#but i will say that man of steel had nolan involved in production and story

[puppetmaster55]

sometimes I wonder how the timeline would be different if man of steel had included a single scene of superman saving a cat from a tree

[denimbex1986]

'Producer Charles Roven first met Christopher Nolan twenty years ago, and along with Emma Thomas, the trio went on to produce what many consider to be the high-water mark of superhero films, The Dark Knight trilogy. Their latest collaboration, Oppenheimer, has picked up right where they left off, as Nolan’s ambitious J. Robert Oppenheimer biopic is yet another critical and commercial smash. The project came about in a rather casual way, as Roven and his wife, Stephanie Haymes Roven, were enjoying a social outing with Nolan and Thomas, his wife and producing partner.

“During a social get-together, I was just kicking it around with Chris about what was next after Tenet, and he’s never one to reveal everything. He likes to keep things close to the vest. That’s definitely a Nolan personality trait,” Roven tells The Hollywood Reporter. “And then he asked, ‘Why? What are you thinking?’ And I said, ‘Have you ever heard of J. Robert Oppenheimer?’ And he said, ‘I actually referred to him in Tenet.’”

Roven and his production company, Atlas Entertainment, had already been approached by James Woods on behalf of J. David Wargo, the underlying rightsholder of Kai Bird and Martin J. Sherwin’s Oppeheimer biography, American Prometheus. So Roven is the one who pointed Nolan in the direction of the book that he would later adapt into Oppenheimer.

“So Oppenheimer was kind of already on Chris’ brain when I brought up American Prometheus. And at the end of our discussion, Chris said, ‘Well, I think I’m gonna read the book,’” Roven says. “And after he read the book, he and Emma called and said, ‘Hey, let’s do this.’”...

What’s the origin story behind your initial collaboration with Chris Nolan on 2005’s Batman Begins?

I had a meeting with Chris, because I was a huge fan from Memento on. His agent had given me a call and said, “Would you be interested in getting involved in this movie that Chris has written and is directing? It’s called Batman Begins.” And I said, “Of course.” And then I also got a call from Jeff Robinov, who was running [Warners Bros.] at the time. I had done a number of movies already with the studio, and this was Chris and Emma’s [Thomas] first movie with the studio. So they thought it would be a good idea to have another producer who really knew those ropes, and that was how I got involved.

Cillian Murphy was right alongside the two of you at the time. Could you sense then that he had a bright career ahead of him?

Well, there was never any doubt that Cillian was an amazing actor. He played Scarecrow, and he was fantastic in the role. He’s been a regular Nolan collaborator ever since; he’s just never had a big starring role in any of those movies. So he certainly delivered in Oppenheimer.

Your last go-round with Chris as director was 2012’s The Dark Knight Rises. What made Oppenheimer the right situation for a reunion?

Well, in 2011, we actually produced two movies together. We did The Dark Knight Rises, but Chris and Emma were also producers on Man of Steel. So they brought me into that project, and both projects were gonna go around the same time. So I really owe my involvement in that movie to the collaboration that we had. But, now, with Oppenheimer, it was kind of a serendipitous thing. I had been approached by J. David Wargo and James Woods. I never knew Wargo, but James introduced me to him because they were friendly. And Wargo had the underlying rights to [Kai Bird and Martin J. Sherwin’s] book, American Prometheus.

So, in addition to having a collaborative business relationship with Chris and Emma, my wife and I are also just friends with them. And during a social get-together, I was just kicking it around with Chris about what was next after Tenet, and he’s never one to reveal everything. He likes to keep things close to the vest. That’s definitely a Nolan personality trait. So he vaguely referred to some things, but he hadn’t landed on anything. And then he asked, “Why? What are you thinking?” And I said, “Have you ever heard of J. Robert Oppenheimer?” And he said, “I actually referred to him in Tenet.”

Robert Pattinson also gave him a book of Oppenheimer’s speeches as a wrap gift on Tenet, because the movie referenced Oppenheimer. So Oppenheimer was kind of already on Chris’ brain when I brought up American Prometheus. The book is pretty fascinating, and it’s got its own amazing history. And at the end of our discussion, Chris said, “Well, I think I’m gonna read the book.” And after he read the book, he and Emma called and said, “Hey, let’s do this.” So that’s kind of how it happened, and that’s why I call it serendipitous.

How does the 2023 Chris Nolan compare to the Chris Nolan you first met in 2003?

