Search
Search results
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Mission: Impossible - Fallout (2018) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
Hunt on the edge… again.
2015’s “MI: Rogue Nation” was one of my favourite films of that year, so of all the summer blockbusters this was the one I was most looking forward to. Was I delighted? It’s a slightly qualified “YES!”.
The film neatly follows on from Rogue Nation with arch terrorist-in-need-of-a-razor Solomon Lane (Sean Harris) being extraordinarily renditioned (probably not a valid phrase!) between multiple countries who want to torture/punish him. But his followers – “The Apostles” – are still active and on the trail of plutonium that could devestate key sites, with religious centres being the top of the target list. Since Ethan Hunt (Tom Cruise) originally caught Lane, IMF Director Hunley (Alec Baldwin) despatches Hunt to intercept the plutonium.
But CIA director Erica Sloan (Angela Bassett) has no faith in the IMF, or trust that the organisation has not been infiltrated, and she insists that her ‘heavy’ August Walker (Henry Cavill) goes along for the ride. But they are not the only parties in play, for Isla Faust (Rebecca Ferguson) is also involved. But who is she working for?
What makes these films a cut above your average action adventure is the stunt work, with the knowledge that Cruise is at the centre of the action. In “Skyscraper” you KNOW Dwayne Johnson is standing on the ‘edge’ in front of a big green screen. Similarly here you KNOW Cruise is standing on the edge of the Tate Modern tower – probably without a safety line – as the camera goes 360 degrees around him. This makes all the difference to the adrenalin count.
There are some outstanding set pieces in the film, with extraordinarily spectacular shots from a ‘halo jump’ and a dramatic helicopter finale. But it is some of the smaller stuff that really impresses: a dramatic edge-of-the-seat car and motorbike chase through central Paris is one of the most impressive and terrifying things I’ve seen on film for many years; and Cruise’s literally bone-crunching run through London is also extremely exciting, with Simon Pegg adding good humour in his regular role of Benji. By the way, series regulars Ving Rhames, as Luther, and Michelle Monaghan, as Hunt’s ex-wife Julia, also make welcome returns but Jeremy Renner is missing this time.
Tom Cruise at 56 (he’s just 15 months younger than I am, damn it!) will eventually meet a Roger Moore-like Bond cliff when his Hunt role is no longer credible. But he’s not there yet! Rebecca Ferguson is again outstanding as Faust and as a newcomer in a similar role Vanessa Kirby (memorable as Princess Margaret in “The Crown”) impresses as the “White Widow” – someone with a familial link to a villain from the past!
Unusually, for a film series which has traditionally been kept fresh by changing directors and composers at each turn, Christopher McQuarrie (“Edge of Tomorrow“, “The Mummy“) returns following “Rogue Nation“, and he also writes the screenplay. The composing baton is handed over this time though to Lorne Balfe (“Churchill“, “Terminator: Genisys“) and for me this was a bit of a step down from the “Rogue Nation” soundtrack by Joe Kraemer which I really enjoyed.
Is it sufficiently fresh though? Let’s be clear here, I was enormously entertained throughout, and this should be near the top of your summer watch list. But it did ultimately feel at times a little like a light retread of “Rogue Nation“. Some of the stunts – notably the Paris and London scenes as above – were a step up for me, but there are some annoyances in McQuarrie’s script (see the spoiler section below the trailer), so for me the rating plateaus at the same as “Rogue Nation“.
The film neatly follows on from Rogue Nation with arch terrorist-in-need-of-a-razor Solomon Lane (Sean Harris) being extraordinarily renditioned (probably not a valid phrase!) between multiple countries who want to torture/punish him. But his followers – “The Apostles” – are still active and on the trail of plutonium that could devestate key sites, with religious centres being the top of the target list. Since Ethan Hunt (Tom Cruise) originally caught Lane, IMF Director Hunley (Alec Baldwin) despatches Hunt to intercept the plutonium.
