained… in “What the IVF?!”

“What the IVF?” is a relatively new series and channel on YouTube, where Genevieve and Paul document their time trying to have a baby. To them, the journey is hard, but they “keep effing trying” as they face tiny victories, but also enormous losses. Get ready for the drama between the two as they encounter problematic situations in sex, testing, wasting money on everything that’s needed for impregnation, and needles so sharp they might as well kill you! Their latest episode listed above is the fourth episode in the series and it is a deep dive on trying to conceive! You see the couple going to Dollar Tree and buying pregnancy tests, Genevieve utilizing an app that might as well be a diary she never wanted, and a shoutout to the drink Surge! By the way, this is a late announcement, but if you haven’t heard, they actually brought the drink back! Just a fun fact because I’m not sure if everyone is aware! To catch up on the latest episodes regarding Genevieve and Paul’s adventure to conception, click the link below to their YouTube channel, be sure to subscribe, like, click the bell, whatever it takes to make them happy without buying something for their baby. Also, be sure to check out their Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and their website! All the links are down below, and if check all of this stuff out, be sure to let them know that Jack Drees sent you over!

WTIVF? WEBSITE: http://www.whattheivf.com/

WTIVF? YOUTUBE: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCILXSidkzWgwrQ5Oa1py78w/featured?disable_polymer=1

WTIVF? TWITTER: https://twitter.com/WTivF

WTIVF? INSTAGRAM: https://www.instagram.com/wtivf/

WTIVF? FACEBOOK: https://www.facebook.com/What-The-IVF-288868031634125/

Thanks for reading this review! April is on the way! “Ready Player One” is out! I’m probably gonna catch it in 70mm! Quite a time to be alive! Not only that, but April will also be the month where I continue this series of reviews and focus on “Mission: Impossible II!” Stay tuned for that, and also I want to let everyone know that I made a part 2 to a post I made back in November which got a decent amount of hits, “What the Heck Is Up with Justice League?” In this new post, I talk about the movie’s box office total, how it is shockingly low for the kind of movie it is, and I even give a sense of wonder as to where the Detective Comics Extended Universe could be going from here. The link to that is down below, be sure to check it out, and be sure to follow me here on WordPress so you can stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, did you see the 1996 “Mission: Impossible?” Let me know your thoughts if you did! Do you think the movies or the TV shows are superior? I actually kinda really want to know since I never watched the show on TV. Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

WHAT THE HECK IS UP WITH JUSTICE LEAGUE (2017)? *PART 2*: https://scenebefore.wordpress.com/2018/03/24/what-the-heck-is-up-with-justice-league-2017-part-2/

The Secret To 3D Movies You May Have Never Known (Post-Conversion)

Posted on by Jack Drees

375px-Glasses_for_RealD_Cinema-fs_PNr°0272

Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! I have a serious question. Is 3D still relevant? Don’t get me wrong, at times it can add a bit to several movie experiences. I remember going to see all three “Hobbit” films in IMAX 3D, all of them were epic and thrilling. Although nowadays 3D has become at times this thing you have to accept when going to see a film at the theater.

3D in a way is like prescription pills. There are a number of cases where you never really asked to take them for your personal amusement, but since you want to get on with your life, you just move along. When I go to the movies, I don’t traditionally care what show I get, but if I were making every executive decision, I’d probably choose to see a film in 2D. If the movie’s in IMAX and 3D’s the only option, chances are I’d go for that. Although when it comes to 3D, it’s something I never wanted, but it has always been around. It was very popular at the at the end of the 2000s leading into 2010. That’s because James Cameron’s “Avatar” was released all over and praised for the theatrical experience when watched in 3D. However since then, audiences have been thinking to themselves that 3D movies are becoming more and more bland. While there are those people who think 3D is awesome and think it’s one of the greatest things in cinematic history, 3D has increasingly resembled a fad as opposed to a game-changer.

One question some of you may have until looking at this post is this: How does the 3D come to be? It varies from movie to movie, but in most circumstances nowadays it’s fake. How is this? Unlike a number of films shot on cameras and rigs meant for 3D, most movies are currently shot on 2D cameras. It doesn’t even matter if the movie’s shot on film or digital, it’s just shot in 2D. Nowadays it is very rare to find a film coming out which is shot in actual 3D. This current year is 2018, let’s take a look at the list of movies that have been revealed to have been shot in actual 3D.

  • Mission: Impossible: Fallout
  • 2.0

There you go! That’s the whole list! Note that there are no animated films since those are made on computers.  Now let’s take a look at the rest of the 3D films labeled to have 2018 releases. Note once again that there are no animated movies.

  • Maze Runner: The Death Cure
  • Black Panther
  • A Wrinkle in Time
  • Pacific Rim: Uprising
  • Tomb Raider
  • Ready Player One
  • Rampage
  • Avengers: Infinity War
  • Solo: A Star Wars Story
  • Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom
  • Ant-Man and the Wasp
  • Alita: Battle Angel
  • Alpha

There are more films coming out in 2018 to be released in 3D. However, I can’t confirm or deny whether they’re real or fake. These results just goes to show when you look at the movies playing and you notice that there’s something playing in 3D, chances are that movie isn’t actually 3D.