Well, Chris has always been Chris. He’s incredibly focused. He really knows what he’s after, and he’s very precise. So I would say that he’s the same guy in those respects. He obviously has earned both the kudos and the control that he has because of how good he is. He’d be hard-pressed to talk about it, but he’s somebody who can handle all the things. He’s not just a major writer-director; he also really knows how to produce. So each time I’ve had a chance to work with him and Emma, it’s really been a delight...

What’s the status of your slate amid the double strike?

Well, fortunately, I was able to get some deals done and closed before the strike....It’s just sad that you can’t move anything forward...I can’t really schedule any pre-production, because I don’t know when the strike is gonna be over and the actors are gonna come back to work.

During the premiere schedule on Oppenheimer, the SAG strike was called when we were about to start the first screening in London, and our actors had to leave. They got to be on the red carpet, but they couldn’t be a part of the introduction of the movie. So that was also sad because they love the movie so much. The only premiere where we really had a full premiere was the one in Paris. We were actually going to go to two theaters in London, but that was aborted...'

[therealkn]

David’s Resolution - Day 18

Day 18 (January 18, 2019)

Blade: Trinity (2004)

“In the movies, Dracula wears a cape, and some old English guy always manages to save the day at the last minute with crosses and holy water. But everybody knows the movies are full of shit. The truth is, it started with Blade, and it ended with him. The rest of us were just along for the ride.”

In 1997, Batman & Robin was released to theaters and... well, a lot of people didn’t like it. In fact, many say it’s one of the worst movies ever made. The first part is true as it was slammed by critics and audiences upon release and has cultivated a considerable notoriety for its badness; the second part is false because trust me, it is FAR from the worst ever made. If you unironically consider Batman & Robin one of the worst films ever, please tell me what your criteria are for determining whether a film is “one of the worst ever”, because I think that criteria is lacking. But one thing that is for certain about Batman & Robin is that it, along with the failure of Steel that same year, more or less killed DC Comics’ hold in the box office. They struggled for several years with other films until finally seeing success again with 2005′s Batman Begins, which was a critical and commercial success and started Christopher Nolan’s “Dark Knight Trilogy” of Batman films.

In between those Batman films, however, Marvel Comics decided to take another shot at movies after some... not-so-great films. And we got Blade. Hell yeah.

Telling the stylish and action-packed tale of the half-vampire Blade (Wesley Snipes) who hunts down vampires and does so in the coolest way possible, Blade - released one year after Batman & Robin - was a critical and commercial success, Marvel’s first in the box office. This was impressive not only because it was a comic book movie and people were questioning the viability of the genre after Batman & Robin, but also because it was an R-rated comic book movie featuring a more obscure character instead of someone more well-known to audiences. Blade was a pretty cool, stylish, badass movie and while X-Men and Spider-Man would become bigger and more famous successes, I’d like to think that Blade started Marvel’s new era of superhero movies and influenced their approach to making future films, especially when it came to looking into more obscure properties to adapt to film like the Guardians of the Galaxy.

And then there was Blade II, released in 2002 and directed by my guy Guillermo del Toro. This was a sequel that was even better than the original in practically every way. The villain was cooler and surprisingly sympathetic (not being mean to you, Stephen Dorff, you were great in the first film, but I’m just saying), the story has some neat twists to it, the characters are great and memorable, the action’s exciting and one-ups the sequences in the first movie, and it has Del Toro’s distinctive visual style for days.

And then came Blade: Trinity, which cocked the whole thing up. In order to properly prepare for this film, I watched the other two films (I’ve seen them before, which is why I’m not writing full reviews for them). I had actually tried to watch this years ago but only got as far as the first act because younger David somehow thought it was that bad. That’s the younger David who would have probably disliked watching sex, lies, and videotape.

This movie’s premise is simple: the vampire world has decided that in order to destroy Blade, they hit the Godzilla threshold and awaken Dracula (Dominic Purcell), the very first vampire ever to exist, to help them fight. And this time, Blade’s not doing it alone. Okay, he wasn’t always alone, as he had his mentor Abraham Whistler (Kris Kristofferson) in the other two films and- oh, they kill off Whistler in the first act, wow, that’s some bullshit. Well, now Blade has become part of a group of vampire hunters called the Nightstalkers, and accompanying him is the wisecracking Hannibal King (Ryan Reynolds) and Whistler’s daughter Abigail (Jessica Biel). Okay, the stakes are raised - pun unintended, promise - and this is going to be the biggest challenge yet for Blade.

