Mission: Impossible - Fantom protokoll

Az utolsó harmadban nemcsak a levegő fogy ki belőle, hanem minden, ami az előző részeket olyan nagyszerűvé tette - a komikus és intelligens távolságtartás, a Cruise-Patton-Renner-Pegg IMF-csapat szimpatikus összetartása, a forgatókönyv szellemes játéka a klisékkel, az ötletes ügynöki hi-tech kütyük, a szemet gyönyörködtető akció és feszültség. Dubai inkább utolsó helyszín lett volna, nem a középső. A karizmatikus Michael Nyqvist által alakított főgonosznak pedig több teret kellett volna kapnia. Részletekben az M:I-4 tetszetős, de összességében csak a harmadik helyen áll, az egyes és a hármas mögött. (2011.12.12)

The most compelling evidence for why we should adore Abrams. This Scientology production tinsel may have inherited most of its predecessor's hallmarks, such as adrenaline-pumping action and plenty of teasing of past films, but it neglected to add at least a drop of itself to it. Neither the BMW prototype nor the protagonist's breasts stay in your head longer than the legendary opening countdown lasts; there’s zero work with the villain, the plot isn’t very catchy, and the premature climax of everything that was already done in Dubai is Bird's sole responsibility. (2011.12.22)

Mission Impossible is and always has been a great series of great action shots. I’ve always been more interested in them than the story itself, which was never exactly perfect but it managed to captivate my interest. In this instalment, I was more interested in the huge list of interesting actors. Cool Tom Cruise is a classic, but Simon Pegg also amused me a lot. On the other hand, it is a pity that Michael Nyqvist did not have a more remarkable part and that you can’t even tell that some scenes were shot in the Czech Republic. The important thing is that the director of animated movies was able to make one of the best action films that I have seen in the last few years. And I think that when I give it a go again, I might increase my rating to five stars, because some scenes here were really at the level of an action orgasm and I couldn’t get enough of them. Tom Cruise is really a champ, considering what I heard about how well he treated ordinary people on the set in Mladá Boleslav, and especially the fact that he shot all the action scenes himself. I bow down before him. (2013.01.09)

Everything I could ask for from an action movie. Well-written dialogues, detailed scenes that wait calmly for half an hour before engaging some of the indicated elements, a polished visual, and a soundtrack that reflects the subtle irony and exaggeration of the whole spectacle. Two hours of dynamism, invention and infiltration, each with more ideas than any previous MI as a whole. Finally, it doesn't take itself too seriously and it bets on only one big currency - spy entertainment. The best MI and overall one of the best and most unique blockbusters of recent years. Thumbs up for Brad Bird - he sees action differently. Where others would bet on monumetality and quantity, the director plays with the perfect execution of de facto relatively tight scenes, the spectacularity of which does not lie in the number of explosions, but rather in the intelligent use of scale and utilization of the environment. Bird just sees better. (2013.05.09)

Mission: Accomplished. I fought with Bird's perspective for some time, but his qualities are especially highlighted in the tightly repeated saga. The pace is occasionally almost frenetic, balanced by the surprising cadence of lines, an excellent passage in Dubai, and a playfully espionage mood, cleverly combined with Abrams' established trends. Fans of various neighboring series can also enjoy it, because in gloomy moments, Ethan resembles Jack Bauer, and in the final battle, he is like James Bond. And it is precisely this cross-section of genres and moods that ultimately elevates Ghost Protocol to the position of a strong player. (2011.12.16)

How peculiar that a director who had previously worked in the field of animation brought a necessary breath of fresh air to the action genre, which had become dependent on the post-Bourne chaos cinema style. Bird’s Pixar movies abound with astonishing action sequences built on the clarity of the scene, long shots and the interconnection of the action with the setting and its elements. Bird brings the same qualities to Ghost Protocol. Replacing animation with live action enhances the strengths of the medium, thus bringing back the attraction of physical action. At a time when blockbusters are rather cartoonish CGI mess with the deepfaked faces of live actors, Bird had Tom Cruise climb the façade of the world’s tallest building. Similarly, the brilliantly designed and always spatially uncluttered chase through a sandstorm is an expressive counterpoint to the cluttered mess of scenes composed of tremendously brief shaky-cam shots that have inundated big-budget action productions in recent years. In comparison with the dark, tense and sophisticated nature of the competition, particularly movies based on comic books, Ghost Protocol also offers a big, longed-for dose of exaggeration and light-heartedness. In addition to that, Bird manages to combine all of the aforementioned elements into brilliant sequences abounding with inventiveness, charming humour, physical action, playful interactions between the actors and a surreal upgrade of the technological gadgets. If what remained of the third Mission: Impossible in the audience’s memory was the playing with expectations and building of suspense with no action sequences, the fourth instalment does not rely on its twists and turns, as its action passages (not only the Burj Dubai and the robotic parking lot, but also the sequences in the prison and the corridor in the Kremlin) rank among the absolute best of the genre. (2015.08.27)

