breakingvideoonline
Lifetime Total
1+
IMDb Member
5 years
Reviews
Mission: Impossible - Fallout (2018)
BORING TRASH - HOLLYWOOD SETS NEW LOWS!
PROS:
ACTION SEQUENCES O.K - but completely diminished by the fact that you KNOW none of the characters are ever REALLY in danger. Remember the first movie when they were actually scared for their lives alll the time, well not anymore - they're basically super heroes who dodge EVERY bullet and jump out of EVERY two story building and just brush it off. Hollywood knows that this is TRASH and that only the DUMBEST of audiences will continue to suspend disbelief.
ALSO Con, the PATHETIC product placement by BMW and LAND ROVER. Its just so obvious it hurts - thereby distracting from the movie. On multiple occasions the cars are literally waiting to be hopped in and lined up as if in a show room. its just so sad, how about showing the cars getting used properly and the characters having fun in them. First we get a new BMW then we get a mix of Range rovers the baddies get around in, then we get an OLD and (INVINCIBLE) BMW that gets shot / crashes multiple times but just keeps going of course - unlike any new BMW . LOL . THEN for the cherry on the product placement cake we get an OLD LAND ROVER later in the movie.... wtf... it probably broke down 200 times while filming.
ALSO ALL car scenes were aimed at the LOWEST possible common denominator - NO pedestrians for multiple minutes of the movies motorcycle scenes - racing along sidewalks (IN PARIS) at 100mph ... ok ... sure wake me up when its over because thats dumb.
CONS:
THE STORY .they Bring back grumpy BORING Villain from last film ( LAZY ) , create some UNBELIEVABLE life or death tension between characters who are meant to be ON THE SAME TEAM. Cause severe audience confusion by attempting to create multiple plot lines that stop as soon as they're started - force in a romantic story arcs that have NO substance in case you offend someone for a kiss scene ... oooooh noooo can't do that but we can show multiple police officers getting murdered in a tunnel. There's something very wrong with current US censorship when abhorrent violence gets into PG-13 but a KISS between the main characters - who are in love - is NOOOOT allowed.
THE HELICOPTER SCENE,
Whoever came up with the idea to have two helo's chasing each other - pat on back, whoever executed the filming / plot points, go back to school.
I understand creative licence in a film and the need to apply it occasionally, however when a chopper gets shot in the engine ( this chopper only has one ) and your entire warning display shows in RED then its going down sooner than later. However here we see nearly INVINCIBLE choppers racing each other to the bottom (literally) of an action sequence that should have been much more creative and believable, Hunt finally crashes his chopper into the SPINNING rear tail rotor of the one in front - but doesn't even get a scratch. The choppers both crash but their airframes are like solid METAL spheres bouncing along the mountain like balls. - I'm sure everyone is well aware that choppers are NOT strong, they are as light as possible and squish without hesitation.
NO real spoilers, but the ENDING
So the bombs are meant to be undefusable, simon peg says so for like a whole minute - so it MUST be, then 5 mins later he announces that HE CAN defuse them ..yah horruh we as an audience were ALMOST subject to some sense of danger. nope not anymore. so we KNOW the bombs will be defused before the bomb defusal scene even STARTS! this is a failure of movie making 101.
Then the cherry on top is that the movie outright FAKES a nuclear explosion with a cut to a white screen for 3 seconds and a very very very bright sunrise that tom cruise is looking at for no apparent reason other to make it seem like he's looking at a NUCLEAR bomb going off. and for a brief second i thought wow - a redeeming factor, those characters will have to be replaced for the next mission - good, we need some fresh faces. but NO we were simply lied to and the rest of the movie was so predictable you might as well walk out early, the whole get together in a nice place - whoo that was a tough one... again .... yeah we just saved a remote medical camp in the middle of nowhere, well pats on backs everyone. Also the main villain wanting to stay and die, C'MON!, really, with no reason but that he says he's sick of being chased - WHATEVER!. ITS A TRASH BRAIN-DEAD MOVIE that SHOULD HAVE BEEN MADE VERY DIFFERENTLY> Over and out.
ACTION SEQUENCES O.K - but completely diminished by the fact that you KNOW none of the characters are ever REALLY in danger. Remember the first movie when they were actually scared for their lives alll the time, well not anymore - they're basically super heroes who dodge EVERY bullet and jump out of EVERY two story building and just brush it off. Hollywood knows that this is TRASH and that only the DUMBEST of audiences will continue to suspend disbelief.
