“A House of Dynamite” is directed by Kathryn Bigelow (Point Break, The Hurt Locker) and stars Idris Elba (The Suicide Squad, Pacific Rim), Rebecca Ferguson (Dune, Reminiscence), Gabriel Basso (Hillbilly Elegy, The Night Agent), Jared Harris (Mad Men, Chernobyl), and Tracy Letts (Homeland, Lady Bird). This film showcases different people’s perspectives as the U.S. tries to respond to an intercontinental ballistic missile.
If you know me in person, you know that when I hear the term “Netflix movie,” I automatically go, “NEXT!” When you are a studio dedicated to hiring some of the biggest stars and putting them in a paint by numbers or completely forgettable story like “Red Notice” or “The Gray Man,” I start to think your track record needs improvement. That said, Netflix can occasionally deliver a diamond in the rough. Like many of its competitors, Netflix will usually spend the end of the year delivering their prestige films. These are movies that are likely to get some awards contention like “The Irishman” or “The Power of the Dog.” This year, one of Netflix’s prestige films happens to be “A House of Dynamite,” directed by the first woman to win an Academy Award for Best Director, Kathryn Bigelow. Like some of her other movies, this one involves a serious subject matter and in some cases, might make for a tough watch.
Upon my first impression, “A House of Dynamite” is exactly what I just said. It is one of those films that as soon as I finished watching it, I thought to myself, I need to go home and find something comfortable to put on the television. As soon as the movie was over, I left the theater, got in my car, got takeout, went home, turned on my TV, as well as my 4K Blu-ray player, and popped in “A Bug’s Life.” I sometimes talk about certain films going for the emotions, but this one goes for the emotions in a different way. It goes for the emotions not so much to make you sad, but more so to make you hopeless on top of being sad.
“A House of Dynamite” is this year’s “Oppenheimer.” It is not as good as “Oppenheimer,” but the two are close in terms of quality. “A House of Dynamite” is presented in such a surprisingly brisk pace. I am gobsmacked on how intriguing they ended up making certain segments of this movie. On paper, the movie sounds like pure cinema, but that may depend on how much detail that paper contains. If I told you that this movie was about a bunch of people trying to deal with an intercontinental ballistic missile that is on its way to the continental United States, you might be sold. The concept sold me. But I was not expecting it to be done in the way the filmmakers’ decided to go about it.
The movie is a case of more talk than action. We never see the missile. The closest we get to seeing the missile is through detection screens indicating where exactly in the air it happens to be.
The film also seems to take a page from “Top Gun: Maverick,” because if you remember that film, it never names the enemy. I think this is actually a somewhat wise move, and the way the movie went about it is surprisingly effective.
If I had to look ahead months from now, I cannot see “A House of Dynamite” winning Best Picture at the Oscars. I can see it being nominated. However, winning seems to be off the table. This is not necessarily because it is a Netflix movie, which, like it or not, can come as a turnoff when your awards body is mostly dedicated to movies in theaters. The main reason why I cannot see this film winning is because if I had to name the film’s most significant imperfection, it would be that the characters do not appear to take center stage. The film appears to be more plot-driven than character-driven.
There is an extensive list of characters in the movie, but I could not tell you any of their names. In fact, in the case of Idris Elba, whose name appears first on the cast, he is credited as “POTUS.” Not to digress, I never imagined Elba playing the President of the United States, but I think on paper it is a great pick. In execution, he plays his part well. “A House of Dynamite” does not really have a central character, but the President is arguably the core of the movie.
The film, like many great stories, is presented in three acts, but it presents its acts somewhat similarly to “The Last Duel,” which shows the same story three times from alternative perspectives. The perspectives are packed with differences, but they all take place around the same time and involve the same incident.
Having seen the film, I would love to know how this movie was written. I want to know which perspective Noah Oppenheim started with, how long it took for him to mesh everything together, and how long it took for him to decide on the order of the three acts. For all I know, it could be a boring backstory, but it does not change the fact that this is one of the most unique screenplays of the year. As for the order of the acts that was chosen, I thought it was perfect. Each act seems to hint at things that become more relevant later, and the hints enhanced the acts that followed as they happened. If this film follows in the footsteps of other Netflix projects like “Roma” or “Marriage Story,” I would love to see a Criterion Collection physical copy of the film be brought to market, because I would kill to see a bonus feature on the process that went into putting the screenplay together.
I am curious to know how people will perceive the ending, because without spoilers, let’s just say that the film does not end in a way that I think a lot of people would expect. I do not outright hate how this film ends, but I cannot say it was satisfying either. It almost makes the film feel incomplete. Once again, the screenplay has such a unique layout, therefore the ending is also fittingly unique. But it does not change the fact that it is lacking an impact. It feels like the movie had more to tell but decided to forget about whatever was ahead. Does the ending take away from what made the rest of the movie good? Not really. Sure, the film does not stick the landing once it concludes, but by no means does it split its head open.
In the end, “A House of Dynamite” is one of the most thrilling pictures of 2025. Pardon my overuse of Christopher Nolan film comparisons, but the film somewhat reminds me of “Dunkirk.” This is due to the recently mentioned imperfection of the movie not exactly having a main character. Instead, the closest thing to it would be the main event itself. And it most certainly helps that the main event is quite exciting. The film overall is intense and nail-biting. And this is without getting to see the nuclear missile itself! Is this is Kathryn Bigelow’s best movie? No. I have such a soft spot for “Point Break.” Although if you are looking for another banger on her resume, look no further than “A House of Dynamite.” I am going to give “A House of Dynamite” an 8/10.
“A House of Dynamite” is now available on Netflix for all subscribers.
Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “The Smashing Machine!” Stay tuned! Also, look forward to my thoughts on “Shelby Oaks,” “Frankenstein,” “Good Fortune,” and “The Running Man.” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “A House of Dynamite?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite Kathryn Bigelow movie? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“Dune Part Two” is directed by Denis Villeneuve (Blade Runner 2049, Arrival) and stars Timothée Chalamet (Wonka, Interstellar), Zendaya (Spider-Man: Homecoming, The Greatest Showman), Rebecca Ferguson (Reminiscence, Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation), Josh Brolin (The Goonies, Avengers: Infinity War), Austin Butler (Elvis, Once Upon a Time in Hollywood), Florence Pugh (Black Widow, Don’t Worry Darling), Dave Bautista (Guardians of the Galaxy, Blade Runner 2049), Christopher Walken (Catch Me if You Can, The Deer Hunter), Léa Seydoux (Crimes of the Future, Spectre), Souheila Yacoub (Making of, Climax), Stellan Skarsgård (Mamma Mia!, Thor), Charlotte Rampling (Restless, 45 Years), and Javier Bardem (Being the Ricardos, No Country for Old Men). This film is a sequel to the 2021 science-fiction epic based on the novel by Frank Herbert. It follows Paul Atriedes as he journeys with the Fremen while waging war against House Harkonnen.
It is crazy to think how far we are in the 2020s. The decade is flying by. It kind of feels like yesterday when I saw “Dune” for the first time in theaters. By now, I have seen it a few times in theaters, once on 4K Blu-ray, and a couple times on TNT. Safe to say, this film has taken up a significant part of my screentime through the past two and a half years. And like many people, I happened to dig it. I do not think it is by any means the greatest science fiction film ever. If anything, the pacing could have been improved. The color palette could have been tinkered just a tad in select scenes. The film feels far less eventful in its third act than it does in the first two, which felt a bit odd but I was engaged nevertheless. Overall, I thought the first “Dune” was fantastic. It even made my top 10 best movies of 2021 and won Best Picture at the 4th Annual Jack Awards. It is a really good movie and it is deserving of its praise, even if there are science fiction films I would rather watch first.
In fact, of Denis Villeneuve’s filmography, I think it is one of his inferior outings. I liked “Prisoners” better. I liked “Arrival” better. I liked “Blade Runner 2049” better. He did those previous two movies back to back and both were equally sensational. Even with the slightly weaker “Dune” coming afterwards, I will not deny that Denis Villeneuve is not only on a hot streak, but is building a case to become the greatest science fiction director ever. As far as my excitement for “Dune Part Two” goes, it was astronomical. All the trailers were great. The footage looked beautiful. And knowing that the film was shot in IMAX’s specialized aspect ratio was a bonus. I thought the film was made for the theatrical experience, and I was also happy to know that more people were going to get the chance to see this movie the way this and the last film were meant to be seen.
Shoutout to HBO Max for nearly killing movie theaters in 2021.
But the million dollar question is this… How was the movie?
Well, to answer that question… I am going to start off by stating a potential problem the movie has. And that is that I will never be able to watch it for the first time again. I will likely never get to experience the sense of euphoria the way I did seeing this movie during my initial viewing.
For those who nag about me not getting around to certain film classics like “Rocky” or “12 Angry Men,” those who choose to say I am not a real movie fan, I could do the same thing to you when it comes to “Pulp Fiction” or “2001: A Space Odyssey,” but I am not going to. Instead, I am going to tell you I am somewhat jealous because you have the opportunity on your hands to watch those movies for the first time. When I hear someone is going to watch either of those films for the first time, my initial thought is, good for them! I hope they have a time of their life equal to what I myself experienced during my first viewing. I feel the same way about “Dune Part Two,” because while I immensely enjoyed the first “Dune,” not only does this sequel feel like it is on another level, but it is one of the most innovative additions to the sci-fi genre that comes to mind.
