MI:3 - disappointing

[GhostfaceZX]

Saw it on opening day. I thought MI:2 was a lot better. Not enough action and definitely not enough face switching twists.

[BilboBaggins]

Saw it on opening day. I thought MI:2 was a lot better. Not enough action and definitely not enough face switching twists.

Damm...was gonna go see it soon...heard mixed reviews tho. maybe just listen to the Theme tune on my comp...should tide me over!

Jon

[Edge]

Damm...was gonna go see it soon...heard mixed reviews tho. maybe just listen to the Theme tune on my comp...should tide me over!

Jon

It is IMHO, exceedingly...............AVERAGE, it's not bad but doesn't blow my socks off either.

I like the MI movies but this one was just OK, nothing special despite all the build up.

Chris

[jraines87]

I read somewhere that the "Industry" thought the general public was getting tired of Tom Cruise and all his whacky antics... This could be one reason for the "less than expected" opening weekend receipts.

[ratchpot]

Saw it on opening day. I thought MI:2 was a lot better. Not enough action and definitely not enough face switching twists.

MI:2 was a terrible film (compared to the first), so this one must be bloody awful.

[dadog13]

haven't seen neither part 1...neither part 2 and definitely not going to see part 3...

[BilboBaggins]

haven't seen neither part 1...neither part 2 and definitely not going to see part 3...

Definitely worth seeing the first...pretty good film

Jon

[dgruter]

I also saw it on opening day, and think its better than the second, and not quite as good as the first. All 3 movies are very different in visual, narrative and action style.

The first (which I believe is the best), has a very good and surprising plot, as well as 1 great action sequence (the train and helicopter sequence at the end) and a great and classic suspenseful one (the CIA robbery). I think it has the best balance of pure action and narrative. Although, I do believe that it lacks a better character development.

The second is a purely visual orgy, from the opening cliff sequence, the slow-mo fights and hair shots (John Woo anyone). In terms of story and plot its the worst of all. You can only enjoy it on a visual basis, if you try to look at it from a plot and narrative point of view you will be inmediately dissapointed.

I believe the third also manages a pretty good plot/narrative and action counterbalance. It has great action sequences (the bridge assault, the helicopter chase trough the wind farm, and the Shangai robbery), as well as a better character development than the first and second (you actually learn a little about Ethan Hunt and his life). The plot is certainly better than the second, although kind of derivative compared to the first (once again Ethan must go disavow in order to steal something and give it to the bad guy). Phillip Seymour Hoffman is a good villain, although I believe he was underutilize. There should have been more scenes pitting him against Tom Cruise (the opening scene is renching, although if you know the franchise its a good guess you have figured it out).

Unfortunately, the movie will suffer box-office wise (reviews have been pretty good) from Tom Cruise's overexposure, and the hate and backlash that he has produced given his conduct during the last year. I honestly don't care what he does with his life, or say or believe (green little men). I think he is a great actor (underappreciated by the critics - see 4th of JUly, A Few Good Man, Jerry Magwire, Magnolia, Last Samurai, Collateral), and is one of the most charismatic actors of his generation (screenwise).

good to know......thanx

[GhostfaceZX]

I liked MI:2 a lot except they should have chosen someone better than Thandie Newton as the girl...the first I fell asleep through (I think I watched it in a plane) and I never finished.

There was way too little Keri Russell, Phillip Hoffman, and Maggie Q, and too much Michelle Monaghan.

[KB]

I saw MI:2 mainly because of the Australian setting................wont be seeing 3

Ken

[Leeroy697]

I dont think I have heard one person so far say that they liked the new one. I personally think Tom Cruise is a tart but he does make some darn good movies.

[archibald]

Jesus....after all the press Krazy Tom did nobody's going to see it. My wife went to see it w/ a friend and came home and said--"Tom Cruise is going to have to either leave katie for a 14 year old boy or do a press event at every house in america to get anyone to see the next one"

[jraines87]

Jesus....after all the press Krazy Tom did nobody's going to see it. My wife went to see it w/ a friend and came home and said--"Tom Cruise is going to have to either leave katie for a 14 year old boy or do a press event at every house in america to get anyone to see the next one"

Damn, that bad huh?

[KenMc]

Jerry M was, IMO only worthwhile film that Cruise has been in for a long time.

Not a fan of his. It has far less to do with his personal issues versus the overblown hype of his looks masking a basic lack of professional depth.

[Willith]

Jerry M was, IMO only worthwhile film that Cruise has been in for a long time.

Not a fan of his. It has far less to do with his personal issues versus the overblown hype of his looks masking a basic lack of professional depth.

Days of Thunder and Top Gun are the best ones yet! I liked MI:1, didn't care much at all for MI:2, MI:3 will be a rental at best for me.

[ahchard]

nothing IMPOSSIBLE about MI: 3 .... the missions were pretty straighforward and easy...