Mission: Impossible -The Final Reckoning (2025)

Let me tell you how old I am. I'm old enough to remember when Mission: Impossible - Dead Reckoning was titled Mission: Impossible - Dead Reckoning Part One. I loved it, and I didn't even think about the problems that might be lying ahead for those aiming to satisfyingly complete the one grand action epic that could serve as a jewel in the crown of the series. Unfortunately, there were problems. Not only did the film not perform as well as expected, it was stuck with a weak human villain and a ridiculous non-human obstacle to be overcome.

I still had faith though. Of course I did. Tom Cruise has enjoyed taking things to another level in his successful working relationship with writer-director Christopher McQuarrie (writing once again with Erik Jendresen for this adventure).

I don't want to spend too much time on the plot. It feels needlessly complex, but it's actually quite simple. Ethan Hunt (Cruise) needs to get the gang back together. That gang now comprises of Luther (Ving Rhames), Benji (Simon Pegg), Grace (Hayley Atwell), Paris (Pom Klementieff), and one or two other familiar faces. The latest mission is the same as it was in the first part of this two-parter, despite the title change and exposition dump at the start of this film. Gabriel (Esai Morales) needs to be apprehended, and the dangerous AI, still stupidly referred to as The Entity, needs to be stopped. Time is running out though, and The Entity will very soon be able to wipe out humanity once it has control of every major nuclear weapon facility.

I'm going to be quite negative about this, but I should clarify now that there are moments here that are fantastic. Two set-pieces make this worth seeing on the big screen. It's just a shame that they're the only real set-pieces in a film that clocks in at a hefty 169 minutes. I would argue that it feels as if a whole hour is spent reminding viewers of highlights from the past movies in the series, giving too much screentime to big names who add nothing worthwhile to the proceedings, and having the title repeated over and over again, as well as a mantra about everything being the sum of numerous choices made throughout an entire life. The second half really delivers though, with the long-awaited submarine sequence and the heavily-advertised aeroplane antics giving us the death-defying Cruise stuntwork that has become a staple of the series.

The biggest problem here is the screenplay. McQuarrie and Jendresen seem to have no handle on the pacing, the tone, or how to weave the exposition and character moments in between fun thrills and great dialogue exchanges. It's odd to think of how well they succeeded with the previous instalment, because this feels like the antithesis of that. I almost lost patience and swore at the screen when one scene played out for the sole purpose of letting characters appear, nod knowingly at others, and then disappear again. 

I suppose Cruise is fine, although he struggles with the constant weight being put on his shoulders (both onscreen and generally, in my view, battling against his advancing years). Atwell and Pegg are given some really good moments, and both do well, while Rhames becomes the strong heart of the group. Klementieff does better with the action than she does with the character development, and Morales remains one of the worst villains that the series has given us, although he has more fun this time around than he did in the last film. Henry Czerny remains fantastic as Kittridge, Shea Whigham is shown to have an intriguing connection to some past events, and Angela Bassett must have been delighted with the journey of her character, Erika Sloane, since first appearing in Mission: Impossible - Fallout. Nick Offerman has at least one good moment, which is more than I can say for Hannah Waddingham and Tramell Tillman, but the real shining stars of the supporting cast turn out to be Rolf Saxon and Lucy Tulugarjuk, the former given what I think could be the most intriguing and wonderful journey of any character to have featured in these movies.

Despite not being up there with the best that he's done before, McQuarrie directs the action well enough when it happens, once again helped by cinematographer Fraser Taggart and editor Eddie Hamilton, there's an undeniable appeal to the bombastic and rousing score (that theme tune has served every composer well over the years, I hope everyone involved remembered to give thanks to Lalo Schifrin), and everyone works hard (perhaps too hard) to deliver something consistent with the continuity and aesthetic of the IMF world as we've come to know it over the years.

If you have enjoyed these movies over the years then you should head out to see this on the big screen. Everyone involved deserves what should be seen as a celebratory, if a bit self-indulgent, swansong for these movies, or these movies being fully planned around Cruise anyway. And viewers are equally deserving of having one more opportunity to enjoy spending time with these characters, and being able to bid them a fond farewell. 