ALSO Con, the PATHETIC product placement by BMW and LAND ROVER. Its just so obvious it hurts - thereby distracting from the movie. On multiple occasions the cars are literally waiting to be hopped in and lined up as if in a show room. its just so sad, how about showing the cars getting used properly and the characters having fun in them. First we get a new BMW then we get a mix of Range rovers the baddies get around in, then we get an OLD and (INVINCIBLE) BMW that gets shot / crashes multiple times but just keeps going of course - unlike any new BMW . LOL . THEN for the cherry on the product placement cake we get an OLD LAND ROVER later in the movie.... wtf... it probably broke down 200 times while filming.
ALSO ALL car scenes were aimed at the LOWEST possible common denominator - NO pedestrians for multiple minutes of the movies motorcycle scenes - racing along sidewalks (IN PARIS) at 100mph ... ok ... sure wake me up when its over because thats dumb.
CONS:
THE STORY .they Bring back grumpy BORING Villain from last film ( LAZY ) , create some UNBELIEVABLE life or death tension between characters who are meant to be ON THE SAME TEAM. Cause severe audience confusion by attempting to create multiple plot lines that stop as soon as they're started - force in a romantic story arcs that have NO substance in case you offend someone for a kiss scene ... oooooh noooo can't do that but we can show multiple police officers getting murdered in a tunnel. There's something very wrong with current US censorship when abhorrent violence gets into PG-13 but a KISS between the main characters - who are in love - is NOOOOT allowed.
THE HELICOPTER SCENE,
Whoever came up with the idea to have two helo's chasing each other - pat on back, whoever executed the filming / plot points, go back to school.
I understand creative licence in a film and the need to apply it occasionally, however when a chopper gets shot in the engine ( this chopper only has one ) and your entire warning display shows in RED then its going down sooner than later. However here we see nearly INVINCIBLE choppers racing each other to the bottom (literally) of an action sequence that should have been much more creative and believable, Hunt finally crashes his chopper into the SPINNING rear tail rotor of the one in front - but doesn't even get a scratch. The choppers both crash but their airframes are like solid METAL spheres bouncing along the mountain like balls. - I'm sure everyone is well aware that choppers are NOT strong, they are as light as possible and squish without hesitation.
NO real spoilers, but the ENDING
So the bombs are meant to be undefusable, simon peg says so for like a whole minute - so it MUST be, then 5 mins later he announces that HE CAN defuse them ..yah horruh we as an audience were ALMOST subject to some sense of danger. nope not anymore. so we KNOW the bombs will be defused before the bomb defusal scene even STARTS! this is a failure of movie making 101.
Then the cherry on top is that the movie outright FAKES a nuclear explosion with a cut to a white screen for 3 seconds and a very very very bright sunrise that tom cruise is looking at for no apparent reason other to make it seem like he's looking at a NUCLEAR bomb going off. and for a brief second i thought wow - a redeeming factor, those characters will have to be replaced for the next mission - good, we need some fresh faces. but NO we were simply lied to and the rest of the movie was so predictable you might as well walk out early, the whole get together in a nice place - whoo that was a tough one... again .... yeah we just saved a remote medical camp in the middle of nowhere, well pats on backs everyone. Also the main villain wanting to stay and die, C'MON!, really, with no reason but that he says he's sick of being chased - WHATEVER!. ITS A TRASH BRAIN-DEAD MOVIE that SHOULD HAVE BEEN MADE VERY DIFFERENTLY> Over and out.
Dunkirk (2017)
Disjointed Mess! Shocking continuity issues make it an unbelievable yawn fest.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
So, it looked promising and so lets start with the PROS;
The intro sequence all 6 minutes (including the first dive bombing) should have continued for the whole movie - EPIC!
That's it for pro's, really the rest will just make you depressed.
CONS;
A poorly cobbled together film without a story and achingly under- utilized actors.
The awfully executed chronology lacked any reference or worthy explanation, exposing the glaring continuity issues and unbelievable plot mechanics.
Sure tell a few different stories, but please at least maintain continuity WITHIN each story, it's as though the decision was made to have all these points of view early on - yet when it came time to film they did it over 2 days. A few extras lined up on a beach and some borrowed planes. F*$*. we are approaching the 2020's dammit - use some bloody good CGI as you clearly can afford it.
