Given that the IMAX screen at Sunway Pyramid isn't that big, would you guys still recommend watching this there instead of a normal screen?

I might just go for the Digital 2D version since that has better visual clarity, but then I'm hearing from you guys the subtitles take up 1/3 of the screen? That's just ridiculous.

Calm down guys. I've already bought the IMAX tickets for tomorrow. From what I hear the Dubai sequence in IMAX is one of the best action setpieces of all time. This better not disappoint! Lol

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.

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For the record though, I think the first is a bit outdated and has too much talking in that plot heavy "talking makes the movie look smart when it actually isn't" kind of way.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.

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

Maybe I'm due a viewing of III again, but from what I remember there wasn't nothing wrong with the action in III. The Burj Khalifa sequence is an exception, as I'm sure Bird utilized the IMAX cameras to capture the sense of vertigo that most other movies fail to adequately reproduce. He succeeds. But the Vatican sequence in III, while not serving up the high-rise spectacle of the Burj scene, is still a mightily cool sequence in itself that rivals the entire Dubai sequence in IV. The bridge attack scene was also pretty terrific. Very nicely shot.

Btw, take a look at this.

http://www.slashfilm.com/qa-imax-theatre-real-imax-liemax/

So yeah, we got ourselves lieMAX.

Can't imagine how good the Burj Khalifa scene would have been in real IMAX.

This post has been edited by QuickFire: Dec 23 2011, 12:54 PM

Ads and no widescreen... Nah I have the DVD anyway.

Yeah the IMAX at berjaya was much bigger than the one at Sunway, but I've heard even that was small compared to the real IMAX screens elsewhere. There's also an IMAX screen in our planeterium, can't remember how big it is since its been such a long time when I was there but the screen is dome shaped.

Is the screen at berjaya now smaller since GSC took charge? I was there last year for TRON legacy and it felt smaller than before.

When TDK was showing I actually asked them why didn't they bring in the real IMAX reel instead of blowing up the normal 35mm, and they told me the business was loss making and they couldn't afford to bring in the real deal.

Dude anyone could have predicted that. It's an MI movie. So what's your point here? That the story in a blockbuster action movie is predictable? They're not trying to reinvent anything here.

No problem dude, I'm just bored on Christmas, as I usually am. You know, family and the likes at my grandma's house. NBTD

Actually I was about to say in my previous post that this movie isn't Casino Royale which brought something new, but just couldn't be bothered. Then again Casino Royale was inspired by the Bourne series, and I'm glad they didn't go down that route. I didn't want an action flick with a quite such a serious tone, I wanted one where I could just relax and leave my brain at the door, something silly. This movie was that, although I do feel MI:III was slightly better because of the superior villain and because I thought there was genuinely something at stake in III (Ethan's wife + the sheer menace of Hoffman's character gave me a sense of that). Here, as you guys point out, the plot is vanilla, I didn't give a shit about it. I'm serious when I say I switched myself off when there was lots of talking about the plot in between the action scenes.

But everything else (i.e. the action) was good. So it's all good to me in the end. Nothing against any of you who wanted a smarter movie though.

I watched the first MI movie. Wow I've been talking shit haven't I. Great movie. The script is smart, and while it isn't action heavy like the other movies, the setpieces it does have are very cool. Love the opening credits as well, something the new movie was rather bad at. Surprising how much taste in movie changes in just a few years. It isn't even outdated as I had remembered (apart from a very few, small scenes).

So... I may have to place the first movie at the top of the series, but I better watch II and III first lest I start calling myself an idiot again.

While I agree with a lot of what you said, was the new movie that much different from the third? Sure, the third had more intense pacing and tone (big chunk due to Hoffman), but it was also a whole damn lot of fun. This one was lighter, brisker, and not that different. The first three movies were all very different, of course.

I just feel that III accomplished almost everything that was good and fun here whilst also being more thrilling overall.

This post has been edited by QuickFire: Dec 27 2011, 07:57 PM

I agree.

No matter what you think of the movie, you have to admit Ethan Hunt lost all his cred when he put on his... Apple earbuds.



This post has been edited by QuickFire: Dec 28 2011, 02:02 PM

They both can't match him for sheer star power though.

I'd rank the movies as such:

1, 4, 3, 5, 2

Thia one felt like a combination of the first and fourth movies, but not as good as either. All previous 4 movies were strikingly different in one way or another and this is the first time I felt that nothing new or different was done. It's closest to Ghost Protocol, but lacks the ultra slick and confident touch of Brad Bird. Still a pretty good and fun movies in its own right.

This post has been edited by QuickFire: Aug 9 2015, 03:57 PM

The score has some outstanding moments. Take the one below for example, when was the last time we heard a track that progressed its theme so elegantly in a modern action blockbuster? Thank you Joe Kraemer.