It's just a shame that it wasn't better. The first half hour or so feels like a clunky straight-to-streaming movie, the excessive callbacks and winks feel like McQuarrie and co. were scared into delivering something intent on keeping fans happy a la Star Wars: The Rise Of Skywalker, and a lot of viewers might grow impatient as they wait for what could have been called A Hunt For Red October. When that is happening onscreen though, it's tense and awesome and enough to make you temporarily forget how often you were just wondering whether or not this could take the lowest position in any ranked list of the M:I movies.

6/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share 

The Wild Robot (2024)

I wasn't sure why I wasn't keen to make time for The Wild Robot, but the opening titles reminded me of my reasoning. This was a Dreamworks animation. As much as I enjoy a lot of their work, and I really love some of their stuff, they often feel like the kind of thing I have to be in the mood to watch. I assume that there will be lots of good gags, a certain visual style, and characters that will sell bucket-loads of merchandise for them. When I think of Dreamworks I think of Shrek, Madagascar, and Kung Fu Panda. They're all fun, and that doesn't begin to cover the range of Dreanworks Animation productions that you can, and should, check out, but I tend to know what I am going to get from them. I figured The Wild Robot would be the same, but then I started hearing more and more praise being heaped upon it. This is definitely not the same as many other films from Dreamworks, and I am already sorry that I didn't get to it even sooner.

A robot lands on a planet uninhabited by humans. That's how The Wild Robot begins. Wanting to be assigned a task, the robot (a ROZZUM Unit 7134, AKA Roz) tries to communicate with the many animals nearby, all of whom seem afraid of the thing that looks like it's been sent to kill them. Roz goes into a low power mode, listening to the many sounds around her and learning the languages of the many different animal species. Those language skills come in very handy when she ends up destroying a nest and then being imprinted on by a very cute, but also very vulnerable, little gosling. Roz gets advice from a fox, although whether or not she can trust this advice is another matter, and she ends up helping a lot of the animals around her as she aims to get her surrogate child ready to fly away before the weather becomes too inhospitable for the goose population. At least she won't have those pesky human feelings of loss and regret when her "child" leaves. Hmmmmmmm.

Based on a book by Peter Brown, this is written and directed by Chris Sanders, a man also responsible for helping to serve up three other animated movies I have loved (Lilo & Stitch, How To Train Your Dragon, and The Croods). If I had put two and two together sooner, and had a better memory for names, I would have had another bit of motivation to get to this before now. I really need to see his live-action feature, The Call Of The Wild, because Sanders is on 100% success rate with me so far.

The voice cast is worth mentioning now, before I get myself distracted by discussing the visual style, the music, and the ability this film has to reduce me to a blubbering wreck. Lupita Nyong'o is a fantastic fit for Roz, keeping her tone well-moderated throughout, with only the slightest inflections hinting at any possible changes in the way Roz views the world. Kit Connor is the goose who grows from the gosling, Brightbill, Pedro Pascal is the aptly-named Fink, the fox, and there is also some great additional work from Bill Nighy, Catherine O'Hara, Mark Hamill, Ving Rhames, Matt Berry, and Stephanie Hsu, as well as many others who aren't immediately familiar to me. 

Now I can once again allow myself to go on about the lovely visual style of the whole thing, the beautiful score from Kris Bowers, and the knack that Sanders has for pushing a button that seems to be directly attached to some tiny being that lives in my chest and is subsequently ordered to pluck my heartstrings like an expert harpist. I expect such emotional manipulation by the third act of many family films, but I was unprepared to be so fragile even before the halfway point. And once I'd been turned into a leaky-faced wreck, well, it was difficult to get through the rest of the runtime without at least feeling my lower lip quivering as I tried to keep myself composed.

I've used a lot of words here to praise this, and I am happy that I've now managed to compose my thoughts in a way that should be calm and understandable for all. This is beautiful, sweet, moving, and an essential new favourite for those seeking an evergreen family viewing choice. It's one of my favourites from 2024, and one of my new favourite animated movies of all time.