Post-converted 3D is something that’s not really talked about when it comes to older movies nowadays such as those that were in 3D during the fifties, but it got some severe attention in 2010. In 1981, a movie known as “Clash of the Titans” was released to the public. The movie provided a fun family adventure for an hour and fifty-eight minutes and received a number of positive verdicts. Since studios love remaking everything, it’s no surprise that “Clash of the Titans” was one of those movies that got the remake treatment. And according to many people, it’s a f*ck-up on S*itshow Valley. Release the Kraken? More like Release the Crapen! Aside from the eye-covering CGI, the one-dimensional characters, and how people see it in comparison to the original film and mythology, this film was despised by critics and audiences for its use of 3D. Perhaps even more hilarious is a marketing tagline used by this movie. The tagline being, “Titans Will Clash.” No. F*cking. S*it. It’s like if “The Emoji Movie” had a tagline that said “This movie will suck, and you’ll hate your life while watching it.” THANKS, CAPTAIN OBVIOUS!

As for the movie’s use of 3D, the film was originally shot on 2D film cameras, and the director of the film, Louis Leterrier, went to the studio early on asking about a 3D conversion. However, this process was new and expensive. When “Avatar” was released, Leterrier was pressured to do a 3D post-conversion. He gave into it after seeing what he thought was a rather convincing View-D conversion process. The man even stated that it was essential for audiences to view the movie in 3D as an enhancement as opposed to a gimmick regarding the overall experience. Let me just tell you right now, the audience didn’t view it as an enhancement, they didn’t even view it as a gimmick, they viewed it… as crap. Three years after the film’s release to the public, Leterrier came out and said this about the 3D:

“It was famously rushed and famously horrible. It was absolutely horrible, the 3D. Nothing was working, it was just a gimmick to steal money from the audience. I’m a good boy and I rolled with the punches and everything, but it’s not my movie.”

And this just goes to show that studios can sometimes get in the way of movies. This isn’t the first time this has happened. Just look at films such as “Spider-Man 3,” “Risky Business,” and “Blade Runner.” Studios might force directors to do something concerning their movie that they ultimately don’t want to do. In this case, the studio wanted a 3D conversion. Had the movie just been in 2D, everyone would have probably been a little more happy. They’d still get a bad movie, but they’d have one less terrible aspect related to it. In fact, part of me thinks that Warner Brothers would end up making just a tad more money. After all, so many people were complaining about the 3D, so some folks would avoid 3D showings like the plague.

This isn’t to say that all post-converted 3D sucks. Some of the most highly appreciated 3D experiences are post-converted. After all, it is the norm now, so there has to be a gem somewhere. I went to see “Jurassic World” and the 3D was probably one of the best parts of the IMAX experience I was given. It was dinosaur-sized fun! “Mad Max: Fury Road” was also an experience worth the extra number of bucks, seeing all of the practicality and CGI come together at times really made you feel like your face was on fire or cars were running you over. One of the best experiences of all, is “Gravity.” I saw “Gravity” the weekend it came out in IMAX 3D, and it was f*cking worth it. The movie itself doesn’t have much replay value, but between the sound editing, sound mixing, score, cinematography, CGI, everything came together, and there were certain scenes where I truly felt like I was in space. Even better, trying my absolute hardest to survive in space. Just goes to show, even fake stuff can be real!

If anything, the improvement of post-production 3D is most likely due to commitment, and advances in technology. When it comes to “Gravity,” CG Effects Supervisor Alexis Wajsbrot has this to say:

“It was rendered in stereo, then we post-converted the faces with a very accurate track. It was a very precise rendition. That’s why the stereo works so well because it was thought about a long time before the movie was made.”

As suggested, the way “Gravity” was rendered gave it a 3D effect. The rest was work. Stereoscopic 3D is a very useful process if you’re shooting in 2D instead of 3D, if you’re maybe trying to save some cash and back pain, or if you are just looking for a way to cash in on a film even though you’re doing it in an effective manner. It won’t be real 3D, but it may give your brain the thought that you’re actually looking at 3D. While I do prefer authenticity, technology and commitment can help in making a proper product.

…Although in reality I prefer seeing movies in 2D.

Thanks for reading this post! I actually believe it or not had trouble doing this post, because I was working on another post I thought of last week, it was stuck in my head like how much I love pizza, the brand of the TV in my room, and the fact that with TurboTax, at least your taxes are free. Seriously though, thanks for reading! Tomorrow a new trailer for “Solo: A Star Wars Story” is arriving and we also got some trailers coming out tonight during the Super Bowl, trailers like “Mission: Impossible: Fallout,” “Skyscraper,” and “Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom.” I might review one of those trailers, and as far as newer movies go, I can confirm that at some point soon I’m going to see “The 15:17 To Paris.” That movie’s coming out February 9th, so I’ll be seeing that not long from now. Also, if you want more exciting content to take a gander at, I’ll have links down below to my “Maze Runner” reviews. Please check those out, I enjoyed a couple of those movies, and I have my thoughts summed up, whether they are positive or negative. Stay tuned for more great content! In 2D. I want to know, what is the best experience you had watching a movie in 3D? Yes, I’ll even count IMAX documentaries or something along those lines. Doesn’t even matter if the 3D’s real or not. Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

“THE MAZE RUNNER” REVIEW: https://scenebefore.wordpress.com/2018/01/18/the-maze-runner-2014-the-continuation-of-teen-angst-starring-dylan-obrien/

“MAZE RUNNER: THE SCORCH TRIALS” REVIEW: https://scenebefore.wordpress.com/2018/01/25/maze-runner-the-scorch-trials-the-continuation-of-teen-angst-starring-dylan-obrien-part-2-to-be-concluded-in-almost-2-5-years-also-this-is-wckd-boring/

“MAZE RUNNER: THE DEATH CURE” REVIEW: https://scenebefore.wordpress.com/2018/01/28/maze-runner-the-death-cure-2018-the-continuation-of-teen-angst-starring-dylan-obrien-part-3-to-be-rebooted-once-hollywood-runs-out-of-young-adult-dystopian-books-to-base-movies-on-still-bett/