But CIA director Erica Sloan (Angela Bassett) has no faith in the IMF, or trust that the organisation has not been infiltrated, and she insists that her ‘heavy’ August Walker (Henry Cavill) goes along for the ride. But they are not the only parties in play, for Isla Faust (Rebecca Ferguson) is also involved. But who is she working for?
What makes these films a cut above your average action adventure is the stunt work, with the knowledge that Cruise is at the centre of the action. In “Skyscraper” you KNOW Dwayne Johnson is standing on the ‘edge’ in front of a big green screen. Similarly here you KNOW Cruise is standing on the edge of the Tate Modern tower – probably without a safety line – as the camera goes 360 degrees around him. This makes all the difference to the adrenalin count.
There are some outstanding set pieces in the film, with extraordinarily spectacular shots from a ‘halo jump’ and a dramatic helicopter finale. But it is some of the smaller stuff that really impresses: a dramatic edge-of-the-seat car and motorbike chase through central Paris is one of the most impressive and terrifying things I’ve seen on film for many years; and Cruise’s literally bone-crunching run through London is also extremely exciting, with Simon Pegg adding good humour in his regular role of Benji. By the way, series regulars Ving Rhames, as Luther, and Michelle Monaghan, as Hunt’s ex-wife Julia, also make welcome returns but Jeremy Renner is missing this time.
Tom Cruise at 56 (he’s just 15 months younger than I am, damn it!) will eventually meet a Roger Moore-like Bond cliff when his Hunt role is no longer credible. But he’s not there yet! Rebecca Ferguson is again outstanding as Faust and as a newcomer in a similar role Vanessa Kirby (memorable as Princess Margaret in “The Crown”) impresses as the “White Widow” – someone with a familial link to a villain from the past!
Unusually, for a film series which has traditionally been kept fresh by changing directors and composers at each turn, Christopher McQuarrie (“Edge of Tomorrow“, “The Mummy“) returns following “Rogue Nation“, and he also writes the screenplay. The composing baton is handed over this time though to Lorne Balfe (“Churchill“, “Terminator: Genisys“) and for me this was a bit of a step down from the “Rogue Nation” soundtrack by Joe Kraemer which I really enjoyed.
Is it sufficiently fresh though? Let’s be clear here, I was enormously entertained throughout, and this should be near the top of your summer watch list. But it did ultimately feel at times a little like a light retread of “Rogue Nation“. Some of the stunts – notably the Paris and London scenes as above – were a step up for me, but there are some annoyances in McQuarrie’s script (see the spoiler section below the trailer), so for me the rating plateaus at the same as “Rogue Nation“.
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation (2015) in Movies
Apr 23, 2020 (Updated Apr 24, 2020)
Your Mission, Should You Choose To Accept It
Mission: Impossible - Rogue Nation, is the fifth installment of the mission: impossible franchise. This one is better than the fourth one in my opinon. The plot is better, the action is better, the villian is better and the risk/higher steaks are better. I will rank the films after i watch the 6th one, but right now as it stands it goes... 3, 5, 1, 4 and 2.
The plot: With the IMF now disbanded and Ethan Hunt (Tom Cruise) out in the cold, a new threat -- called the Syndicate -- soon emerges. The Syndicate is a network of highly skilled operatives who are dedicated to establishing a new world order via an escalating series of terrorist attacks. Faced with what may be the most impossible mission yet, Ethan gathers his team and joins forces with Ilsa Faust (Rebecca Ferguson), a disavowed British agent who may or may not be a member of this deadly rogue nation.
Sean Harris was excellent as the villian, second to phillip seymour hoffman. You really got to hate his guts. Such a badass villian.
A excellent movie, a huge plus from the 4th one.
The plot: With the IMF now disbanded and Ethan Hunt (Tom Cruise) out in the cold, a new threat -- called the Syndicate -- soon emerges. The Syndicate is a network of highly skilled operatives who are dedicated to establishing a new world order via an escalating series of terrorist attacks. Faced with what may be the most impossible mission yet, Ethan gathers his team and joins forces with Ilsa Faust (Rebecca Ferguson), a disavowed British agent who may or may not be a member of this deadly rogue nation.