And I say this knowing that this is a follow-up that just so happens to be the second half of a first book of a popular series that has already been adapted to both film and TV in the past. Nevertheless, this feels like something new. There are times where I watched “Dune Part Two” and could not help but make a couple “Star Wars” analogies. Based on its technical mastery and power, this film must emit similar feelings to when people watched “Star Wars” for the first time in 1977. Meanwhile, as a sequel, “Dune Part Two” reminds me a bit of “The Empire Strikes Back.”
This is not only because “Dune Part Two” is a high quality second installment, but when it comes to the duel scenes, those are improved here. Not that the duel scenes in the first “Dune” were bad. If anything, they were terrific. That said, the choreography is much more spellbinding this time around. Additionally, I felt incredibly riveted by the story and characters, which made the film’s action scenes all the more exciting. With these two ideas in mind, I can tell you there is a duel towards the end of this film that is nothing short of jaw-dropping. The choreography is so fast that you would think that Sonic the Hedgehog oversaw it. Meanwhile, it is all in the middle of a key scene of the film where the emotions of our characters reach a tipping point. Where the story reaches its finest moments. Where we get some of the finest exchanges and performances in the history of science fiction. There is a moment towards the end of the movie, it is in the trailer, where Paul Atriedes yells, “SILENCE!” As far as pure line delivery goes, it is arguably the most chilling utterance of dialogue of the decade so far. The only other line in a movie that I can think of that came out in the 2020s that rivals this for me is the final line of “Oppenheimer.” Specifically, “I believe we did.”
Another reason why I found myself calling this the next “Empire Strikes Back” is because it goes all out on its antagonists. Stellan Skarsgård returns once again to slay his performance as Baron Harkonnen. Dave Bautista continues to prove himself as a fine wrestler-turned-actor as Glossu Rabban. In fact, not only does Bautista cement himself as a superior wrestler-turned-actor when compared to John Cena and Dwayne Johnson, he convinces me he could rack up one or two Oscar nominations if he keeps up the good work. I have seen Bautista in quite a few movies now. “Dune Part Two” is easily his greatest performance yet. Between the “Dune” movies and “Blade Runner 2049,” I would love to see Bautista continue to collaborate with Denis Villeneuve as much as possible because they tend to bring out the best in each other. Both of these characters are intimidating and well executed. Every moment they are on screen had me hooked.
But the real star of the show, antagonist-wise, is Austin Butler as Feyd-Rautha. While I did not love “Elvis,” there is no denying that Butler was the best part of it. Much like that film, his performance just so happens to be one of the best elements of “Dune Part Two.” There is such a sinister nature to this character that is almost beyond reality but in the case of this universe, I immediately bought into it from scene one. Butler makes it believable. This is a guy who will literally kill his own people on a whim, perhaps delivering him a great deal of satisfaction as a result. Feyd-Rautha works so well because he emitted a feeling in me that many great villains should be able to emit. He becomes a character that I love to hate. I would not want to go bowling with this character, but as a villain, he is perfect. Not only that, but Butler sometimes feels unrecognizable. I have not seen him in a lot of movies, but based on what I have seen him in before, he has a flair to his performance here that comes off as individualistic.
That said, this is film is led by Timothée Chalamet. In today’s culture, it is easy to say the idea of “the movie star” is dead. But if there are sparks of that idea that are still alive, then Timothée Chalamet is certainly one of them. And boy is he a fine star. Not only is he young and good looking, not only is he bankable, but he also just so happens to have incredible range. Prior to this movie, he starred in “Wonka.” While I was not a fan of the movie, I thought he handled the material perfectly. He made the movie fun. He was expressive, upbeat, not to mention a mighty fine vocalist. Now we go to his next movie, “Dune Part Two,” where Chalamet’s character is caught in the middle of war, politics, and drama. And Chalamet’s ability to immerse himself into a world like this is impeccable. It feels weird, but one of Chalamet’s hidden talents is making such a scrawny dude come off as one of the most convincing leading figures in recent cinema. Sure, he’s not exactly short, but muscular is not the first word I’d use to describe Chalamet as a person.
I think “Dune Part Two” has an advantage for general audiences. While I cannot imagine this movie being for everyone, I can see this movie having a wider appeal than the first one. The movie not only has more action, but I would say the action is better this time around. I also think this film’s use of Stilgar makes for a great sidekick role of sorts. He almost comes off as a guy you would be sitting next to as you are watching the movie. Maybe he recommended it to you and is guiding you for the ride. Additionally, he has some of the most memorable lines. One of my favorite moments in “Dune Part Two” is when we see him believe Paul refuses to mention he is “the one.” There is a reason why I am seeing the words “As it is written” all over social media right now, it is Javier Bardem does a phenomenal job as Stilgar. He is perfectly cast and I cannot imagine anyone else filling in his shoes.
That said, if you enjoyed “Dune,” that does not necessarily imply you will fail to do the same in regards to “Dune Part Two.” I am proof of that. I really liked the first “Dune.” I gave it a positive review. But I think this sequel feels more adventurous. The score, somehow, is more memorable its predecessor. There is a theme that blares throughout the movie that I cannot get out of my head. It does a good job at expanding the lore and building the world. The acting is better. And as a pure experience, “Dune Part Two” is simply put, superior. One of my problems with the first “Dune” is that it very much feels like an intro guide to the world within. The movie has a three act structure, character development, and pretty much everything else you need to call it a movie. But one of its flaws is that it tends to feel more like a “how to survive Arrakis tutorial” than a journey through Arrakis. Now with this movie, it feels like we are taking the tools we acquired from the predecessor and putting them to the test.
Thankfully, as I write this review, “Dune Part Two” is still playing in theaters. And I must tell you, if you have not seen “Dune Part Two” in a theater yet, do yourself a favor and get your tickets as soon as you can, because this is one of those theatrical experiences you have to see to believe. This is easily one of the best times I ever had in a movie theater. I felt like sand was coming through the speakers the entire time. I thought I was in the middle of the desert. I was convinced the wind was flying in my face. If you told me that I was in Arrakis for two and a half hours, I would have believed you. But there is a reason, above all others, why you should see this movie on the big screen. Sandworms. Yes, there are sandworms in the last movie. But that’s not the point.
In this sequel, there are several minutes in this movie dedicated to Paul first experiencing what it is like to ride a sandworm for the first time. This is one of the most riveting, loudest, most visceral, exhilarating scenes yours truly has ever witnessed. This is one of those scenes that shows why movie theaters are built. It shows why we make big movies for the big screen. When I look back at this scene, it was almost as if I were alive a century or two ago, I had never seen a movie and someone from the distant future time-travelled to when I would exist. That person would then show me the power of what movies could be. This scene is perfection. It was well shot, packed with rambunctiously satisfying audio, and is nothing short of a perfect tech demo. But in both the background and the forefront, we are seeing our characters experience the world in front of them, learn more about each other, themselves, and their abilities. As an audience member, I am getting a great mix of thrills, expansion of lore, and details about certain characters.
The movie makes such a simple moment of learning and adapting look like the most intense thing in the history of the world. This is a scene I will never forget. Once again, a moment like this will show why I would be jealous to find out someone tells me they are about to watch this movie for the first time.
I thought the sandworm action could not get as electrifying as this… Until the second half of the movie happened, and somehow it equaled, if not surpassed the thrills I felt before. There is a scene, you’ll know it when you see it, where there is a shot showing the perspective from a sandworm’s eye. It is one of the most eye-popping, beautiful things I have ever seen on a screen. It’s quick, it’s raw, it’s massive. It is basically an encapsulation that describes the film itself. I was thrilled to no end.
Although going back to the original “Dune,” this brings up something noticeable about this sequel. There is a reason why it has “Part Two” in its title. Obviously, it is the second “Dune” movie, yes. Also, it is the second half of the original book. But this really is true to its name, a “Part Two.” There are several sequels you could watch and appreciate without having to see the original movie. Having watched “Dune Part Two,” this is one of those movies where I feel in order to fully appreciate what is in front of you, it would be worth going back and giving the first “Dune” a watch at some point. Either if you forgot what happened, or if you have never seen it before. Because there are a couple moments that would hit harder if you have that movie under your belt.
I have not seen “Dune Part Two” a second time just yet, but knowing the how lost for words I became by the time the movie was over, my second viewing is definitely around the corner. But I will never forget my first time. And this is where I bring in another “Star Wars” comparison. Much like that 1977 science fiction event, I will look back at “Dune Part Two” as a film that will define a generation. It has flaws. I kind of wish to know how people get off the sandworms once they are done with them. Some of the pacing feels inconsistent, but even in the less consistent moments the story is still exciting. And again, if you have not seen the first movie, it could theoretically lessen the impact of this one just a little. Other than that, there is not much else can I say except this is one of the best fiction movies of the decade, and you should see it as soon as you get a chance.
In the end, “Dune Part Two” fits the classic motto of a fine sequel. It goes bigger, and it is better. “Dune Part Two” is not only superior to its predecessor, but it is also the first great movie I have seen in 2024. It is still early in the year, but I needed this. After “Madame Web,” “Night Swim,” and “Argylle,” I truly needed a movie that I could deem somewhere on the level of a master class effort. And this is that movie. Going back to what I said earlier, Denis Villeneuve is on a roll. While I think Christopher Nolan is the superior director, he has a knack for filmmaking that is on the level of Christopher Nolan. I have not seen all of his work. I still need to watch “Enemy” and “Incendies.” But from what I have seen so far from Villeneuve, I can say that I have not seen a single bad movie from him. I can easily name a least favorite, and that would be “Sicario,” but that is still a movie where there are more positives than negatives for me. If Denis Villeneuve ends up making a third “Dune,” perhaps an adaptation of “Dune: Messiah” that is on the level of these last two movies, it would easily further the case of him being the greatest sci-fi director of all time. Villeneuve is that good at what he does. But it is not just him. You have Greig Fraser’s immensely beautiful cinematography. Hans Zimmer’s roaring score. An incredible ensemble of actors across the board. Timothée Chalamet, Stellan Skarsgård, Rebecca Ferguson, Austin Butler, and Dave Bautista just to name a few! I did not even get to Zendaya! She does a really good job as Chani in this film. Regarding the love connection between Chani and Paul, I bought into it immediately. It is still early, so it is hard to know how this movie will do next awards season. That said, not only could I see this movie getting nominated for Best Picture at next year’s Oscars, …I can totally see it winning. It is that brilliant. I am going to give “Dune Part Two” a 9/10.