I had a little problem reviewing Ghost Protocol. The fact is that I didn't enjoy the film at all from the beginning and it was clearly heading toward parts of the film world that mean nothing to me. On the other hand, if I were to be objective, the film was better than some of the previous installments in the series, so I should go back to the older ones and reassess them. As others have said, it's a parade of beautiful people (women, men), and beautiful things (high-tech toys, perfectly fitting suits from expensive fashion houses). It could be meant as a compliment, but I don't feel that way about it. I would also add that it has very unobtrusive but effective product placement. What is visually attractive about Ghost Protocol, meaning the set design, effects, and non-stop action, doesn't impress me. The high-tech gadgets rather annoy me and overall, I would describe the direction the series took as a worse aspect of Bond's legacy. At least Bond has style and in the newest films, they even try to add some psychological depth and character development, whereas here the characters are as flat as a sheet of paper. What fails the most in my eyes (and it's paradoxical) is the humor, because, unlike the previous installments, the film doesn't take itself seriously and becomes an action comedy. However, the comedic aspect doesn't paradoxically affect me, I simply can't laugh at the exaggeration. Maybe it's because the action, story, and characters are taken to such absurdity that even parody has nowhere to go. Perhaps this is the first film where Simon Pegg, no matter how hard he tries, simply doesn't entertain me at all. Overall impression: 25%. (2013.10.27)

After an excellent part 3, Ghost Protocol falls a little short, but what it loses in violence and fatefulness, it gains in humor, elegance and a greater team spirit. The layering between action and story is most similar to part one, but this one lacks suspense and fear for the hero (the entire threat of nuclear war just doesn’t come across at all threateningly). The only exception is the middle part in Dubai which delivers the requisite genre entertainment to the letter, innovates and drives deep. Technical gadgets (although still faulty) play a much greater role than before and are (along with Pegg) the source of the best jokes. Jerry Renner with his snappy lines is also excellent, in a very different role than we are used to. And just a shame that Josh Holloway didn’t get much of a chance to warm up in this movie. (2011.12.16)

It is true that the MI franchise is one of the few where each episode has a completely different directorial style. The first was the most spy-driven ride, the second had an action-packed poetic feel (which many did not appreciate), the third focused on physicality and kinetic action, it is interesting to see which direction the next episode will take. Or in other words, it was a great challenge for Brad Bird to figure out how he actually wants to play this game. The fourth episode bears the closest resemblance to the third, but I’m not convinced that it reaches its quality. Cruise is insane, his stunts are over the top. The action is perfectly shot, especially the adrenaline-filled finale in Dubai and the car chase scene (both briefly shown in the trailer). There’s plenty of physicality as well, but unlike the third film, it’s more focused on details and moments. I didn’t feel immersed in the whole film, and that is a bit disappointing, but, Abrams is Abrams. The emphasis here is on the team (excellent cast and chemistry) and that is good. Facing the world alone for the fourth time would not be the same. The cameos are okay (Sawyer from Lost and Ving Rhames at the end really hit the mark). It's a ride, probably the fastest action film of the year, with Tom at his finest. Perhaps a bit too mainstream (BMW, iPhone), but that's something you have to take into account in today's marketing era. I would go to the cinema again. It's not as “real” as the previous episode, but it stands up well. Ethan Hunt on this wave – that's totally fine. PS: The sequence in Dubai is possibly the most captivating stunt scene ever. (2011.12.26)

The second time around, and especially in the original version with subtitles, the film is much brisker, funnier, more entertaining; in short, better. I can't believe it and I would like to apologize to Brad Bird for the original two stars. (2012.09.21)

One could say that Ethan Hunt for the fourth time is a bet on a very sick horse. However, such a thing could be said at a time when the second part infected the cinemas, which was just as far from a good action movie as fries are from a classic French onion soup. Currently, "M:I" is once again a highly sought-after brand and we can apparently look forward to the fifth installment. The success of the last notch lies in several points. These points are Tom Cruise, the team, a well-crafted story, and locations. Tom Cruise, although a fresh fifty-year-old, is absolutely perfect in action scenes, and also funny. He doesn't wear as many masks anymore, which is another point for him. However, the others support him brilliantly. Events from the third part are present in this one as well, with Ethan's story unfolding, and his partners remaining by his side. Ving Rhames only appears briefly at the very end, but Simon Pegg managed to rise to the level of a lead actor of supporting characters, whom you will love. His antics in American brawls are simply excellent. The new member of the team is Jeremy "Hawkeye and the new Bourne" Renner and Paula Patton, who are definitely pleasant additions because together they create a great team. The story is a bit of a classic spy one, where it's about nothing less than the destruction of the world, and the main villain is none other than a Russian portrayed by Michael Nyqvist, who fit better in the "Millennium" series. And finally, the locations. "M:I" has returned to the Czech Republic, pleasing the presence of Pavel Kříž. There are many locations here, including a sandstorm. In this regard, the film remains very interesting and keeps the viewer on the edge, providing a spectacular spectacle to cheer for the good guys. Brad Bird ("The Incredibles" or "Ratatouille") directed a sequel that he definitely doesn't have to be ashamed of. More: http://www.filmovy-denik.cz/2012/08/parmeni-krysy-z-temnot-mi-4-blazniva.html (2013.02.26)

A brilliant breather that captivates you from the very beginning to the end. It's certainly not a flawlessly made film, but it follows Abrams's third episode quite faithfully. Compared to the latter, the filmmakers paid more attention to the jokes and the gadgets, which don't seem unnecessary in the film. On the other hand, though, the film lost all surprise. But it still is the best spy action movie of the year. (2012.01.07)