Sean Harris was excellent as the villian, second to phillip seymour hoffman. You really got to hate his guts. Such a badass villian.
A excellent movie, a huge plus from the 4th one.
Sarah (7798 KP) rated Interview with the Vampire (1994) in Movies
May 17, 2020
A classic vampire tale
I'm rather ashamed to admit that I've never seen this film, and I've only been prompted to watch it now after having read the book recently.
As vampire tales go, I'd be inclined to say this is one of the classics and definitely one of the better vampire films I've seen even considering it's age. It has a great gothic and chilling feel to it, and has a very interesting plot. It has some slightly dodgy CGI moments but fortunately due to it's age relies more on some rather decent physical effects. There's a great cast in this, although I'm rather polarised on their performances. Tom Cruise seems a little too OTT yet Brad Pitt seems too reserved, even considering Louis's character.
This film also does a decent job of adapting the book. The book I found rather long winded at times and the film helps summarise the main story without being too drawn out. Although there were a few times when it felt like the film had missed out a little too much of the detail.
Overall this is a decent daptation of the book and a worthy example of a great vampire flick.
As vampire tales go, I'd be inclined to say this is one of the classics and definitely one of the better vampire films I've seen even considering it's age. It has a great gothic and chilling feel to it, and has a very interesting plot. It has some slightly dodgy CGI moments but fortunately due to it's age relies more on some rather decent physical effects. There's a great cast in this, although I'm rather polarised on their performances. Tom Cruise seems a little too OTT yet Brad Pitt seems too reserved, even considering Louis's character.
This film also does a decent job of adapting the book. The book I found rather long winded at times and the film helps summarise the main story without being too drawn out. Although there were a few times when it felt like the film had missed out a little too much of the detail.
Overall this is a decent daptation of the book and a worthy example of a great vampire flick.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Jack Reacher: Never Go Back (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
I’m a big fan of Tom Cruise. He is a real old-fashioned film star, generous with his fans on the red carpet and with real star power at the box office. And I can happily sit down in front of just about any one of his DVD’s time and time again and still enjoy it. Unlike many critics, I even enjoyed his last outing as Jack Reacher.
Unfortunately, and it pains me to say this but, his latest outing – “Jack Reacher: Never Go Back” – is a bit dull.
Lee Child’s Reacher has many years before turned his back on his military past and wanders the country as a drifter righting wrongs outside of the law. In this film, his military past again makes a major (“No, ex-Major”) intrusion into his life. Potential love interest Major Susan Turner (Colbie Smulders, from the “Avengers” world) is arrested on trumped-up espionage charges and Cruise sets out to clear her name. Along the way he accidentally (and rather too conveniently for the plot) discovers that a paternity suit has been filed against him and Reacher confronts the rebellious and light-fingered teenager Samantha (Danika Yarosh, aged 18 playing 15).
Unfortunately the big-cheeses involved in the international arms skulduggery are determined to tie up each and every loose end in their intrigue, and that includes Reacher, Turner and young Samantha by association. Needless to say, the villains – led by a one-man killing machine (Patrick Heusinger) – haven’t counted on Reacher’s ‘particular set of skills’.
My problem with the film (after an entertaining opening) is that the screenplay lumbers from standard thriller set-piece to standard thriller set-piece in a highly predictable way. It’s as if the scripts from 20 different films have been stuck in a blender. Shadowy arms dealing shenanigans: check; Cute teenager in peril: check; Gun fight on a dockside: check; Rooftop chase: check.
Are all the individual set-pieces decently done? Yes, sure. But the combination of these bits of action tapas really don’t add up to a satisfying meal. The story arc is almost non-existent as there is no suspense in the ‘investigation’: the plot is all pretty well laid out for you.
Where there is some fun to be had is in the play-off between the born-leader Reacher and the born-leader Turner, both trying to be top-dog in the decision making. The romantic connection between the leads seems almost plausible despite their 20 (TWENTY!) year age difference: this is more down to how incredibly good Cruise still looks at age 54 (damn him!). Turner makes a good female role-model right up to the point where there is a confrontation in a hotel room and Turner backs down: despite Cruise being the “hero” it would have been nice for female equality for this face-off to have gone the other way.
