Have mentioned that. But never actually went to count.

Except the Kremlin part, where he did get some bruise... light ones...

Actual pain only comes or rather portrayed in the last scene

Kremlin and Dubai doesn't justify his injury

Heck it's "Impossible" for starters. The opening from Agent Hannaway already shows that "impossible" is the correct term and expectation for the movie. haha

This post has been edited by hairyLGS: Dec 21 2011, 11:26 AM

spoiler spoiler... hehe

Sorry sorry... trying to look for the official clip of those scenes to post it here... and of course, Spoiler them

The whole movie is to portray how handsome Cruise looks.

But Craig Daniel looks even more sexier and macho with all his bruises...

James Bond was never meant to have bruise too... Daniel Craig is the first in Bond series to give that gritty look

Running into a sandstorm.......



















LIKE A BOSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!!

haha looks like ima go watch this after that

Timonty dalton, pierce brosnan also have shown bond can be vulnerable (respective bond roles)

---

Added on December 21, 2011, 10:02 pmTimonty dalton, pierce brosnan also have shown bond can be vulnerable (respective bond roles)


Cruise is fine here, the movie can be bit better in terms of action n effects


This post has been edited by koolspyda: Dec 21 2011, 10:02 PM

Eh this movie so good only got 3rd in US boxoffice with a few million tickets sells... Rubish like Twilight can get 100 over mill? I fear for good action movie like this will die off bcs not profitable?

Because last week MI: Ghost Protocol release just the IMAX version at 425 location in US and will go nationwide on wednesday.

http://www.joblo.com/movie-news/weekend-bo...mber-16-18-2011

Very good movie, but I'm not sure if I prefer this or MI:III, which I found to be extremely entertaining as well. I probably need to watch all three previous movies again. The way I rank the series as of now:

1 & 2. MI:III / MI:IV
3. MI
4. MI:II

Anyhow it is the best live action action movie this year, because the best action movie award already went to Tintin.

Oh and the two women here are smoking.

Who would have thunk, we can agree on things...

That happens in almost every Tom Cruise movie though. It's just the way he rolls, love him or hate him. Tom Cruise needs a capable director to keep him in check or he will waltz through an entire movie with that annoying I'm-Friggin'-Tom-Cruise showboat face.

Idiots do tend to think alike.

I'm a bit perplexed why the RT score for this is that much higher than MI:III. Both movies that a similar tone and style, but III has a much better villain in the form of Philip Seymour Hoffman. The first three movies had different directors and very different styles, but the fourth, despite having a different director as well, pretty much employs the same formula, tone and style from Abram's third movie. That's not a knock on Brad Bird's debut live action feature, it is a solid and entertaining blockbuster, but it doesn't bring anything new to the table. Again, this isn't really a fault, just saying what I noticed.

For the record though, I think the first is a bit outdated and has too much talking in that plot heavy "talking makes the movie look smart when it actually isn't" kind of way. The last time I saw it anyway. Need a rewatch. The second I can barely remember, because I watched it like when I was 8 or something, and I hated it back then. The third was a whole lot of fun.

Hey! Speak for yourself!!

I have to agree with both you and RT. What I agree with with Rotten Tomato is I LOVE the pacing of MI:4, so overall, it felt, to me, a better movie. You got it right with, Philip Seymour Hoffman was a much MUCH better villian!! One of the main reason MI:3 lost points with me is Maggie Q... She is SUCH a horse!!!...


Yes, Qucikfire, we ALL know how YOUNG you are!!!

This post has been edited by Mov_freak: Dec 22 2011, 06:41 PM

great movie... lts of new idea... 100% worth to watch!

But was the pacing of IV that much different from III? Because from what I recall, III's plotting was extremely driven and propulsive as well, and I distinctly remember that being one of the movie's high point. As of now, Hoffman gives III a slight edge over IV.

What's wrong with Maggie Q? She's pretty hot too, although I think I prefer the two woman in this one. Paula Patton or something. And that other french girl who was in Robin Hood and Midnight in Paris. Oh what a cute face she has.

Léa Seydoux.

This post has been edited by QuickFire: Dec 22 2011, 09:52 PM

I disagree that this and the third are similar in tone. While I agree that Hoffman is a far superior villain (the best in the series) but there is very little doubt in my mind that Bird is a far superior action director. The time he takes to allow his set-pieces to 'breathe' and escalate such as the sequence at the skyscrapper and the car factory is something Abrams has never been good at (not a knock at Abrams).