9/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing, and ALL of the links you need are here - https://linktr.ee/raidersofthepodcast
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share

Kiss Of Death (1995)

Although it doesn't slavishly follow the plot of the original movie, this neo-noir from director Barbet Schroeder does a good job of hitting a number of familiar key points while ensuring that everything feels in line with a slightly grittier and more modern approach to the story. Writer Richard Price did this more than once throughout the 1990s, with varying degrees of success, and his complete body of work illustrates just how good he is at crafting tales of tension, threats, and troubling dilemmas.

David Caruso plays Jimmy Kilmartin, an ex-convict trying to go straight. Unfortunately, he is roped into a job by his wayward cousin (Michael Rapaport), and it isn’t long until things go sour. A cop (Samuel L. Jackson) is nearly killed, Jimmy is caught, and this leads to a spiral and unfortunate fate for his wife (Helen Hunt). Knowing that others are benefiting from him taking the rap, Jimmy is eventually convinced to become an informant, looking to help police get enough evidence to arrest Little Junior Brown (Nicolas Cage).

Kiss Of Death is both helped and hindered by its cast. Cage is a definite highlight, whether he’s bench-pressing a young woman to show off to others around him or getting ready to have some beaten up while listening to House Of Pain. He heads up a brilliant assortment of supporting turns, including the aforementioned Hunt, Rapaport, and Jackson, as well as Stanley Tucci, Ving Rhames, Kathryn Erbe, Anthony Heald, and Philip Baker Hall. Unfortunately, this is another film that should have put anyone aside from Caruso in the lead role. He’s rarely been a good leading man in movies, with his turn in Session 9 being a notable exception, and this film would benefit from almost anyone else being cast in the central role. Sorry, I cannot quite put my finger on the problem, but Caruso just doesn’t emanate any decent amount of charisma or watchability.

Clocking in at almost the same runtime as the original, Price does a good job of moving pieces into place for the finale while also allowing room for a few scenes that just flesh out the characters. Things never feel rushed, yet it never feels too slow or indulgent either. The end result may be far from a perfect film, but all of the ingredients are mixed in perfect amounts. Having Schroeder at the helm seems guaranteed to keep things from excelling, he is a competent pair of hands, but no more than that, so it’s a real bonus that we got this script married up with this cast. There are so many ways this could have gone horribly wrong, and I imagine some big fans of the original will still disapprove, but I am pleasantly surprised that it ended up so enjoyable and effective.

You might be put off by Caruso. You might be put off by Cage (some people still don’t appreciate his brilliance). You might even be put off just by the fact that this is a remake. I would advise you to get over those prejudices and give it a go. You should end up having a good time in the company of some bad people.

7/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share

Netflix And Chill: Wendell & Wild (2022)

Another stop-motion animated movie from director Henry Selick (who also helmed such greats as The Nightmare Before Christmas, James And The Giant Peach, and Coraline, as well as Monkeybone . . . but we don't mention Monkeybone), Wendell & Wild feels a step removed from his previous features thanks to a more diverse cast and an excuse to reunite Key and Peele onscreen (even if it's only in voice form, of course). Unfortunately, it's also not as good as most of the titles I just mentioned (except Monkeybone . . . but we don't mention Monkeybone).

Kat is a troubled teen, having blamed herself for years for the death of her parents. Moving from one place to the next, with trouble often not far away, Kat finally ends up at a school very close to the small town where she used to live in happier times. Wanting nothing more than her parents brought back to life, Kat ends up being tricked by two demons, Wendell (Keegan-Michael Key) and Wild (Jordan Peele), who want to enter the world of the living and try out their plan to raise the dead with some very powerful hair restorer. There's also a pair of schemers trying to keep their part in a deadly chapter in history hidden, which could become tougher when the dead start to rise, and Kat may find herself equally in danger from the undead and the living.