The director is Edward Zwick, who helmed Cruise’s more interesting movie “The Last Samurai”.
The trailer started off well and then progressed into general mediocrity. Unfortunately – for me at least – the film lived up to the trailer. Watchable, but not memorable.
Unfortunately, and it pains me to say this but, his latest outing – “Jack Reacher: Never Go Back” – is a bit dull.
Lee Child’s Reacher has many years before turned his back on his military past and wanders the country as a drifter righting wrongs outside of the law. In this film, his military past again makes a major (“No, ex-Major”) intrusion into his life. Potential love interest Major Susan Turner (Colbie Smulders, from the “Avengers” world) is arrested on trumped-up espionage charges and Cruise sets out to clear her name. Along the way he accidentally (and rather too conveniently for the plot) discovers that a paternity suit has been filed against him and Reacher confronts the rebellious and light-fingered teenager Samantha (Danika Yarosh, aged 18 playing 15).
Unfortunately the big-cheeses involved in the international arms skulduggery are determined to tie up each and every loose end in their intrigue, and that includes Reacher, Turner and young Samantha by association. Needless to say, the villains – led by a one-man killing machine (Patrick Heusinger) – haven’t counted on Reacher’s ‘particular set of skills’.
My problem with the film (after an entertaining opening) is that the screenplay lumbers from standard thriller set-piece to standard thriller set-piece in a highly predictable way. It’s as if the scripts from 20 different films have been stuck in a blender. Shadowy arms dealing shenanigans: check; Cute teenager in peril: check; Gun fight on a dockside: check; Rooftop chase: check.
Are all the individual set-pieces decently done? Yes, sure. But the combination of these bits of action tapas really don’t add up to a satisfying meal. The story arc is almost non-existent as there is no suspense in the ‘investigation’: the plot is all pretty well laid out for you.
Where there is some fun to be had is in the play-off between the born-leader Reacher and the born-leader Turner, both trying to be top-dog in the decision making. The romantic connection between the leads seems almost plausible despite their 20 (TWENTY!) year age difference: this is more down to how incredibly good Cruise still looks at age 54 (damn him!). Turner makes a good female role-model right up to the point where there is a confrontation in a hotel room and Turner backs down: despite Cruise being the “hero” it would have been nice for female equality for this face-off to have gone the other way.
The director is Edward Zwick, who helmed Cruise’s more interesting movie “The Last Samurai”.
The trailer started off well and then progressed into general mediocrity. Unfortunately – for me at least – the film lived up to the trailer. Watchable, but not memorable.
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Jack Reacher: Never Go Back (2016) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
Tom Cruise returns as Jack Reacher in the second cinematic installment of the popular character in the book series by Lee Child. In “Jack Reacher: Never Go Back”. After helping the military with an operation, Reacher returns to his drifter ways but is enticed to travel to Washington D.C. to visit Major Turner (Colbie Smulders), after establishing a friendship with her via phone during the recent operation.
Reacher has left the military behind and why he agreed to do the task for the Military is unclear aside from the actions of those involved upset his moral compass and made him become involved.
Upon reaching D.C. Reacher is informed that Turner has been arrested and charged with espionage and that she has requested that he not be allowed to see or contact her.
This does not sit right with Reacher and the fact that Turner occupies the same office that he was commanded has made this more than a personal score for him. Reacher also notices that he is being followed by some military contractors and soon suspects that he and Turner are in serious danger.
Reacher uses his resources and abilities to break Turner from confinement to save her life and sets off to clear her name and stay ahead of the forces that seem to know their every move.
If this was not enough trouble for Reacher, he is also implicated in a crime he did not commit and learns that there is a young girl named Samantha (Danika Yarosh), who has been targeted to get to Reacher even though he has no idea who she is and how she is involved.