Speaking of Ryan Reynolds... he’s the best thing in this movie ,getting that out there right now. His character, Hannibal King, could best be described as “Deadpool Lite”. He calls his vampire ex a cock-juggling thundercunt, which is one of the greatest insults of all time and that alone makes him great. I can see why some people would find him annoying or grating, but I like to think of it as a dry run for his playing the Merc with a Mouth, which is funny considering that around this time, Reynolds was hearing about the Deadpool character. In fact, after this movie, Reynolds would begin the twelve-year-long journey of bringing DP to the big screen, which would involve playing a character named Wade Wilson in X-Men Origins: Wolverine.

I’m sorry, this movie is not great. It’s just a big disappointing letdown. One of the problems with the movie is with Blade. Not the character himself, he’s still pretty cool and Wesley Snipes is great. I mean that this doesn’t feel like his movie. In the other two movies, it was pretty clear he was the guy in charge, especially in Blade II when he made it clear to the vampires he formed a truce with that he was not someone you screw with. But in this one, he just kinda gets shunted off for several other characters. To their credit, Marvel would get better at ensemble films (The Avengers, ‘nuff said), but in this one, it just feels sad. We watched this movie because we want more of Blade. But it feels like they put him in the back seat to focus more on other characters. He’s the title character for fuck’s sake, and yet he feels like he’s a side character in his own movie. Just like what happened with Tom and Jerry...

What doesn’t help either is that the film is one of those “too many things happening for its own good” films. The movie’s got too much going on and it feels confusing. What’s this film about? Is it about Blade fighting Dracula with the Nightstalkers? Is it about the vampire world finally getting the law to crack down on Blade? Is it about the vampire’s plans to completely subjugate the world? It doesn’t seem to know which one it wants to focus on, which really hurts considering that this is supposed to be the biggest threat that the vampire hunters of the world ever faced, and yet Dracula seems like less of a legitimate threat than Deacon Frost in the first movie or the Reaper virus in the second. And it’s not the only third film in a superhero film series to have this problem, as X-Men: The Last Stand had this same problem with too much happening. Again, Marvel at least got better at juggling multiple plotlines in superhero movies with their cinematic universe, so there is that.

There’s a lot of other problems big and small, and a good chunk of them can probably be traced back to Wesley Snipes. The production of this film was pretty screwed up, and a lot of it is due to him. David S. Goyer, who wrote all the Blade films including this one, ended up directing it when no one else wanted to take the job. Snipes was unhappy with Goyer’s decision to direct, and both he and Kris Kristofferson were unhappy with the script, which is probably why Kristofferson’s character is killed off early on. (Reminds me of what they did with RoboCop’s partner in RoboCop 3, another third movie in a series that sucked.) Not only that, but Snipes was hostile to Goyer as well as Ryan Reynolds and Jessica Biel; at one point, Hannibal King says “He doesn’t like me, does he?”, which was not Hannibal talking about Blade, but Reynolds talking about Snipes. Snipes also apparently refused to leave his trailer for any scenes that didn’t show his face, so his stunt double did a lot of the Blade scenes. His working relationship with Goyer got so bad that he called him a racist several times for no reason and refused to speak to him, communicating only in Post-It notes. The fact that the final film got finished and is... watchable... is pretty impressive.

This film, sadly, killed off the Blade franchise. New Line Cinema’s problems with Wesley Snipes led to them making a short-lived TV show on Spike TV with someone else playing the Daywalker, and then Snipes got sent to prison for tax evasion and the Blade character’s film rights reverted to Marvel during his prison term. He’s been in talks with Marvel Studios to bring the character back, but so far they’ve said they have no plans for the character in the future. Here’s hoping we get more Blade in the future.

I should also mention that the version I saw was the unrated cut, which doesn’t really add more violence or swears or other things cut for an MPAA rating as all the Blade movies were rated R. It has some more plot and character stuff, but that doesn’t help the movie much when compared to the theatrical version. The biggest change is the ending, which includes the infamous shot of Blade’s opening eyes being superimposed over his face when Snipes refused to open his eyes in the scene.

This movie’s a mess, plain and simple. It is without a doubt the weakest film in the Blade trilogy, which sucks because it could have been better. If they had trimmed some of the plotlines and focused more on Blade than his companions, it would have been better. Like Mimic 3, I don’t hate the film, I just find it disappointing with how it could have been better. For what it is, it’s still watchable, but it’s just a muddled mess of a movie. Not sure if I’d recommend it. I’d definitely recommend the other two Blade films.