“Dune Part Two” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.
Thanks for reading this review! If you enjoyed this review, good news! I have more coming! Be sure to look out for my thoughts on “High Tide,” “Kung Fu Panda 4,” “Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire,” “Snack Shack,” “Godzilla X Kong: The New Empire,” and “Monkey Man.” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Dune Part Two?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite scene in film history? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One” is directed by Christopher McQuarrie (Jack Reacher, The Way of the Gun) and stars Tom Cruise (Top Gun, Risky Business), Hayley Atwell (Agent Carter, The Duchess), Ving Rhames (Lilo & Stitch, Pulp Fiction), Simon Pegg (Ready Player One, Run Fatboy Run), Rebecca Ferguson (Dune, Reminiscence), Vanessa Kirby (Pieces of a Woman, Fast & Furious Presents: Hobbs & Shaw), Esai Morales (Resurrection Blvd., Bad Boys), Pom Klementieff (Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2, Oldboy), Mariela Garriga (Bloodline, Nightmare Cinema), and Henry Czerny (Ready or Not, Revenge). This film is the seventh installment of the ongoing “Mission: Impossible” movie franchise based on the hit television series of the same name. In this latest installment, Ethan Hunt and crew must track down a dangerous weapon before it is too late.
The “Mission: Impossible” franchise is, in some ways, the definition of irony. Because there is a general saying that a movie’s sequel is not usually as good as the original. If “Mission: Impossible” stopped at two movies that would be true, because I liked the first film quite a bit, but felt a significant dip in quality in John Woo’s “Mission: Impossible II.” Thankfully, “Mission: Impossible III” was better. Not perfect, but J.J. Abrams at least did enough to thwart the franchise in the right direction. “Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol,” directed by Brad Bird, not only ended up being really good, but revitalized the franchise. I still think about the scene set around the Dubai Tower on a regular basis. Then we get “Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation,” directed by Christopher McQuarrie, which much like its predecessor, had incredible action sequences and stuntwork that define Tom Cruise’s career. That would have been my favorite “Mission: Impossible” movie, had it not been for the fact that Cruise and McQuarrie reunited to make the last “Mission: Impossible,” specifically “Fallout.” That film is the peak of what I consider to be one of the greatest action franchises. It was my favorite film of 2018, and I would put it right next to “Risky Business” as my favorite film starring Tom Cruise. The film is simple in plot, but has jaw-dropping action, likable characters, and a bone-chilling climax to back it up. It is everything a modern action movie should be.
This is also part of why I was excited for “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One,” which I put my as my #2 for my top 10 most anticipated movies of 2023. This franchise has a special talent. Specifically, a talent where almost each film ends up surpassing its predecessor. With how good “Fallout” was, this seventh installment had big shoes to fill.
Time for some good news and bad news. Bad news, the streak of these sequels surpassing their predecessors has ended. I think “Fallout” is a better film than “Dead Reckoning Part One.” Good news, “Dead Reckoning Part One” is all around, a great time at the movies. It contains the essentials I am used to seeing in these films between the quick pace, the character moments, the fun action sequences, and everything in between. If you are looking for summer blockbuster thrills, look no further. This film is an excellent outing for everyone involved, and it will make an excellent outing for you once you step outside your home and into the theater.
One of the reasons I, and I imagine many others, ended up looking forward to “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One” is because it is a continuation of Tom Cruise pulling off death-defying stunts. In fact, much of the marketing pushes the moment where Ethan maneuvers a motorcycle off a cliff and shortly thereafter removes himself from said motorcycle, allowing himself to fall through the air like an absolute moron. I can tell you, that stunt alone is worth the price of admission. When that scene came up in my auditorium, I could tell just about everyone felt a shiver through their body.
But what if I told you that is not even the most intense thing this movie has to offer? Because there are a couple of other scenes that continue to stand out to me. First off, there is a chase through Venice that will go down as not only one of my favorite sequences in the “Mission: Impossible” franchise, but also as one of the funniest action scenes I have ever watched in the history of cinema. I do not think I laughed this hard watching action either since “The Suicide Squad” or “Free Guy.” One of those two movies. When I say this action scene is funny, I mean it. There are a lot of visuals that caught me off guard in the best possible way. Although I must say, I apologize to the company because their car is prominently featured in said sequence, I do not think I will be buying a Fiat anytime soon. If there was any product placement involved, I think this action sequence basically told me to not spend my money on one of those cars. I will stick with my Ford for now.
Another standout sequence in “Dead Reckoning Part One” is set further into the movie, specifically on a train. First of all, the interior of the train, which was assembled for this movie from scratch, is stunningly designed. If the Oscars were tomorrow, I would consider putting this film amongst the Production Design nominations for how solid the inside of that train looks. Secondly, this movie may have the greatest train scene since “Spider-Man 2,” which is an impeccably high standard to match. But the reason why this train sequence will stick with me for a long time is because it does what “Mission: Impossible” does best. It does not only put our characters in danger from a story perspective, but as I watch the sequence, I am increasingly worried for their physical safety. Both the characters and the actors playing them. Anyone can do a train sequence in a film if they wanted to. I have seen boring train scenes before, just go watch “Solo: A Star Wars Story.” But this film does it in such a way that had me wondering how the heck anyone could make it out alive. Heck, there is a movie from last year called “Bullet Train,” and the train scene in “Dead Reckoning Part One” is arguably more thrilling than that entire movie. For the record, I liked “Bullet Train.” But my point stands.
If I had a problem with the film, it would be the opening scene. Sure, it is a homage to a respected title, “The Hunt for Red October,” but the dialogue during this scene honestly felt wooden. Maybe if I watch it again it would be better, but it felt more like a parody of “Mission: Impossible” rather than an actual “Mission: Impossible” movie. Which, quite frankly, is a dead on way to describe “Mission: Impossible II.” I said what I said. But other than that, there are not many flaws to point out about “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One.” If there is one, maybe the A.I. was not as threatening as it could have been, but maybe the crew is saving the good stuff for part two. Staying on topic though, I think the antagonist, Gabriel (Esai Morales), is a bit of a step down for the franchise. Especially when compared to August Walker (Henry Cavill) from the previous installment.
On the note of multi-part efforts, despite having part one in the title, I will contend that “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One” plays as a complete movie. It contains a full, concrete story. Sure, there are loose ends, but the main story ties itself up in a bow. It is a much better part one than what “Fast X” gave us a few months ago, which offered possibly the dumbest, most insultingly complicated cliffhanger in recent film. It did not feel like an end to a movie. It felt like the beginning of something much worse. I left “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One” feeling satisfied with what I saw. Maybe I overhyped it a little, but it does not change the fact that it is a solid option for the big screen this summer.
Going back to “Fast X,” when it comes to the big spy movie franchises out right now, the “Fast & Furious” and “Mission: Impossible” franchises are the two that immediately come to mind. This movie manages to get something right that the “Fast & Furious” movies do not. Characterization. Sure, maybe every once in awhile it is soothing to hang out with the “family,” but those movies fail when it comes to getting me onboard with the characters due to a lack of stakes. Once again, this film reinstates the notion that I am worried for everyone’s safety. Part of it is because a lot of the stuff on screen is done for real, but they flesh out the characters and treat them more like people as opposed to big muscular bodies moving from one place to another. Grace (Hayley Atwell) is layered and has an intriguing mysteriousness to her throughout the film. Additionally, Paris (Pom Klementieff) is another new character that stands out and brings a lot to the table. There continues to be genuine chemistry between Cruise, Rhames, and Pegg as friends. When I left this film, one of the thoughts in my mind happened to be that I cannot wait to see “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part Two.” Not only to get back to a franchise that I adore, but to continue seeing cool characters like these. Here is hoping the upcoming sequel is a worthy entry to the franchise, much like this one.
In the end, if I had to rank the “Mission: Impossible” movies, “Dead Reckoning Part One” would not be my favorite, but it would be on the higher end. I would put it above “Ghost Protocol,” but I would put it below the last two. The more I think about it, I think I like it just a little more than the 1996 original, which is a great movie on its own. When it comes to pure summer action, “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One” delivers. It is exciting, thrilling, and I left the film satisfied, but still wanting to know what is next. While this may not make as much money as Tom Cruise’s last outing, “Top Gun: Maverick,” “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One” brings in some big guns of its own. I am going to give “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One” an 8/10.
“Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.
Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Oppenheimer,” the brand new movie from my favorite filmmaker, Christopher Nolan. Also, I will soon be dropping reviews for “Haunted Mansion,” “The First Slam Dunk,” and “Barbie.” If you want to see this and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite “Mission: Impossible” movie? Mine is “Fallout,” but I want to know yours! Comment below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“Dune” is directed by Denis Villeneuve (Blade Runner 2049, Arrival) and stars Timothee Chalamet (Interstellar, Call Me by Your Name), Rebecca Ferguson (Reminiscence, Mission: Impossible – Fallout), Oscar Isaac (Star Wars: The Force Awakens, Ex Machina), Zendaya (Spider-Man: Homecoming, Space Jam: A New Legacy), Josh Brolin (The Goonies, Avengers: Infinity War), Stellan Skarsgård (Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest, Thor), Dave Bautista (Guardians of the Galaxy, My Spy), Stephen McKinley Henderson (Lady Bird, Devs), Chang Chen (Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, The Assassin), Sharon Duncan-Brewster (FIFA 17, Doctor Who), Charlotte Rampling (Stardust Memories, Dexter), Jason Momoa (Aquaman, Game of Thrones), and Javier Bardem (Vicky Cristina Barcelona, Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales). This film is an adaptation of the Frank Herbert novel and follows Paul Atreides, a young boy born into a royal, planet-ruling family. Paul is destined to one day take on the role of Kwistaz Haderach, much to the dismay of some, considering how his mother was instructed to bear a daughter. When House Atreides arrives on Arrakis, a sandy planet with worms that pop up out of the ground like geysers, it is up to them and Paul to protect the planet and its valuable resource, spice.
Where do I even start with “Dune?” Unlike “Blade Runner,” when it comes to Denis Villeneuve’s work, I was much less familiar with “Dune’s” source material, especially when compared to Villeneuve himself, because the more I heard about this movie, the more I recognized Herbert’s love for the source material. When I first heard Denis Villeneuve was working on this project, and I think cinematographer Roger Deakins was rumored to be involved as well, I was obviously excited because Villeneuve is one of the best directors working in Hollywood today. I’ve only seen a couple of his films, but I’ve always been curious to go back to “Sicario” and “Enemy” because of how much I have adored his recent work. Both “Arrival” and “Blade Runner 2049” made it to my Top Movies of the 2010s countdown event as the #10 and #2 spots respectively. I love both films to the moon and beyond, and I cannot tell you how many times I popped in the 4K Blu-ray for “Blade Runner 2049” since I bought it. I have not even read the novel or its follow-ups, and even with that, “Dune” was easily my most anticipated film of 2021. It may have even been my most anticipated for 2020, but COVID-19 ended up killing the hopes of it coming out that year.
Just for the record, I have not seen any of the previous on-screen adaptations of “Dune.” I’ve read a number of pages of “Dune” during a car ride, but I never picked it back up. It’s not that I did not like the book, I just didn’t have time for it. But regardless of what I have not seen, the trailers for this film encapsulated a supposed epic vibe that Villeneuve and crew may have been shooting for. Big scale, massive locations, and we even got a bit of taste of Hans Zimmer’s score long before the film officially released, and when I heard it, it made me more excited for the film because it sounds like what would happen if a madman trapped an orchestra in a chamber and wouldn’t release them until they were dead tired. From the little that I heard, it sounded majestic as hell.
Now that “Dune” is done, what did I think?
In a number of ways, “Dune” met my expectations, but it is not the best movie of the year. I can think of a few movies I liked more. BUT, if you want a great time at the movies that can make you put your thinking cap on, “Dune” may be for you. “Dune” reminded me of a number of films, one of the first being “Blade Runner 2049,” mainly because both have some distinctions that Denis Villeneuve can call his own. Plus, I knew a tad about “Dune” going into it, and one of the things I knew is that it was pretty dense, so it was no surprise to me that the film itself would turn out to be a bit of a slow burn. Slow does not mean bad in this case. You can make a film slow as long as it seems that the pace fits for the subject matter or the film itself. Same goes with quick pace. You can have explosions and bangs and crazy lasers flying in your face every other second as long as the script and direction makes those things add up. This is not to say there are no explosions in “Dune.” There are, just watch the trailers. But don’t go in expecting every other scene to be like a dogfight in “Star Wars.” But on that note, this film also feels rather “Star Wars”-esque. Granted, the book came out before “Star Wars” hit theaters, but my point is, both stories have similar vibes and themes. Both involve young boys who associate with desert planets and must strive to become men greater than themselves. Both in a way have to follow the hero’s journey, a typical story structure that is often followed or slightly altered depending on the story at hand. I will not give any details as to what ways “Dune” follows or does not follow that structure, but the point stands.
I want to talk about some of the characters in this film, and believe me when I say that this film is not short on bringing together a great cast. Between Timothee Chalamet, who I loved since “Interstellar,” to Zendaya who is practically starting to appear in everything now, to Oscar Isaac who has been great in Alex Garland’s work along with the “Star Wars” franchise, even though he was the one who had to say “Somehow Palpatine returned.” The film is not short on A-listers and stars. Overall, the chemistry and acting between everyone was top notch.
Timothee Chalamet appears as if he is going to be the next Oscar great. Maybe not this year, he is still quite young. But throughout his lifetime, I think he’ll be the male equivalent to Meryl Streep. I think one day, we’ll see an Academy Awards ceremony with an opening monologue from whoever is currently hosting a hit talk show on ABC and one of the jokes will poke fun at Chalamet for stealing all the Oscars from all the up and coming talent. I almost think there is no one better to play Paul Atreides because Chalamet not only looks young, but he has this bridge between him that I can sense that he is young enough to be a kid, but mature enough to be liked by the parents of whomever he’s dating. Chalamet has range, and it is shown in this film through his expressiveness and occasional stoic nature. That’s not implying that Paul Atreides, the character himself, is up for question on what kind of character he actually is, but it sort of shows that the character knows how to put himself in a variety of situations, even though he is still learning how to be an adult.
Along with Chalamet for much of the journey is Rebecca Ferguson as Lady Jessica. I will admit, after watching the movie, someone brought up a creepy but true fact. Take this as you will. One of my favorite elements of the movie is the chemistry between Timothee Chalamet and Rebecca Ferguson. Naturally, it feels the way a mother and son should be. The mother wants what’s best for her kid, and the kid does his best to impress the mother even though he may occasionally lash out or disagree with her. Chemistry-wise, I would love to see more of these two actors together. The thing however, in real life, Chalamet is 25 years old. Rebecca Ferguson is 38 years old. That’s a difference of 13 years! So either teenage reproduction is much more welcomed, accepted, and/or encouraged in the future, or these actors have such great range that age is meaningless, therefore making both individuals more convincing performers. For the sake of sanity and the fact that child labor laws exist, I would much prefer to go with the latter. If anything, I think Rebecca Ferguson may give a better performance than Timothee Chalamet, because there are several scenes and lines of dialogue that I could feel her pain, reflecting a natural instinct that most, if not all mothers, would have.
The main antagonistic side of the film would be the Harkonnens, who ravage the planet of Arrakis for Spice. It is up to our heroes to defend the planet and its precious resource. So in a way, this movie is literally the War on Drugs. This side allows for some more great performances to shine through, including one from Dave Bautista as Beast Rabban Harkonnen. I want to highlight him in this review because I think that a performance like this allows him to sharpen his skills as an actor. I like Dave Bautista as a personality, but I think even he knows that his acting skills are limited. Unlike his role as Drax the Destroyer, where he would either scream, laugh in someone’s face, or give a brooding quote every once in a while, his role in “Dune” is more menacing and takes the brooding nature of his Drax character and intensifies it a bit. I like Drax the Destroyer, but if you watch him in “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2” the way he’s both written and performed feel slightly one-dimensional, but Bautista did an okay job with the character nevertheless. I think if you put Bautista in front of the right director like James Gunn, again, I like Drax. Or in this case Denis Villeneuve, his talents could be unleashed. I hope that these two continue to collaborate in the future.
As menacing as Bautista may be, he’s got nothing on Baron Harkonnen himself, played by Stellan Skarsgård. HOLY CRAP. Now that’s casting. I also have to give props to the makeup department, because of the work they did on the Harkonnens, making them all look pasty white. As for Stellan Skarsgård, this is no offence to him, because in real life, he may be a nice guy, I would not want to shake Baron Harkonnen’s hand. He looks like what would happen if Wilford Brimley ate a ton of ice cream and endlessly made fun of the children of generations below his, and maybe once in a while, enjoyed those kids’ heads with his ice cream. The dude flat out looks creepy by sci-fi standards. You want my money Warner Bros.? You own both these characters to a degree so make this happen! Get Bill and Stellan Skarsgård together, have them portray their characters of Pennywise and Baron Harkonnen respectively, just have them go around scaring children and other crap like that. I’d watch that.
One character that must also be acknowledged is Duncan Idaho. Aside from the fact that the name is freaking lit, Jason Momoa is perfectly cast as this character, because similar to how he made Aquaman a superhero I would want to have a drink with, Momoa shines because of his enthusiastic, almost reckless nature in this film. He’s in a somewhat serious, deep, intense sci-fi picture that the rest of these characters happen to be in, and he’s the only performer who happens to be taking things not so seriously. His character just screams ridiculous fun at times. He’s expressive, he’s witty, he’s charismatic, and much like Aquaman, I would go to a bar with Idaho if I had the chance.
For those of you who were looking forward to seeing Zendaya in the film for whatever reason, I would not prepare for disappointment, but I would also not prepare for excitement at this point, because her character is written in such a way that she has such a minimal impact and appearance throughout the film. If anything, we’ll probably get more of her in part two. I do think her character was well cast, I just hope the next movie gives us a clear answer as to whether Zendaya was truly a good choice for the role of Chani. But from what I’ve seen so far, she seems promising.