What follows is an exciting mix of action and suspense as Reacher and Turner battle enemies and try to solve the clues behind their situation before it is too late.
The sequel has a premise that grabs you early on and an energy that keeps you compelled to the action. Cruise seems to be very comfortable with the part in his second outing as Reacher and it shows as he commands the screen with a mix of physicality and restraint that underscores the complex nature of the character. Smulders also does well with the physical nature of her part and works very well with Cruise as she is far from a damsel in distress.
The film at times takes some leaps of faith but the intensity and suspense of the film as well as the solid action scenes and pacing make the film a very pleasant surprise and one worth watching.
http://sknr.net/2016/10/21/jack-reacher-never-go-back/
Reacher has left the military behind and why he agreed to do the task for the Military is unclear aside from the actions of those involved upset his moral compass and made him become involved.
Upon reaching D.C. Reacher is informed that Turner has been arrested and charged with espionage and that she has requested that he not be allowed to see or contact her.
This does not sit right with Reacher and the fact that Turner occupies the same office that he was commanded has made this more than a personal score for him. Reacher also notices that he is being followed by some military contractors and soon suspects that he and Turner are in serious danger.
Reacher uses his resources and abilities to break Turner from confinement to save her life and sets off to clear her name and stay ahead of the forces that seem to know their every move.
If this was not enough trouble for Reacher, he is also implicated in a crime he did not commit and learns that there is a young girl named Samantha (Danika Yarosh), who has been targeted to get to Reacher even though he has no idea who she is and how she is involved.
What follows is an exciting mix of action and suspense as Reacher and Turner battle enemies and try to solve the clues behind their situation before it is too late.
The sequel has a premise that grabs you early on and an energy that keeps you compelled to the action. Cruise seems to be very comfortable with the part in his second outing as Reacher and it shows as he commands the screen with a mix of physicality and restraint that underscores the complex nature of the character. Smulders also does well with the physical nature of her part and works very well with Cruise as she is far from a damsel in distress.
The film at times takes some leaps of faith but the intensity and suspense of the film as well as the solid action scenes and pacing make the film a very pleasant surprise and one worth watching.
http://sknr.net/2016/10/21/jack-reacher-never-go-back/
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Rain Man (1988) in Movies
Jun 11, 2020
Hoffman and Cruise pair well together
Some films grow over time, some diminish and others are unfairly maligned. I feel that such is the case with 1988's RAINMAN, the film that won 4 Oscars including Best Director, Actor and Picture. I, too, thought that this film might be "cringe-worthy" in the harsh light of 2020, so it was with some trepidation that we fired it up as my wife's choice for "Secret Cinema" in our house.
I need not have worried for this film, it's themes and performances hold up very, very well more than 30 years later.
Starring Dustin Hoffman and Tom Cruise, RAINMAN tells the story of selfish, self-absorbed, high flying Charlie Babbitt who is shocked to discover that he did not inherit the estate of his estranged father - it went to his brother, Raymond (who Charlie knew nothing about). Finding out that Raymond is autistic, Charlie kidnaps Raymond, figuring he could con his way to his Father's fortune.
The first, most surprising, part of this film is the wonderful chemistry between Cruise and Hoffman. They play off each other very well and seem to have a natural rapport. Hoffman, of course, won the Oscar for Best Actor that year - and it is well deserved, even though some claim that his characterization of Raymond is a "gimmick". I think that is not giving the character - and the performance - it's due, for I found (on this rewatch) that Hoffman's portrayal of Raymond is layered, sensitive and sincere. He builds a character that you want to root for.
The surprise of this film is Cruise's performance as Charlie Babbitt. At the beginning he is playing the "yuppie" jerk quite well - focused only on himself - and his possessions and the money he can make, Charlie is not very likable and is, if I must confess, a bit one-dimensional to start. But something happens along the cross-country road trip that Charlie takes Raymond on - his character (and Cruise's performance) grows and shapes into a fully three-dimensional person that has good traits and bad traits. It is one of Cruise's finest performances - and it is a shame that it was not rewarded with an Oscar nomination.