Also, if any of you are hoping for me to review more Marvel movies as part of this resolution, you may be out of luck, sadly. I’ve seen all the Marvel Cinematic Universe films, as I had to catch up in time for Avengers: Infinity War, as well as all the X-Men films and spinoffs and the 2003 Hulk, which I actually really liked, even more than some MCU films (to which someone will say “it’s okay, you can just say Thor: The Dark World”). ...Although I haven’t seen the Amazing Spider-Man films yet...

Next time: How about a GOOD comic book movie from 1997?

[comics-mostly]

WHY I’m remaining hopeful about Warner Bros. DC Films!

written 08/24/2017.

So, it’s been an interesting news cycle for fans of comic book films. I imagine, by now, we’ve all heard the news regarding the Joker origin film, which will take place outside of the established DCEU (Man of Steel, Batman V. Superman: Dawn of Justice, Suicide Squad, Wonder Woman, Justice League) and feature a new actor, in lieu of Jared Leto. Then there’s the additional news that Matt Reeves’ The Batman will also be outside of the DCEU, and that Ben Affleck will not be playing the role of the Dark Knight in the film. In fact, I’m sure by the time I get around to posting this a Robin film will be announced with a brand new actor. I’m kidding, but you get my point – strange things are happening over at Warner Bros. these days. But, oddly enough, while many are groaning and griping over the news, I have found a way to channel the House of El and maintain a sense of Hope. I’ll explain.

You know what DC does really, really well outside of producing comics? Movies. No, I’m not talking about the DCEU, but the DCUAOM. I know the acronym doesn’t quite roll off the tongue the way the DCEU does, but what I’m referring to is the DC Universe Animated Original Movies. Movies such as Flashpoint, Batman: Under the Red Hood, and Justice League: War; to name a few. Quite frankly, when it comes to animated features, DC knows what it's doing, and it does it well. I used to think that it was because these stories pulled directly from the comics, but with films such as Justice League: Gods and Monsters and Batman vs. Robin, the studio has shown us that not only are they able to adapt stories from the pages of comics, but they are also able to create their own stories that still provide solid entertainment for audiences. 

So, why am I mentioning this? Because, I’m hoping that’s what Warner Bros. is planning to give us with these new films; films of the same story-telling quality as their animated productions, except in a live-action format. Stories that don’t necessarily have to interact with one another, such as Justice League: Gods and Monsters or the new Batman and Harley Quinn which are not bound by continuity in the same way other films are. These new films, which will reside within the purview of DC Films but not necessarily the DCEU, can take chances that might serve to create something unique and interesting.

Another aspect of these films I find interesting is the fact that it seems as though they will not interact with one another. Now I know this may seem contradictory to my Defenders post, but it does align with my thoughts on the Earth One line of comics. The reason this new revelation has me excited is because it essentially offers the best of both worlds; we will not only have the DCEU – which will be our shared universe – but we will also have standalone universes which only have one hero inhabiting it (at least in theory.) So we can have fun with our occasional team ups in the DCEU, but also see stories that exist outside of that universe - stories that could possibly offer twists and turns that the DCEU is unable to provide. Think, Star Wars: Rogue One - but with DC Films.

An example outside of the realm of Animated films is the Christopher Nolan trilogy. As much as I would have loved to see Bale’s Batman fighting alongside other DC Heroes, there was an undeniable beauty to the idea of a lone Knight fighting criminals in the streets of Gotham. I mean, The Dark Knight is still one of my favorite films of all time – comic book or otherwise. And Man of Steel, which was treated as a standalone film before work started on the other DCEU films, was a masterpiece in its own regard; the idea of an alien presence making itself known to a planet that had previously held the belief that it was alone in all the cosmos. Both of those films were amazing – even without the integration of a shared universe or involving other heroes. In fact, as much as I hate to say it, DC seems to have only suffered as a result of their shared universe, compared to the thriving beast that is the MCU. But, that’s a conversation for a different post.

Now, while I’m not necessarily excited for a Joker film, I can appreciate the fact that Warner Bros. is trying to do something different; that they’re taking the initiative to branch out from the established norm and provide a story unlike anything we’ve ever seen before. I’m not entirely sure how audience are going to take it - so far it’s been met with an almost overwhelming backlash - but I’m trying to remain hopeful. Besides, backlash is often the initial response to matters such as this. Remember when people used to say Heath Ledger was the worst choice to inherit the mantle of The Joker?