I really want to talk about the ending of this film, without spoilers of course. But most stories you read or watch have a proper ending where something dramatic happens, matters are resolved, maybe there’s a happily ever after, then we cut to “the end,” maybe black or white, or just straight to the credits. “Dune” does not have that kind of ending. I will not say where it ends, but it ends in a particularly interesting place. Let’s just say the ending is not the same as the first book… If you want to put it that way. The film ends on at a place where we see our characters in a particular situation only to have the screen cut to black. I have seen the film twice, and both times, I did not mind the ending. Mainly because I have enjoyed what I have seen so far, and the movie set itself up in a way to make me want more. I left thinking, what’s next? When are we getting the next movie? I want it now! Some would claim that in a way, this story is unfinished. I disagree. While the film is structured in a such a way that could garner such a thought when the ending comes up, I disagree because from start to finish, this movie is about the journey, struggle, and change of Paul Atreides as a character. We see him start at one point. We know his ambition, his flaws, and what others think of him. By the end of the film, he is different from how he is when it starts. I won’t give much detail, but if you pay close attention to the movie, you’ll notice. One journey is over, and another one begins. It is a… Strange ending. But it is also one that happens to be effective. I do not blame the movie for ending where it did.
With that being said, “Dune: Part Two” cannot come fast enough. When it arrives, I will buy my tickets in a heartbeat.
I thought to myself upon leaving the theater that while “Dune” was not my favorite film of this year, there is a lot that will it do to aspire future filmmakers and storytellers. I have a feeling that this “Dune” movie is going to have a similar impact on part of the current generation that “Star Wars” and “Lord of the Rings” did on their generations. If anything, even though there were some imperfections when it comes “Dune,” I think it has a shot at being the next “Lord of the Rings.” Between the modern visuals, the epic scope, the dense storytelling with enormous potential, this is absolute franchise material. In fact, as of writing this, not only is “Dune: Part Two” greenlit, but there’s also going to be a TV show set in the “Dune” universe coming to HBO Max at some point. This could be big.
BEVERLY HILLS, CA – JANUARY 16: Composer Hans Zimmer arrives at the 68th Annual Golden Globe Awards held at The Beverly Hilton hotel on January 16, 2011 in Beverly Hills, California. (Photo by Jason Merritt/Getty Images)
As for Hans Zimmer’s score, OH MY GOD. If you go see this in theaters, and I highly recommend you do so, prepare to have the room shake like a fish out of water. It is some of his best work to date and I would put it up there with, interestingly enough, another score he did for a Denis Villeneuve film, “Blade Runner 2049,” which he did with Benjamin Wallfisch.
In the end, “Dune,” or “Dune: Part One,” depending on your preference, is a great adaptation of the iconic sci-fi novel. It’s dense and occasionally hard to get through if you are in a certain mindset, but this film successfully created an epic atmosphere and introduced a whole new world of lore and possibilities. Well, kinda. This is another retelling of a classic story. Denis Villeneuve is up there with some of my favorite directors and this movie ended in such a way where I enjoyed the journey so far, but I also left with curiosity as to where they’d take the story. As of now, “Dune: Part Two” is my most anticipated film of 2023. The film can occasionally feel dense and strenuous. The ending, even though it did fulfill the arch of Paul Atreides, comes at a satisfying point, but also feels particularly emptier compared to other portions of the film. So for what I said, I massively enjoyed “Dune,” and I have a feeling that it could be something that will increase in enjoyment through repeat viewings. I’m going to give “Dune” an 8/10.
“Dune” is now playing in theaters everywhere and is streaming for a limited time on the ad-free tier of HBO Max.
Thanks for reading this review! If you are worried that I am going to be short on upcoming content. Trust me, I’m not. I want you all to know that I have reviews coming for “The French Dispatch,” “Last Night in Soho,” “Eternals,” and “Ron’s Gone Wrong.” There’s plenty of content to come but so little time! If you want to read this and more on Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Dune?” What did you think about it? Or, did you ever read any of the “Dune” books? Which is your favorite? And did you see any of the other “Dune” adaptations? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“Reminiscence” is written and directed by Lisa Joy (Westworld, Burn Notice) and stars Hugh Jackman (X-Men, The Greatest Showman), Rebecca Ferguson (Mission: Impossible – Fallout, The White Queen), Thandiwe Newton (Mission: Impossible II, Solo: A Star Wars Story), Cliff Curtis (Missing, Fear the Walking Dead), Marina de Tavira (Roma, Ana and Bruno), Daniel Wu (Into the Badlands, Tomb Raider) and this film is set in the future when climate change has severely affected Miami. During this time, Nick Bannister (Hugh Jackman) is part of a business responsible for a machine called the tank, which allows people to go back in time and see older memories. One day, a client named Mae comes in looking for her missing keys. Shortly after, Nick and Mae become romantically involved, although Nick’s co-worker, Emily “Watts” Sanders does not trust Mae and wants to do anything she can to keep Nick from seeing her. In addition, Nick spends time revisiting past memories in the tank involving his love interest, which could trap him forever.
Well, that took some time to explain now didn’t it… I’ve been looking forward to “Reminiscence” for a number of reasons. It’s from my favorite studio, Warner Brothers, despite how they’ve stabbed the backs of theater owners this year. It’s got a decent cast with Hugh Jackman and Rebecca Ferguson in starring roles. But I also really like the concept this movie tries to deliver. Sometimes going into this movie, it would remind me and a few other people of a Christopher Nolan flick. In fact on the surface, it really does feel like that. The color grading and sets feel like something out of “Inception” or “Tenet,” and much like those two movies, this film has a concept that mixes action, romance, and transportation to another reality. The trailer for this film was not too bad, although I have seen better. The way they edited it though made it feel like it was somewhere outside our world even though it really was in our not so far future, and the action did look pretty sick.
Another reason why this looks like a Christopher Nolan movie… Jonathan Nolan, Christopher Nolan’s brother, was one of the film’s producers. And this should not be surprising, after all, he is the director’s wife! Hollywood, everybody! It’s about WHO you know! Not always what ya know! Granted, Jonathan Nolan had no writing or directing credits by the end of the product, Lisa Joy wrote and directed this film on her own, but it would not surprise me if some of his touch made it into the final product.
But going back to what I said about “Inception” and “Tenet,” as much as I like both movies. And I do. …Very much. I would say that “Inception” is clearly the better film because at the end of “Tenet,” I’m left amazed, but also wondering how certain things came about in that film because it is one of the most beautifully confusing things I ever watched.
“Reminiscence,” to me, even though the concept was somewhat, well, reminiscent, of “Inception,” kind of felt like it belonged in the same category as “Tenet.” As a high-concept sci-fi film, it is nice to observe, but there were still some loose ends that needed tying.
That’s what I would say if “Reminiscence” weren’t so goddamn forgettable! I would have reviewed this earlier if I had the motivation and time, because I did watch this film days after it came out, but I waited until this point because this is just the way things lined up. And now that I’ve had as much time as I did to think about this film, I think I may have spent more time thinking about the film I watched before this one, “Don’t Breathe 2.”
I really like the concept of “Reminiscence.” To have people go back and revisit their favorite memories, especially in a future where it seems that there are no positive memories left to create, is fascinating. I honestly wish a machine like this existed because it does seem to be safer than time travel and there are fun memories that I would love to revisit for one reason or another. I would love to go back to my first visit to New York City or one of my flocks to Salisbury Beach. Those were fun times and I would love to relive those. In fact, the more I think about what this movie is trying to do, it kind of succeeds at communicating that people do not see rainbows and unicorns in the future and would do anything to revisit their past. I just wish the story involving all of these elements happened to be more attractive. You know, kind of like Rebecca Ferguson in this movie. Props to the costume design on this film, a couple of her looked legit.
“Reminiscence” does not have the best screenplay of the year. At least in terms of visual execution. But there is one line that is repeated throughout the film that I found intriguing.
“No such thing as a happy ending. All endings are sad. Especially if the story was happy.”
Believe it or not, there is some truth to that. This is perhaps a slightly more artistic way of saying “Nothing lasts forever,” or “We all die at some point,” or “There will come a day where you will hate something that ‘Star Wars’ puts out.” I think this is a great quote, even if the script leaves a bit to be desired.
Technically speaking, this is not a bad looking film. Some of the shots are majestic, and kind of have a feel that harkened back to not just the couple of Nolan films I mentioned, but I’d even bring up “Blade Runner” and “The Shape of Water” as goto comparisons.
If anything, “Reminiscence” was an idea that had wasted potential. Aside from the concept, which I mentioned earlier, the film comes in with a stacked cast from Hugh Jackman to Thandiwe Newton. These are all-stars, and they’re working on one of the most uninteresting sci-fi flicks of the past few years.. The one thing that I wonder is that even though Lisa Joy has been in the visual entertainment industry for some time, is if she was truly ready to take on a movie like this. Because most of her work has been through television. I’m not saying that Lisa Joy should be forbidden from directing, writing, or working on a film if she so desired, but I wondered how out of her comfort zone something like this could have been for her. What else has she directed? One episode of “Westworld?” Okay… I mean, I’ll say in her defense, HBO programming usually has a higher price tag, standard, and more cinematic feel compared to most television shows. I’ll give her that. But I think if you were to direct a film like this, which is not the most expensive thing in the world, but it is by no means cheap, I think you would want someone with more experience in the director’s chair to pull this off. I am glad that women are getting more opportunities to direct, but I wonder if Lisa Joy should have just stuck to the screenplay and let someone else bring her vision to life. Because despite my complaints about the screenplay, the original script for this film was on the 2013 Black List of most-liked unmade screenplays. This film had a lot going for it. I’m glad Lisa Joy could get her movie out there, but my god I wish it were better.