Director Barry Levinson (Director of the under-rated gem DINER) does a nice job keeping the pace - and the mood - of the film moving forward. This could easily have devolved into an over-sentimental and "schmaltzy" feel good flick, Levinson finds the right balance to make this a "feel good" film.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
I need not have worried for this film, it's themes and performances hold up very, very well more than 30 years later.
Starring Dustin Hoffman and Tom Cruise, RAINMAN tells the story of selfish, self-absorbed, high flying Charlie Babbitt who is shocked to discover that he did not inherit the estate of his estranged father - it went to his brother, Raymond (who Charlie knew nothing about). Finding out that Raymond is autistic, Charlie kidnaps Raymond, figuring he could con his way to his Father's fortune.
The first, most surprising, part of this film is the wonderful chemistry between Cruise and Hoffman. They play off each other very well and seem to have a natural rapport. Hoffman, of course, won the Oscar for Best Actor that year - and it is well deserved, even though some claim that his characterization of Raymond is a "gimmick". I think that is not giving the character - and the performance - it's due, for I found (on this rewatch) that Hoffman's portrayal of Raymond is layered, sensitive and sincere. He builds a character that you want to root for.
The surprise of this film is Cruise's performance as Charlie Babbitt. At the beginning he is playing the "yuppie" jerk quite well - focused only on himself - and his possessions and the money he can make, Charlie is not very likable and is, if I must confess, a bit one-dimensional to start. But something happens along the cross-country road trip that Charlie takes Raymond on - his character (and Cruise's performance) grows and shapes into a fully three-dimensional person that has good traits and bad traits. It is one of Cruise's finest performances - and it is a shame that it was not rewarded with an Oscar nomination.
Director Barry Levinson (Director of the under-rated gem DINER) does a nice job keeping the pace - and the mood - of the film moving forward. This could easily have devolved into an over-sentimental and "schmaltzy" feel good flick, Levinson finds the right balance to make this a "feel good" film.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Sarah (7798 KP) rated A Few Good Men (1992) in Movies
Aug 1, 2020
Brilliantly done
I'm ashamed to say that until tonight, I'd never seen this film. I had thought it was just another monotonous and dull courtroom drama (despite knowing most people refer to it as a classic), however had I known this was written by Aaron Sorkin I would've watched it a long time ago!
The star of this film is by far Sorkin's script and writing. It isn't just a dreary by the bools legal drama, the script is spot on - it's whip sharp, witty and surprisingly funny at parts. This film keeps you hanging on every minute and guessing about the outcome. This paired with a truly phenomenal cast makes the movie a must see. I'm not the biggest fan of Tom Cruise, but he's an absolute star in this and displays a range I never thought possible from him. And then of course there's Jack Nicholson who manages to almost steal the show with his iconic line and speech, despite it really only being a minor part. And the rest of the cast too are really great, even Demi Moore who I've never thought much of either.
My only criticism of this film is that it may be overly long. Not massively, but at 2h15 I feel like it could've been cut down a little to around 2 hours without any real detriment to the story. But that said, this did pretty much hold my attention throughout and this is mainly due to Tom Cruise's performance and Sorkin's unbelievably brilliant script. If you're looking for a shining example of a courtroom drama, you can do no better than this.
The star of this film is by far Sorkin's script and writing. It isn't just a dreary by the bools legal drama, the script is spot on - it's whip sharp, witty and surprisingly funny at parts. This film keeps you hanging on every minute and guessing about the outcome. This paired with a truly phenomenal cast makes the movie a must see. I'm not the biggest fan of Tom Cruise, but he's an absolute star in this and displays a range I never thought possible from him. And then of course there's Jack Nicholson who manages to almost steal the show with his iconic line and speech, despite it really only being a minor part. And the rest of the cast too are really great, even Demi Moore who I've never thought much of either.
My only criticism of this film is that it may be overly long. Not massively, but at 2h15 I feel like it could've been cut down a little to around 2 hours without any real detriment to the story. But that said, this did pretty much hold my attention throughout and this is mainly due to Tom Cruise's performance and Sorkin's unbelievably brilliant script. If you're looking for a shining example of a courtroom drama, you can do no better than this.