All in all, while I'm trying to remain optimistic about the situation, I know the reality of it is that it will probably be just as messy as the DCEU. If the history of this new slate of DC films have taught me anything, it's that they don't quite seem to have a handle on what it is they're trying to accomplish. And, I’m not going to necessarily fault them for that; while I’m sure it seems easy from the outside looking in, I imagine there are aspects that are incredibly difficult to create and produce. I'm hoping that Justice League is successful because that will more than likely be the most difficult film to pull off, and I imagine that if they can get a handle on that, that the rest of the films will be smoother moving forward. But, I don't know. We'll just have to wait and see how it all turns out.

Until then, feel free to leave comments about how you feel about the new DC films that are going to take place outside of the DCEU. Are you excited to see a new Joker? Are you hyped that someone else will be taking over the mantle of the Bat? Do you think it's all a giant mess? Let me know - I'd love to talk about it. Until then, feel free to check out some of my other posts!

[spryfilm]

“Mission: Impossible – Fallout ” (2018)

Thriller

Running Time: 147 minutes

Written by: Christopher McQuarrie

Directed by: Christopher McQuarrie

Featuring:  Tom Cruise, Ving Rhames, Simon Pegg, Rebecca Ferguson, Sean Harris, Michelle Monaghan, Alec Baldwin, Henry Cavill and Angela Bassett

August Walker: “How many times has Hunt’s government betrayed him, disavowed him, cast him aside? How long before a man like that has had enough?”

Say what you want about Tom Cruise especially as a public persona with his associations to Scientology as well as marriages that have come and gone, but there has rarely been a more popular as well as bigger movie star in all of Hollywood history. Sure there have been box office disappointments but even when his star was seemingly falling in the US it was picking up elsewhere in the world to carry his popularity, enabling him to make not only big budget movies but more modest fare as well, such as last years “American Made” (2017), which was an above average action/drama but also a modest hit with a great cast, including some fantastic production talent. The only real box office dud in recent memory was the musical “Rock of Ages” (2012) where he only had a minor role but showed no fear in his performance, which coincidentally is what he has become known for since “Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol” (2011) with its huge (mostly) non CGI stunts, with Cruise front and centre in those performances. Now against all odds when at one point this franchise seemed dead after a listless third entry we now have the sixth, arguably its biggest entry with almost everything supersized as well as a push towards the future with not only some familiar faces but new blood injected to keep things fresh, although with the sheer number of set pieces this never seems an issue.

“Mission: Impossible – Fallout” (2018) as the sixth entry arrives twenty two years after the first installment revisited the East as a post cold war adaption of a television series best known for the continuous face swapping that occurred almost every episode to ensure the IMF always came out on top. The first movie had two major set pieces that have been not only parodied endlessly but served as a taster for what was to come. Until this new movie each installment had a different director that was supposed to offer something different for fans but it was not until Brad Bird directed the great “Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol” that it was clear the type of story, as well as feel that these movies should strive for. They became more cinematic, a lot more tongue in cheek, they took the stories global, introduced new actors to the world and of course the stunts got more practical as well as much bigger. In fact the entire franchise became more like a Chris Nolan movie than a James Bond movie, it is no wonder people would love Nolan to direct the Bond franchise.

Returning writer/director Christopher McQuarrie shows onscreen that he has not only learnt from his previous mission but illustrates how to make a movie that isn’t a comic book movie, differentiating it as much as possible through the use of excellent actors as well as crafted set pieces, including a story that while not completely original does something that few blockbusters do, make the action a part of the narrative in doing so it slims the plot down to a double dip, that is a road movie of sorts as well as a conspiracy thriller set around the all too familiar ‘loose nukes’ storyline seen in many other spy thrillers. The fact that the plot of this movie may seem overly familiar is not necessarily a negative as it serves a purpose cutting through with ease to the audience about what is actually occurring onscreen. Where “Mission: Impossible – Fallout” is original is that separate from the action it introduces many new people to the franchise that could return or not, it also, while being based around one character, Ethan Hunt, does let many of its other characters shine in very specific ways as to really make this new movie original in a Summer full of reboots, sequels, prequels and remakes. McQuarrie has been given free reign like no other ‘Mission’ director, in that he after the success of his previous movie, as well as his close relationship with Cruise he has crafted the movie he wanted to produce with the highest stakes going, the future of the franchise is in his hands and to his credit he succeeds far higher than many other writer/directors have in the past with any equivalent franchise – this could be the franchises “Skyfall” (2012). As mentioned McQuarrie has become a fine director and this movie has many nods to previous installments as well as many other movies reflective of the genre that this movie apes in some great ways, using noise, silence as well as music to highlight moments that other directors may rely on tropes to get by.