I'm not sure why this doesn't work as well as other Selick features, but it seems to lack something truly magical and impressive. The detailing is often as lovely as you'd expect, but there also seems to be no connective tissue between the land of the living and the land of the dead, with each one feeling like it stays in whatever snowglobe-like environment is required for each main scene. The tone is also disappointingly wobbly, neither macabre nor amusing enough, and it feels weird that Key and Peele are used here (Peele having also helped to write the screenplay) without making the most of their talents. Perhaps the problems come from the source material, it's based on a book by Selick and Clay McLeod Chapman, or maybe it needs more than one watch to pick up on more of the lovely production design and character developments. Maybe it needed a better score from Bruno Coulais to lend stronger support to the visuals. I would rewatch this, but it won't ever be too high on my list of priorities.

Ross is a very good lead, Key and Peele are a bit muted, but fun, and it's great to hear Angela Bassett, James Hong, Ving Rhames, David Harewood, and Maxine Peake in main roles, every one a great actor also able to deliver a great vocal performance. Sam Zelaya and Tamara Smart are also very good, playing two other teenagers important to the plot, alongside Seema Virdi and Ramona Young in supporting roles.

I cannot dismiss this as a bad film, and it's more entertaining and inventive than dozens of other movies aimed at younger viewers, but it's near the bottom of the pile when compared to similar stop-motion features presenting macabre elements in a child-friendly way.

6/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share

Mission: Impossible - Dead Reckoning Part One (2023)

I couldn't resist. The usual "Prime Time" blog post will appear tomorrow, apologies to anyone who likes me keeping to a more rigid schedule.

Here we are then. Is it the beginning of the end for the Mission: Impossible movie series? It certainly feels that way. We all know that Tom Cruise can only keep risking his life for our entertainment for so long. We also know that each time the stakes are raised can make it harder to find ways for the next instalment to top the previous one. This certainly feels like it could be a great mission to go out on, and there are some interesting parallels between this film and the De Palma blockbuster that started it all.

Ethan Hunt (Cruise, like you need me to tell you that) has to go rogue once again, this time on a mission to collect two parts of a special key. Nobody knows quite what the key unlocks, or where it needs to be used, but it's all connected to a world-threatening AI enemy, referred to through most of the movie as "The Entity". Hunt enlists the help of his old friends, Luther Stickell (Ving Rhames) and Benji Dunn (Simon Pegg), as well as reconnecting with the tricksy Ilsa Faust (Rebecca Ferguson). There are many others after the key, although some know more about it than others, including a slippery thief named Grace (Hayley Atwell), a deadly figure from Hunt's past (played by Esai Morales), and a few other key players (no pun intended).

Although this movie series has been on great/top form for some time now, and you could easily argue that not one instalment is a complete miss, I did go into this feeling one small pang of regret. I felt the importance of the marriage of the films with their respective directors had disappeared, especially when you consider how much De Palma and John Woo stamped their style on the first two films, for better or worse, but maybe I am completely wrong. It’s perhaps the case that other directors are still very much doing their own thing, but their own thing happens to be presenting what they want to see in these movies. Director Christopher McQuarrie has certainly done as much to elevate the films, and maintain them as essential cinema viewings, as his star, and this film exudes a confidence gained from previous success. There’s no big song to use/promote, there’s no big stunt during the prologue (although it’s still a fantastic, extended, opening act), no teasing for an extended cinematic universe, and there aren’t really any surprises. You have seen what you’re getting in the trailer and marketing, to a degree, and McQuarrie, who also co-wrote the screenplay with Erik Jendresen, knows that he has something good enough to satisfy everyone who buys a ticket. And the big stunt that has been promoted so heavily in the run up to this release? It’s a highlight that the film builds to as the third act builds, with everyone involved seeming to relish the moment, nodding to the viewers and saying “we know you came here for this . . . here it is, and it’s something special”. And you know what . . . it IS something special. Because almost any other film would have executed that stunt in any number of different ways. But this is Tom Cruise, enabled by McQuarrie, in a bloody Mission: Impossible film.