In the end, “Reminiscence” by no means the worst movie of the year. In fact, I think at this point I’d rather watch this again as opposed to some other recent Warner Brothers titles like “Space Jam: A New Legacy” and “Tom & Jerry.” Then again, this may come with a bias towards sci-fi. I had very little connection to the other two projects going into them with the exception of liking one of the trailers for the former. As for “Reminiscence,” it had plenty going for it from the marketing (even though they did not spend much money on it), the people in it, and the concept. But in the end, it all feels like a waste. I’m going to give “Reminiscence” a 4/10.
“Reminiscence” is now playing in theaters and it is also on the ad-free tier of HBO Max for a limited time.
Thanks for reading this review! I just want to let everyone know that my next review is going to be for “Shang-Chi and the Ten Rings.” I wanted to get this out a bit earlier, but life has been busy, so I’ve been holding this review off for some time. I do want to let everyone know that I already did see the movie, AND I am seeing it again tonight, which unfortunately may spoil part of my thoughts regarding the film itself, but either way, look forward to my review when it drops! Also, be sure to check out my review for “Malignant,” whenever that drops as well! If you want to see this and more on Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Scene Before Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Reminiscence?” What did you think about it? Or, what is a film that you think has a great concept with terrible execution? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“Men In Black: International” is directed by F. Gary Gray (The Fate of the Furious, Friday) and stars Chris Hemsworth (Thor, Rush), Tessa Thompson (Thor: Ragnarok, Creed), Rebecca Ferguson (Mission: Impossible: Rogue Nation, The Girl On the Train), Kumail Nanjiani (The Big Sick, Silicon Valley), Rafe Spall (The Big Short, Life of Pi), Les Twins, Emma Thompson (Saving Mr. Banks, Love Actually), Liam Neeson (Non-Stop, Cold Pursuit), and Tim Blaney (Muppets Tonight, Guild Wars 2). This film is a spinoff that takes place in the popular “Men In Black” franchise, which would traditionally star Will Smith and Tommy Lee Jones, but this time, as you can assume by the recently mentioned word “spinoff,” the story is diverging away from its usual storytelling methods. Although Frank the Pug is back, which is awesome. This spinoff revolves around agents H and M (coincidence?) as they save the planet from alien-related attacks.
Going into this movie, I had my expectations set somewhere around the middle. I enjoy the “Men In Black” movies. I own the first one on DVD, and I have seen the second and third films as well. When it comes to the second film, I thought it was decent. Just another case of the sequel not surpassing the original, but still a good time. Surprisingly, probably not just for me, but this might surprise a lot of you, of Will Smith’s trilogy, my favorite of them all is “Men In Black 3.” There was one point where I would watch Starz all the time, and throughout the year of 2013, “Men In Black 3” was probably the thing I rewatched the most on that channel. I admired the film for its use of time travel, some of the dialogue, and the surprisingly emotional ending. When I first heard they were doing a “Men In Black” spinoff, I didn’t particularly know what to think. I also remember there once being an idea for a crossover between “21 Jump Street” and “Men In Black.” I have not seen “21 Jump Street,” so I can’t fully give my thoughts on how much sense this idea would make. However, despite my slight apprehensions, which I still had after witnessing the first trailer for “Men In Black: International,” I still went in with some hopes that this movie would be worthy of the franchise name. I will say though, the final trailer, is actually a pretty good piece of marketing. It got me a bit more interested in the movie than I was before.
So, how was the movie? It’s the best “Men In Black” spinoff ever!
It’s also the only one.
Seriously though, how was the movie? It was pretty good. If you ask me, I think “Men In Black: International” has all the ingredients for a cliche, but effective, summer blockbuster. Cool action, witty dialogue, charming characters, neat effects (for the most part), and some nifty concepts here and there. It’s good enough for you to go with a few friends and forget about reality for a couple hours, and then, I dunno, maybe catch on cable one day. And I say that with all seriousness, because it is probably the most “fun” I’ve had in a theater this year. It’s not the best movie of 2019. In fact, there are other “fun” movies that I saw that I would technically consider better than this, but if you if you ask me which movie made me grin like an idiot for most of the runtime in 2019, “Men In Black: International” is certainly a contender.
The “Men In Black” franchise has always seemed to have mastered the art of comedy, and “Men In Black: International” is no exception to this rule. Unfortunately, while Frank the Pug does make a brief appearance in this film, he’s not a critical character. But we do manage to get an equally as awesome comic relief character by the name of Pawny, played by the likable and talented Kumail Nanjiani. His backstory, which is explained during the film, made me care for him, and he had a number of gutbusting lines here and there. Speaking of gutbusters, Pawny’s charisma does suggest that all the other characters are less funny or less interesting, because Chris Hemsworth is the bomb.
My respect for Chris Hemsworth has grown so much over the past few years, even though I hated “Ghostbusters,” even though “Thor: Ragnarok” was not what I wanted it to be, I still had respect for Chris Hemsworth because in general, he makes the idea of being charming the exact opposite of a chore. And when it comes to “Men In Black: International,” I think Hemsworth was one word: charismatic. He had fantastic lines, he truly feels like an expert in his field, maybe a bit of a goofy smart-ass who simultaneously takes his job seriously, and a guy who I would not mind having lunch with. Also, I mentioned the excellence of this film’s comedic elements, and I will certainly link an inside joke involving Hemsworth’s character. If you have ever heard of Marvel or Thor, there is a shot that will have you dying. Prepare for it if you ever see this movie.
Speaking of Hemsworth, I’d say he also had great chemistry with the film’s other lead, Tessa Thompson, but then again, that should not be too surprising since they have worked together before in multiple Marvel films, most notably “Thor: Ragnarok.” In fact, if I had to be honest, I think the duo’s chemistry here in “Men In Black: International” is better than it was in “Thor: Ragnarok,” because I feel the actors’ personalities meshed together when it comes to collective line delivery and interactions. I was able to buy into their partnership, and they worked together quite well.
I also really liked the big gun the marketing revealed at one point. If you remember the final trailer where our main characters test a gun in a desert, that makes for a couple highlights in the film. The gun does not get heavy usage, but it is probably the most admirable weapon in the film, which is saying a lot.
However, like most movies, “Men In Black: International” comes with its imperfections. Like a number of films I have seen recently, this movie suffers from some minor pacing issues, which almost made me lose interest in the story. Also, compared to a couple other “Men In Black” films, this installment feels a tad disposable. I’d watch it again, but I would not call it the holy grail of summer blockbusters. And as mentioned earlier in the post, a lot of the effects worked, but it doesn’t mean all of them did. When the movie started, I got a glimpse at a creature who was in front of young Agent M. It looked like something out of a B-rate “Avatar” film or perhaps live-action “Sonic the Hedgehog,” although, probably much more competent than that. It didn’t look revolting, but absolutely artificial. There was also almost no real threat. While various baddies appear throughout the film, it’s almost impossible to pinpoint the most threatening of them all, at least for a period of time, and it almost took me out of the movie. Another aspect I didn’t like is the Lexus product placement, but at the same time, compared to “Hitman: Agent 47” and that film’s relationship with Audi, I can tolerate Lexus in this film by MILES. Pun most certainly intended. Then again, this film had a decent amount of positives to which point, the negatives almost don’t even matter. I had enough fun with “Men In Black: International” that I felt in the zone. Do I want to see another story with Chris Hemsworth or Tessa Thompson? That’s still up for debate from my perspective, but I still managed to enjoy what I saw.
In the end, “Men In Black: International” had me smiling, laughing, and immersed. If there is one aspect of movies that I personally felt has improved since I first started Scene Before in 2016, it is comedy, and movies like “Men In Black: International” support that sentiment. Chris Hemsworth and Tessa Thompson make a good team, I enjoyed the humor, and it made me, surprisingly, appreciate a “Men In Black” story that didn’t have Will Smith in it. Although technically speaking, he does appear at one point, I won’t say how. Also, part of me may be wondering however if my positive, “smile on my face” thoughts related to this film, may be due to the collective atmosphere in the theater. Because just about everyone was laughing from one point to the next and the cinema was nearly full. Then again, I saw “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2” in a full cinema where everyone was laughing and I hated that piece of crap. Part of me wonders if my thoughts as of now, are simply fueled by what the collective vibe must have been. Maybe if I watch the film again, said thoughts could end up changing. But I don’t care, because I’m going to give “Men In Black: International” a 7/10. Thanks for reading this review! I just want to let everyone know that I just recently reached my 300 post mark on Scene Before, so if you want to check it out, click this link! The post involves me going over my complete Blu-ray collection, which features a video I uploaded to YouTube, partially because WordPress would not let me upload it directly. Be sure to follow Scene Before either with an email or WordPress account so you can stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, did you see “Men In Black: International?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite “Men In Black” movie? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“The Kid Who Would Be King” is directed by Joe Cornish (Attack the Block, The Adam & Joe Show) and stars… some kids you may have never heard of. Patrick Stewart’s here though. Anyway, in all seriousness, this movie stars Louis Ashborne Serkis (Alice Through the Looking Glass, Mowgli: Legend of the Jungle), Rebecca Ferguson (Mission: Impossible: Rogue Nation, The Girl on the Train), Tom Taylor (The Dark Tower, Legends), and as mentioned, Patrick Stewart (Star Trek: The Next Generation, American Dad!). This film revolves around a young boy named Alex, who eventually finds Excalibur, the sword of King Arthur. Alex eventually comes to a realization that he must use this sword to stop the enchantress Morgana from destroying the world.