“Mission: Impossible – Fallout” is set two years after the capture of Solomon Lane (Sean Harris), the remains of his organization ‘The Syndicate’ have reformed into a terrorist group known as ‘The Apostles. At a safehouse in Belfast, Ethan Hunt (Tom Cruise) receives details of a mission to intercept the sale of three plutonium cores to members of the group. The mission takes him to Berlin where he meets up with Benji Dunn (Simon Pegg) and Luther Stickell (Ving Rhames), but the mission fails when Hunt makes the choice to save Luther’s life and the plutonium is taken by the Apostles. Erica Sloane (Angela Bassett), Director of the CIA, instructs Special Activities operative August Walker (Henry Cavill) to shadow Hunt as he attempts to retrieve the plutonium. So the movie moves at a brisk pace from here towards a goal that has a complicated plot which is as stated surrounded by amazing action set pieces.

As with any ‘Mission’ movie the central figure is always Tom Cruise as not only Ethan Hunt but also as one of the uncredited writers and as main producer. These movies have always been Cruise’s baby with him taking centre stage at almost every turn, for the most part succeeding both critically as well as financially even when his personal stock has been low these movies have soared high. Everything about Cruise has already been written, he is dedicated to action movies like no other actor ever, maybe except Steve McQueen, but Cruise does so much more physically than he ever did. Not only that but Cruise is an underrated actor both dramatically as well as comedically what is great about the ‘Mission’ movies is that he gets to exercise those muscles throughout sometimes in the same scene. Lastly Cruise is not afraid to share the screen with anyone which has been a hallmark of his entire career, here he invites the entire cast to do their best work, and within the medium they all deliver some of their best work.

Returning to the franchise are Ving Rhames, Simon Pegg, Rebecca Ferguson, Sean Harris, Michelle Monaghan and Alec Baldwin all playing their parts like old pros, they have all made appearances before so know their jobs with all shining in their own individual ways which compliment the main star. New to the fold are great character actor Angela Bassett who is always fantastic to see onscreen especially in high profile projects such as this and the huge success that was “Black Panther” (2018). Also newly arriving is the unofficial co-lead of the movie Henry Cavill, who has been searching for a successful high profile movie after the success of “Man of Steel” (2013), which it appears he has found after two disastrous DCEU movies as well as the underrated “The Man from U.N.C.L.E.” (2015), it appears playing this part may have stretched him showing that he has a viable career after playing Superman. Cavill is a physically gifted actor who here gets to not only play strong action scenes, but gets to really invent a character playing high drama, comedy as well as being duplicitous throughout his arc in a very good bordering on great action movie, one of the best of the year.

The road movie narrative fits very well with this new movie, it starts in Belfast and doesn’t give up until the climax of the movie, like all great movies of its ilk, it is not so much the end goal that is important or even satisfying, it is the trip it takes to get there, unlike many movies this attempts to not only up the ante from previous movies but seeks to do that from scene to scene. The fact that this movie succeeds as a spectacle speaks highly of not only the director as well as the actors but of the stunt people, the cinematographer and everyone else involved in the production. Unlike many similar movies there is definitely something that will be lost not seeing this on the big screen, it is that much of a unique event, it has to be the best ‘Mission’ movie yet which speaks directly to how great it is, anything that the previous movie missed in terms of quality, story, narrative or action or more than made up for here, not only that it sets a firm direction for the future without offering any kind of bait for a sequel.

This movie does so many things right with not only the stunts but the overall way this sequel fits into the overarching narrative started with “Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol” which hinted at some rival group of terrorists as well as the fate of Ethan’s wife. What is unusual to almost all blockbusters especially the patriarchal themed movies is this one does actually have a very real emotional core that has only increased with each subsequent sequel. “Mission: Impossible – Fallout” does what possibly only the middle two ‘Bourne’ sequels did, that is explain why character shifts occur as well as how the last three movies fit in to this universe which is now free to really ramp up to a new story yet leaning on the past in a very substantive way, I cannot wait for more of these movies.

If you want a movie that is entertaining as well as action packed with moments of comedy then this is for you. It is that rare franchise sequel that is worth the price of entry; it begs to be watched multiple times, this movie is a winner on all levels and a great way to end the summer blockbuster season.

“Mission: Impossible – Fallout” is out now only in cinemas.

Film review: “Mission: Impossible – Fallout” (2018) "Mission: Impossible – Fallout " (2018) Thriller Running Time: 147 minutes Written by: Christopher McQuarrie Directed by: Christopher McQuarrie…