If you enjoyed this cast in previous adventures then you will enjoy them here. They maintain great chemistry with one another, they each bring something to the table, and viewers should care about whether they live or die. Other familiar faces returning are Vanessa Kirby (still entertainingly flirty and dangerous as “The White Widow”) and Henry Czerny as Kittridge, a man who seems to be in the habit of upsetting Ethan Hunt. Atwell is the standout from the newcomers, always trying to stay one step ahead of Hunt and co. while being unaware of the full picture forming around her, and also being unaware of just how much danger she is in. Morales is fine, although hampered by the contrivance needed to make him feel like a physical embodiment of the AI threat, and there are very entertaining performances from Shea Wigham (an agent who quickly becomes exasperated while trying to capture Hunt), Greg Tarzan David (working with Wigham’s character), and Pom Klementieff (a skilled and determined assassin). Eagle-eyed viewers will also spot the likes of Rob Delaney, Mark Gatiss, Indira Varma, and Cary Elwes, although you don’t need to be too eagle-eyes to spot Elwes, as he has a bit more screentime than the others, portraying the Director of  National Intelligence.

McQuarrie may not be doing his best writing work here, but he throws enough exposition around during the earlier scenes to set everything up for a film that can then rush headlong from one impressive set-piece to the next. The 163-minute runtime doesn’t ever start to feel tiring, thanks to the pre-credits sequence and that jaw-droppingly fantastic finale, coming along after numerous gunfights, a brilliantly inventive car chase, a couple of big brawls, and a sequence set in Venice that underlines just how slim the chances of success are (“well, this is not mission difficult”).

I wouldn’t rush to call this the best of the series, that’s a high bar indeed, but it certainly comes close. It’s so good that it has me thinking I was too harsh when I reviewed the last instalment, because this is easily on a par with that one and I find myself more inclined to overlook the minor issues in favour of the sheer thrill of the energy and spectacle of it all. Oh, and I'll eat my hat if I don't make numerous The Ethan Hunt For Red October gags when the second part is released.

9/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share

Entrapment (1999)

A blockbuster vehicle for Sean Connery and Catherine Zeta-Jones that hopes viewers are distracted enough by star power to overlook the sheer preposterousness of the plot, Entrapment isn’t a very good film, but it kind of works for what it wants to do.

Zeta-Jones is Gin, an insurance agent who becomes obsessed with catching the best in the business, Mac (Connery). She has been following his trail for a long time now, and she knows that she has a payday to tempt him. Mac is suspicious from the very beginning though, and so begins a wary dance of mistrust between them.

Directed by Jon Amiel, a man who spent a few years specialising in slick, forgettable, Hollywood product, Entrapment feels tailor-made for its stars. Writers Ronald Bass and William Broyles Jr. manage to play up the strengths of both, either deliberately or simply by writing a project that always aimed to have “charming male lead” and “sexy female lead” at the heart of it. 

Released in 1999, this felt dated within a year or two. The plot hinges on the millennium changeover, the age gap between Connery and Zeta-Jones felt like, even for Hollywood, it was stretching things a bit too far, and the most popular sequence (which I will highlight in the next paragraph) was shown again and again whenever the film was being discussed favourably.

Connery is allowed to be his roguish charming best, and he goes along with all of the nonsense with a wry grin and a twinkle in his eye, while Zeta-Jones works in his shadow, breaking out occasionally in sequences that gratuitously dwell on her classic beauty (case in point - the training sequence that has her contorting her body as she avoids “security lasers”). It is a fairly thankless role for her, but she acquits herself well enough to the task. Although the cast isn’t huge, there are also welcome performances from Ving Rhames and Will Patton, two great actors who earned some decent paychecks from this kind of fare while they were on the radar of the casting directors.

Compared to other con/caper movies in the same wheelhouse, this is pretty bad. Compared to the slick blockbusters of this time that put star power ahead of logic and plotting, many being Simpson and/or Bruckheimer productions, this is pretty bad. Compared to other films starring Connery or Zeta-Jones, well, they both have filmographies that fluctuate wildly in quality. Just accept the general badness of this anyway, and then allow yourself to enjoy it nonetheless. Because sometimes nonsense involving attractive a-list stars is enough to keep you entertained for an hour or two. And this still manages to entertain me, despite me knowing that it’s generally bad.