I didn’t see “The Kid Who Would Be King” when it came out in theaters. Partially because on its opening weekend, I wanted to go see “Serenity” instead, which was kind of a mistake. I remember seeing the trailer not too long before the film came out and it looked like a fun adventure film for a family demographic. I can dig a solid adventure flick. But unfortunately, due to life, college, and other movies getting in the way, I missed out on this film during it’s theatrical run. And apparently a lot of other people did too. This movie is a box office bomb and made over $30 million, which is fine for an R-rated, small-budget horror film. But having seen “The Kid Who Would Be King,” there are a few effects-heavy sequences that give that traditional fantasy film vibe. According to IMDb, the film’s production budget is estimated to be $60 million. I just bought this movie on 4K recently and I decided to watch it on Thursday night. As I was watching the movie, I didn’t know how to feel. In fact, now that the movie is no longer playing on my screen, there is a massive part of me that still doesn’t know how to feel. But for the sake of not spoiling anything, I cannot go into everything that happened.
This movie is not exactly what I would call a guilty pleasure. Who knows? Maybe it will become one overtime depending on how much attention it picks up in terms of our cultural trends. Maybe the “The Simpsons” could make an episode based on it that would make people go back and watch the movie. I don’t know, I can’t tell the future. But this movie has a collection of decent sequences and scenes, some interesting characters, and cool ideas (some of which MIGHT be better remaining on paper), but it occasionally gets bogged down by one or two heavy plot points. In fact, without spoiling anything, there’s something that really ticked me off about the mother, and it honestly made her one of my most hated characters, probably in movie history. Don’t get me wrong, she’s cast pretty well, and she definitely fits the role’s requirements, but the way she’s written was pretty anger-inducing. Part of me wonders if that’s the intention, but regardless of whether this intentional or not, I still got a bit irritated, which is not good. Without giving away my final verdict just yet, but there were a couple of fluctuations of said verdict. It’s kind of like ordering the same meal at a fast food restaurant repeatedly. Chances are you are not going to be completely satisfied as you may have been at a certain time because it doesn’t always come out the same way.
But one of the biggest perks I can give towards this film may as well go towards the acting, because if one were to pitch to me an idea of a movie with a ton of kids in the cast, I’d probably hesitate on getting it greenlit because there’s that stereotype of child actors being difficult to work with. So I not only have to give props to the kid cast but also the work that director Joe Cornish had to take on. There were barely any moments that any of these child actors felt out of characters except for one. There is one kid who goes by the name of Lance (Tom Taylor) who starts out the movie as a bully, then he befriends the main character, which felt a tad rushed for him, but that’s not why he felt out of character for me. That befriending moment was sort of convenient but it was not my main problem. My main problem kind of occurs during the midway point of the movie.
One of my minor problems in this movie as well has to do with chemistry. The chemistry manages to improve by a tad as soon as the movie comes to a close. But the main problem with the chemistry between our four leads manages to carry through from the first act and extends for a good portion of the movie. The characters almost feel like they’re randomly placed together. Granted, one advantage is that the four leads originally were in duos, and these duos cross over. So these characters, as duos, have chemistry, which to me, works. And this was all previously established before the movie’s main course began.
Another minor problem of mine is that this reminded me a lot of another movie that was trying to go for a similar demographic last year, specifically “A Wrinkle In Time.” I say so because you see the main character at his school, trying to prevent something happening because to him, it’s what he thinks is right. And much like that movie, we eventually meet a weird being that can’t fit into normal, 21st century society. I will say however, unlike the mediocre combination of the odd trio in “A Wrinkle In Time,” this film did a better job with its solo being.
That weird being by the way is Merlin himself, who goes by two identities. Although, without diving into much detail, Merlin may have disguised himself well from the outside, but his fake name, which is exposed during the movie was ridiculous. Why? Because it sounds almost exactly the same as his original name. It would be like if I were trying make a fake ID or something and change my name to have my last name come before my first name! I might as well settle for some fake mustache I can buy at Walmart or something. I mean, I don’t know about Medieval Times as much as other people. However, I would probably assume that Merlin wasn’t the first definition people thought of that would relate to the word “idiot.” Then again, that is his only trace of idiocy throughout the entire film, so he could definitely be worse as a character. Plus another odd thing about this Merlin is that while he is often stereotyped as an old man (which is where Patrick Stewart comes in), he is represented as a young man who looks like he often jams out to rock music (which is where Angus Imrie comes in). The reason? He mentions he can age backwards. I have a question. Can he turn into a baby? I honestly don’t want to see him turn into a baby, but that is a question I continue to have.
As for how this movie concludes, I will admit that this film feels like it goes on for a bit too long. It could have ended at a certain point, but it almost feels like because this movie “needed some big climax,” it just had to continue. Granted, the climax was pretty cool at times, but it almost feels forced or tacked on. And it does partially involve a couple major plot points exposed throughout the film, but I didn’t care about some of those plot points so why should I fully care that we’re getting a flashy climax? In fact, without it, the movie probably could have made its budget back. They would have spent less on it and theaters could have added more showtimes. Although at the same time the movie could end up feeling rushed, so who knows?
In the end, I almost feel confused on my ultimate thoughts towards “The Kid Who Would Be King.” It’s not horrible, yet I am pointing out a lot of flaws. It’s not great, but I am willing to say there are many positives brought to the table. There were even a couple of shots I really liked in this movie. There’s a landscape shot that shows our main characters walking through a field, it’s eye candy on my 4K TV if you ask me. There are a few creative ideas brought to the table, especially with a movie like this that kind of has a predictable formula. But there are some parts of the movie that truly got me angry. Even with that, it’s met with fun action, a likable duo between the main character of Alex and Bedders. Although if I were to have kids one day and sit them down for a family movie night, this would not be my first choice. I’m going to give “The Kid Who Would Be King” a 6/10. Honestly, this movie could also be a 5/10, but I’m not going to give it that. Because this film still manages to be fun while making me slightly irritated. That’s just me. Thanks for reading this review! Pretty soon I’m going to have my thoughts on “Godzilla: King of the Monsters.” Be sure to look forward to that review very soon. But I will point out something to you all. You may or may not know this, this is my 299th standing post. My next entry to Scene Before is going to be a special 300th post giving you guys an update on my Blu-ray collection! I’ll posting that as soon as possible so look forward to it! Be sure to follow Scene Before with an email or WordPress account so you can stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, did you see “The Kid Who Would Be King?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite movie involving Medieval Times? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
Your mission, should you choose to accept it, can simply be referred to as “out with the old, in with the new.” After reviewing five “Mission: Impossible” movies starring Tom Cruise, it is time to focus on a new chapter while it is still in theaters. With the same amount of Jackassery as ever, you will find some things that if you read the other Scene Before “Mission: Impossible” reviews, or even the Scene Before reviews that aren’t related to “Mission: Impossible,” they’d be like a trip down memory lane. Whether you choose to read this sitting down, standing up, or if you’re Tom Cruise, running around the world, be sure to observe every detail of the review very carefully. 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: Fallout” is directed by Christopher McQuarrie, the director of the previous “Mission: Impossible” film, “Rogue Nation,” and stars Tom Cruise (American Made, Risky Business), Henry Cavill (Man of Steel, The Man From U.N.C.L.E.), Ving Rhames (Pulp Fiction, Bringing Out the Dead), Simon Pegg (Star Trek, Shaun of the Dead), Rebecca Ferguson (Life, The Girl on the Train), Sean Harris (The Borgias, Harry Brown), Angela Bassett (Olympus Has Fallen, American Horror Story), Michelle Monaghan (Eagle Eye, Patriots Day), and Alec Baldwin (The Boss Baby, The Departed). This film is the sixth installment in the “Mission: Impossible” movie franchise that has been going on since 1996. While the plot of this film may have a familiar feel to it when compared to other installments in the franchise, there is no denying that it totally works. Now that the IMF is stable again, the same can’t be said for the world. The villain from “Rogue Nation,” Solomon Lane, has some remaining members of his terrorist organization, The Syndicate. These remaining members have now formed a new group by the name of The Apostles. Now it is up to Ethan Hunt and his allies to stop havoc from happening after The Apostles gain possession of plutonium. And no, they are not using it to power a DeLorean in order to travel through time, the reason is much more deadly.
Let me just start off this review as a flashback to those who read my stuff regularly and a newsflash to all of the newcomers or some of you viewers who don’t check out my content as much as some other people. Before the release of “Mission: Impossible: Fallout,” I made an effort to get through each one of the Tom Cruise “Mission: Impossible” installments. This would also help me in creating my review series for all of these movies before “Fallout” was even able to be witnessed by the public. One thing I noticed is that the franchise always seems to step up their game (personally) from one installment to the next. I thought the first movie was great, the second one, stupid, the third one, alright, the fourth one, pretty good, the fifth one, f*cking fantastic. I started to wonder, how would the sixth one be? I had tremendous faith based on how much I appreciated the trailers, the positive buzz, Christopher McQuarrie being in the director’s chair again, all that sort of jazz. I was beginning to wonder to myself, given how much I enjoyed “Mission: Impossible: Rogue Nation,” the fifth movie in the franchise, which just so happened to be my absolute favorite, how could this be topped? Is there any possible chance that they could top the awesome opening sequence with the A400 plane? Is there any possible chance they could top all of the crazy s*it that happened in the opera house? Is there any possible chance that they could top the scene where Tom has to deal with a security system underwater? Is there any possible chance that “Mission: Impossible: Fallout” could top “Mission: Impossible: Rogue Nation?”
Well, it did.