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Top Gun: Maverick (2022) in Movies
May 19, 2022
Back in 1987, Tom Cruise and Paramount released “Top Gun” and in doing so created a cultural phenomenon that launched Cruise into Superstardom and became an enduring classic.
Now after decades away and delays due to the pandemic, Cruise has returned to the franchise with “Top Gun: Maverick” and has crafted the rare feat, of a sequel that is not only better than the original but also gives audiences an edge of the seat summer event film when it is needed the most.
Cruise stars as Captain Pete Mitchell who after thirty years is not only haunted by his past but unable to shed his insubordinate and impulsive ways which have kept him from reaching the rank of Admiral and have moved him from one assignment to another.
After his latest action confirms his incredible aviation skills but infuriates the upper brass in the process, Mitchell is out of options as he is unwilling to retire, unable to be promoted, and out of posting options. He is tasked by an old friend with enough clout to watch out for him to return to the Top Gun program as an instructor. Mitchell is hesitant as his last attempt as an instructor did not last long and he believes he is better suited to fly versus teaching.
It is learned that an enemy faction is about to open a Uranium enrichment facility in violation of established law that would threaten the region, and Mitchell is tasked with training a team of Top Gun graduates in three weeks who can make what appears to be a near-impossible assault on the facility to destroy it before it becomes a threat.
While the assembled pilots represent a brash and talented group, Mitchell must contend with the ghosts of his past as one of the members Bradley ‘Rooster’ Bradshaw (Miles Teller), is the son of his deceased friend Goose and has a very fractured relationship with Bradshaw over their shared past.
With pressure on him from Admiral Simpson (Jon Hamm), Mitchell must somehow find a way to train the group in a small amount of time for what is considered by many to be an impossible mission due to the terrain, defenses, and location of their target.
The film is an edge-of-the-seat adrenaline rush that grabs ahold of you from the start and never lets up. From the opening music to the intense aerial sequences, the audience was hooked as gasps and cheers erupted frequently as the characters and action clearly connected with the audience.
While the visual sequences are nothing short of spectacular, the film is a character-based story and there is a depth to Mitchell and many of the cast that goes much deeper than one would normally see in a summer action film.
Jennifer Connelly offers a great counter-point to Mitchell as a person from his past that has known him through several key moments of his career and helps him endure the turbulent emotions that he has.
From the solid characters and story to the rousing final segments of the movie, “Top Gun: Maverick” returns the Summer Event film in grand style and exceeded my expectations and the original in every way.
Now after decades away and delays due to the pandemic, Cruise has returned to the franchise with “Top Gun: Maverick” and has crafted the rare feat, of a sequel that is not only better than the original but also gives audiences an edge of the seat summer event film when it is needed the most.
Cruise stars as Captain Pete Mitchell who after thirty years is not only haunted by his past but unable to shed his insubordinate and impulsive ways which have kept him from reaching the rank of Admiral and have moved him from one assignment to another.
After his latest action confirms his incredible aviation skills but infuriates the upper brass in the process, Mitchell is out of options as he is unwilling to retire, unable to be promoted, and out of posting options. He is tasked by an old friend with enough clout to watch out for him to return to the Top Gun program as an instructor. Mitchell is hesitant as his last attempt as an instructor did not last long and he believes he is better suited to fly versus teaching.
It is learned that an enemy faction is about to open a Uranium enrichment facility in violation of established law that would threaten the region, and Mitchell is tasked with training a team of Top Gun graduates in three weeks who can make what appears to be a near-impossible assault on the facility to destroy it before it becomes a threat.
While the assembled pilots represent a brash and talented group, Mitchell must contend with the ghosts of his past as one of the members Bradley ‘Rooster’ Bradshaw (Miles Teller), is the son of his deceased friend Goose and has a very fractured relationship with Bradshaw over their shared past.