The movie fails to portray even a 1/1000th of the actual evacuation - there were +- 330 000 troops leaving and over 60 000 killed ( thanks Wikipedia) yet ... Nolan fails to deliver any inkling of that sort of magnitude. The Brits left behind 63,879 vehicles including tanks and motorcycles + 2,472 field guns .... holy s*$(. but do we see a single tank or gun ... maybe 5 trucks and tug boat --- woo ooh ...
also the ending is Horses excrement, climaxing with some stupid spitfire pilot who is SO worried about fuel, yet manages to fly around and engage bombers for the WHOLE FILM right up to, and after its engine stops ... SURE ... then it unbelievably swoops around with no engine (they obviously just cut the sound to make it look like the engine had stopped) and then swoops past TWICE along the beach and it is assumed by the plot that it engages and SHOOTS DOWN an approaching Stukka dive bomber -NO! NO! I CALL BULLSH$T MR NOLAN!
So major bullsh%t climax moment out of the way, onto the meat and bones of this cut and pasted high school conceived garbage pile.
Day, morning, evening, rough seas, very calm seas - NEVER bloody mind - just SHOOT the scene dammit! The "DAY" progresses achingly slowly and even although we see two sunrises / sunsets / a storm and everything in between we are meant to believe it all happens during these story points, what LAZY film making .... I do not believe.
I never much cared for this Mr Nolan chap - and now after wasting my few dollar I feel confused for the future of film making and even more disappointed than ever for the general intelligence of the world. Are audiences/critics really that shallow / attention deficit that they cannot come up with an honest review so that others may find out before wasting time and effort?
pathetic for a $150 Million budget. If i could SAVE 50k p/a i'd have to work for 20 YEARS just to make 1/150th of the budget... and yet THIS is the result. These people are living in a ridiculous reality paid for by you and I>
So, it looked promising and so lets start with the PROS;
The intro sequence all 6 minutes (including the first dive bombing) should have continued for the whole movie - EPIC!
That's it for pro's, really the rest will just make you depressed.
CONS;
A poorly cobbled together film without a story and achingly under- utilized actors.
The awfully executed chronology lacked any reference or worthy explanation, exposing the glaring continuity issues and unbelievable plot mechanics.
Sure tell a few different stories, but please at least maintain continuity WITHIN each story, it's as though the decision was made to have all these points of view early on - yet when it came time to film they did it over 2 days. A few extras lined up on a beach and some borrowed planes. F*$*. we are approaching the 2020's dammit - use some bloody good CGI as you clearly can afford it.
The movie fails to portray even a 1/1000th of the actual evacuation - there were +- 330 000 troops leaving and over 60 000 killed ( thanks Wikipedia) yet ... Nolan fails to deliver any inkling of that sort of magnitude. The Brits left behind 63,879 vehicles including tanks and motorcycles + 2,472 field guns .... holy s*$(. but do we see a single tank or gun ... maybe 5 trucks and tug boat --- woo ooh ...
also the ending is Horses excrement, climaxing with some stupid spitfire pilot who is SO worried about fuel, yet manages to fly around and engage bombers for the WHOLE FILM right up to, and after its engine stops ... SURE ... then it unbelievably swoops around with no engine (they obviously just cut the sound to make it look like the engine had stopped) and then swoops past TWICE along the beach and it is assumed by the plot that it engages and SHOOTS DOWN an approaching Stukka dive bomber -NO! NO! I CALL BULLSH$T MR NOLAN!
So major bullsh%t climax moment out of the way, onto the meat and bones of this cut and pasted high school conceived garbage pile.
Day, morning, evening, rough seas, very calm seas - NEVER bloody mind - just SHOOT the scene dammit! The "DAY" progresses achingly slowly and even although we see two sunrises / sunsets / a storm and everything in between we are meant to believe it all happens during these story points, what LAZY film making .... I do not believe.
I never much cared for this Mr Nolan chap - and now after wasting my few dollar I feel confused for the future of film making and even more disappointed than ever for the general intelligence of the world. Are audiences/critics really that shallow / attention deficit that they cannot come up with an honest review so that others may find out before wasting time and effort?
pathetic for a $150 Million budget. If i could SAVE 50k p/a i'd have to work for 20 YEARS just to make 1/150th of the budget... and yet THIS is the result. These people are living in a ridiculous reality paid for by you and I>