Actually, ya know what? I take that previous statement back. “Mission: Impossible: Fallout” DID NOT top “Mission: Impossible: Rogue Nation,” it DESTROYED it. I’ve seen a lot of movies over the past few years, many of which I’ve actually reviewed here on Scene Before, and I still find it amazing that after all of the movies I’ve seen, my jaw still drops to this day at new content. This movie literally has everything an action movie should have. Some may say the story is cliche or familiar. And while I’m not gonna say that’s an unfair or invalid criticism, I’d personally say that this familiar story was very well done. In fact, I’d say the “Mission: Impossible” movies are doing what the “Transformers” movies should be doing, because both movies seem to have plots or elements of the story that repeat from movie to movie, but the thing about “Mission: Impossible” is that it is either a little less obvious, or I care more about the characters, or perhaps both. This movie has scenes that feel raw. There is reliance on actual stunts as opposed to a green screen. You have your adrenaline rushes, you have exposition that isn’t really that boring, great characters, not too many jump cuts or quick cuts, and moments you just don’t want to end.
There have been many great action movies throughout the 2010s. Some of these include “John Wick,” “Atomic Blonde,” “Skyfall,” “Kingsman: The Secret Service,” “Deadpool,” “Baby Driver.” Comparing “Fallout” to all of the other movies I listed, this movie beats every single one of them. A couple movies on this list, they have an action sequence that I deeply remember. In “John Wick” you have the nightclub scene where Wick basically kills everyone to some kick-ass music. You also have “Atomic Blonde” where there is this beautifully shot one-take sequence where the main character of Lorraine is basically taking everyone down on a stairwell. It was magic. A good action movie can contain a memorable sequence. But an amazing action movie can contain a bunch of sequences worth talking about. In “Mission: Impossible: Fallout,” you get an awesome bathroom fight where Tom Cruise smashes a guy into a mirror. You get a killer chase in the streets where there’s cars, motorcycles, and it’s just epic. You get a great duel on a mountain near a cliff. You get what might possibly be the best chase scene of the decade, the one where there’s a duel between two helicopters. That scene is LIFE.
Seriously, that helicopter scene alone is worth the price of admission! You thought Tom Cruise hanging on the side of a plane in “Rogue Nation” was thrilling? The thrill levels only rise from there! Tom Cruise learned how to fly a helicopter for this movie! I’m not even going to get too much into the helicopter scene, because I want to savor the flavor for those who have not been exposed to the true work of art I like to call “Mission: Impossible: Fallout.” Although I will say once the scene started, not to mention progressed, I was on the edge of my seat with my jaw dropping. Once the scene ended, I wanted more! It was THAT GOOD. Another advantage I had with the helicopter scene is that it was one of the sequences which gave me a bigger image in IMAX theaters. I went to a local AMC which had an IMAX screen, which in reality, is not the IMAX that I would usually go for, but it’s still a very fun experience. Not to mention, since I’m a Stubs member, it was $5 ticket Tuesday so I got a pretty good deal. Once the scene began, the aspect ratio would go from scope format to covering the entire IMAX screen through a scrolling process. It was just epic! Now, without getting into spoiler territory, one thing that I didn’t complain about but I imagine some people seeing this in IMAX would probably complain about is that there is a scene that actually cuts in between moments of the helicopter chase, and the scene is in the scope aspect ratio, so there’s brief moments where you go from the bigger IMAX exclusive aspect ratio to the scope aspect ratio and back to IMAX once again. If this were “Transformers: The Last Knight,” I’d be complaining a whole lot, because all of the aspect ratio changes in that son of a bitch, just happens to be worse than finding lots of hair on a guestroom bed.
Guys, I think it’s especially clear at this point that Tom Cruise might just be one of the greatest action stars of all time! The guy is in his mid-fifties, he still looks and acts like he’s a lot younger than that, and he just commits to his craft. While I can definitely praise Cruise for his portrayal as Ethan Hunt, making it believable, charming, and an overall delight, most of my praise for Cruise has to do with his stunts. One of the reasons why I consider the “Mission: Impossible” franchise to be some of the better action movies is that this is not done on green screen sets. I actually remember hearing that Tom Cruise broke his ankle, which by the way, there’s a moment where the ankle break is caught in the movie. Not only that, but Cruise, as mentioned, learned how to fly a helicopter. He even trained awhile to do a HALO (high altitude low open) jump. This makes Cruise the first ever person to do a HALO jump on camera. There have been HALO jumps in movies before, there was one earlier this decade in “Godzilla,” but this is basically the first REAL HALO jump. It doesn’t rely as much on stock footage, CGI, green screen, none of those cheap tricks. The tricks here are f*cking expensive! These tricks are expensive enough to make this film have a $178 million budget!
Each movie in the “Mission: Impossible” franchise always seems to have at least one notable newcomer in the mix when it comes to the cast. This time, the most notable newcomer is Henry Cavill. He plays a character named August Walker. I liked a lot of things about this character. Seeing him in action was pretty cool, the chemistry he has with Ethan, not to mention Erica Sloan was definitely charming, and I also kind of dig his mustache.
Wait a minute… Should I say that? Henry Cavill had the same mustache in “Justice League” and I didn’t like that. I don’t want to look like a hypocrite!
Another personal standout character for me is also a standout from the last “Mission: Impossible” as well and that is the character of Benji played by Simon Pegg. To me, Benji just seems like a guy who would make a lovely assistant in life. If you need something done, just get Benji to help and you’re good! If you need moral support, Benji will be your cheerleader! If you need a question answered, Benji will do his best to get the best possible answer to you as soon as he can. There’s something about Benji that just makes me want to hang out with him, maybe grab some lunch. I dunno, Benji just seems like a pretty cool dude even though he may sound like a geek. Then again, I’m a geek so yeah…
One returning character is Alan Hunley, played by Alec Baldwin. At the end of “Rogue Nation” it is revealed that Hunley becomes the secretary of IMF. Here, you actually get to see Hunley in said position. Having seen this movie, I think Baldwin is definitely a good pick for this character. That previous thought probably sounds like something I would say in a review for “Rogue Nation,” but in all seriousness, given his transition from “Rogue Nation” to “Fallout,” Hunley is probably in a very believable position and Alec Baldwin continues to play his character very well. My one disappointment however, and this has nothing really much to do with the movie itself, it doesn’t affect my final verdict at all, but it is a thing that I want to bring up. There is a scene in the movie where CNN, the cable news channel, has a heavy presence. Alec Baldwin happens to play Donald Trump on “Saturday Night Live.” There’s not even one point in the script that just MAYBE could have utilized a fake news joke? I do think that there are times in my life where I’d go ahead and say that I’ve had it with politics and hearing about it, but I’d probably admire the use of that sort of joke if it were to have been uttered in the movie.
And of course, we have one of my favorite cast members/characters of the film, Ving Rhames returns once again as Luther. Rhames just knows how to be charming and maintain a presence that doesn’t feel over the top. One of my favorite scenes with his character actually occurs in the start of the movie, when the plot is just beginning to unfold. Without getting into specific details, there’s this one moment where Tom Cruise is just getting pumped with rage and he basically has to take it out on someone. Rhames is trying to avoid this from happening and attempts to calm Cruise down, it’s really engaging.
In the end, there are so many things I can continuously talk about that’s related to “Mission: Impossible: Fallout” until the day I die. From the action to the twists and turns to the cinematography, there’s so much to love about this movie. But one thing that needs to be addressed is that this is pretty much the opposite of what someone like myself would expect out of a movie franchise. Usually you start off good and your future is full of inferiority. While I wouldn’t call each movie a complete step up from the one before it, most of the movies in the franchise are worthy of that label, and “Fallout,” when compared to “Rogue Nation,” to my surprise, is no exception. The first thing I said once I finished watching the movie was a slow but steady “Holy crap.” There was multiple parts where I whispered to myself “Oh my gosh.” There were several moments where my jaw dropped. Every single frame had my attention and I was totally entertained, not to mention appreciative of the genius filmmaking efforts. Towards the end of the movie, I couldn’t breathe. It was one of the best feelings I had in my life, and when I was breathing, that felt equally fulfilling. When it comes to 2018 movies, I can declare that “Mission: Impossible: Fallout” has something in common with “Ready Player One,” “Avengers: Infinity War,” and “Won’t You Be My Neighbor?.” Why? That’s because I’m gonna give “Mission: Impossible: Fallout” a 10/10! This might just be my best movie of the year so far. I can’t say for sure, because a part of me is still trying to process what exactly I just saw, but I really couldn’t help but love every minute of my kick-ass experience. One last thing I will mention, Tom Cruise has an EPIC running scene in this movie. Look forward to it! Thanks for reading this review! I’d just like to take a moment to remind my viewers that I’m going to be utilizing a Facebook page specifically dedicated to Scene Before. If you want to like it or follow it, click the link below that way you can take yourself to the page and do your thing. Also, if you guys currently have “Mission: Impossible” fever, feel free to check out my reviews for the other “Mission: Impossible” movies. Be sure to check all of that out and stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, did you see “Mission: Impossible: Fallout?” What did you think about it? Or, which “Mission: Impossible” movie is your favorite of the bunch? Another question I’ll ask, what is your favorite action movie of the 2010s? I currently don’t have an answer for that as this is still certainly a contender and I am not sure where it should be ranked. But if it is not my favorite, my number one choice would something like “Inception.” Nevertheless, leave your comments below, check out my Facebook page, and be sure to follow me here on Scene Before to stay up to date on my latest reviews, countdowns, thoughts, and more! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
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.”
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!
Scene Before 