With pressure on him from Admiral Simpson (Jon Hamm), Mitchell must somehow find a way to train the group in a small amount of time for what is considered by many to be an impossible mission due to the terrain, defenses, and location of their target.
The film is an edge-of-the-seat adrenaline rush that grabs ahold of you from the start and never lets up. From the opening music to the intense aerial sequences, the audience was hooked as gasps and cheers erupted frequently as the characters and action clearly connected with the audience.
While the visual sequences are nothing short of spectacular, the film is a character-based story and there is a depth to Mitchell and many of the cast that goes much deeper than one would normally see in a summer action film.
Jennifer Connelly offers a great counter-point to Mitchell as a person from his past that has known him through several key moments of his career and helps him endure the turbulent emotions that he has.
From the solid characters and story to the rousing final segments of the movie, “Top Gun: Maverick” returns the Summer Event film in grand style and exceeded my expectations and the original in every way.
Mark Halpern (153 KP) rated Rock of Ages (2012) in Movies
Jan 26, 2018
From Broadway to big screen
Rock of ages takes us on the story of a small town girl who is living in a lonely world, who comes to the bright light big city of Los Angeles only to get robbed and have to work at one of the most famous bars on the strip. This movie follows her story about life in the big city and living amonungst rock and roll during the 80's. She is up, she is down, and rises to top again but not in the way you think.
On Broadway Dee Snyder from Twisted sister played the lead character of Stacy Jaxx the famed rock and roller, who is drunk but is so popular who cares right. Our switch to Tom Cruise to film was not the right person to sing. He can act but, if we remember top gun lets be real.
Other major actors and singers who grace the silver screen in this movie are
Alec, Baldwin, Russel Brand, Catherine Zeta Jones, Julianne Hough and Mar J Blige.
The music and sound track were worth seeing the movie especially if you saw it on Broadway but this was yet another way to let america get to see a show that was only in NY.
On Broadway Dee Snyder from Twisted sister played the lead character of Stacy Jaxx the famed rock and roller, who is drunk but is so popular who cares right. Our switch to Tom Cruise to film was not the right person to sing. He can act but, if we remember top gun lets be real.
Other major actors and singers who grace the silver screen in this movie are
Alec, Baldwin, Russel Brand, Catherine Zeta Jones, Julianne Hough and Mar J Blige.
The music and sound track were worth seeing the movie especially if you saw it on Broadway but this was yet another way to let america get to see a show that was only in NY.
Caffeinated Fae (464 KP) rated Troublemaker: Surviving Hollywood and Scientology in Books
Nov 9, 2018
Fascinating book filled with drama, hope, and a lot of cursing
Wow, just wow. I've been wanting to read Troublemaker ever since I heard of it. I've liked Leah Remini as an actress and I've always been curious about Scientology. The only thing I knew about it was that Tom Cruise was a Scientologist and that a bunch of Hollywood people were too.
This book is quite interesting and the audiobook was extremely well done. I enjoyed listening to Leah Remini tell her story and it was fascinating to listen to all of the hardships she has undergone. This book is centered around Scientology because Leah Remini grew up in the cult. I honestly loved hearing her tell her story and it is extremely brave of her to come forward with her story.
One thing that has set this book apart is how much of Leah Remini's personality is in it. It made me laugh, look on in horror, and want to cry at times. Remini really doesn't hold back her opinions yet at the same time this book comes off fairly humble. It's a fascinating book filled with drama, hope, and a lot of cursing. It's definitely worth a read/listen.
This book is quite interesting and the audiobook was extremely well done. I enjoyed listening to Leah Remini tell her story and it was fascinating to listen to all of the hardships she has undergone. This book is centered around Scientology because Leah Remini grew up in the cult. I honestly loved hearing her tell her story and it is extremely brave of her to come forward with her story.
One thing that has set this book apart is how much of Leah Remini's personality is in it. It made me laugh, look on in horror, and want to cry at times. Remini really doesn't hold back her opinions yet at the same time this book comes off fairly humble. It's a fascinating book filled with drama, hope, and a lot of cursing. It's definitely worth a read/listen.