6/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews

Undisputed (2002)

Written and directed by Walter Hill, fans of the director may be completely unsurprised to hear that Undisputed is a tough, entertaining, action movie. It's a bit more low-key than many other releases in his filmography, but it certainly holds up as a Walter Hill movie.

Wesley Snipes is Monroe Hutchens, a prisoner in Sweetwater, and the number one boxing champ for ten years. The prison has a major boxing match every few months, with plenty of money to be won and lost, and Hutchens is given due respect because of his fighting prowess. Ving Rhames is George "Iceman" Chambers, a boxing champ who is imprisoned after being found guilty of a rape charge that he denies. Chambers immediately starts to try and throw his weight around, but that doesn't matter. What matters is the inevitable showdown in the ring between the two pugilists.

Despite the prison setting, this isn't really a prison movie. You get very few of the familiar tropes there (no tense shower scenes, for example), but it is also a way to heighten the atmosphere and veritable need for these two men to fight, and decide an ultimate winner.

Snipes is on good form here, and certainly brings his A-game with the physicality, but it is Rhames stealing a number of scenes, giving a performance that feels very much inspired by a troubled boxing talent that rhymes with Schnike Schnyson. Peter Falk is good to see in a supporting role (an old mobster without the memory and wits he once had, but with the right connections), Michael Rooker is impressive as a tough guard who isn't also unnecessarily sadistic, and both Wes Studi and Fisher Stevens do well, each aligned with a respective fighter.

Hill directs with his usual good eye for some solid action beats (there are few people who have more consistently made manly movies that successfully blend bone-crunching violence with real art), but things fall down slightly in the script, which he co-wrote with David Giler. It is hard to know who we are really supposed to be rooting for, and what they might have done to deserve any extra support. Okay, a revelation about why Snipes is inside helps to show him in a better light, but he's still a prisoner serving a long sentence. And Rhames is still in there on a charge of rape, with his character doing himself no favours in the way he maintains a cocky and unapologetic stance.

Quality throughout, if inessential, Undisputed is worth a watch. If only to get through it and on to the sequels, which are allegedly more fun. I will be finding out soon.

7/10

https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews

Mission: Impossible - Fallout (2018)

You may have already seen clips of Tom Cruise in action for this latest Mission: Impossible movie. He dives out of a plane. He races through the streets of Paris. He flies a helicopter in a manner not to be found in the "Guide To Being A More Responsible Helicopter Pilot". He does all of that and more. You may have also already heard the glowing praise. A lot of people are calling this the best of the franchise. A lot of people are calling it a new action classic.

Yeah, about that. Let's take off the rose-tinted IMAX glasses and turn things down just a notch.

Mission: Impossible - Fallout is a very good film. There are times when it is great. The stuntwork is often bordering on the insane, making it insanely entertaining, but this isn't the best action movie in years. I'd say that it even falls just below the previous two entries in this series, and I'll go into just why that's the case in a little while.

Cruise is Ethan Hunt once again, of course, and he's flanked by Benji (Simon Pegg) and Luther (Ving Rhames) as they try to recover some stolen plutonium cores that they don't want falling in to the hands of The Apostles (who have remained at work despite the loss of their leader, Solomon Lane, played by Sean Harris). Henry Cavill is a CIA agent, August Walker, tasked with keeping a closer eye on Hunt and his team, Rebecca Ferguson returns as the kickass Ilsa Faust, and a few other familiar faces pop up to join the fun.

Writer-director Christopher McQuarrie (now on his third film with Cruise and his second in this series, the first director to return) knows how to sketch characters, dynamics, and the potentially complex plotting of a good spy caper. It's great to see a number of threads picked up and expertly manipulated. Plot points drop in and reverberate through this movie, and even the events of the past movies, with the impact of a fly that just found itself unexpectedly caught in a spiderweb. And this all happens in between, and sometimes during, those magnificent action set-pieces.

The cast all slip back into their roles with ease. Cruise is, as we all know nowadays, either fearless or completely insane. He won't rest until one of these films allows him to escape a space-set shockwave as he glides down to Earth on the back of a toothy creature a la "Ace" Rimmer from Red Dwarf. Pegg and Rhames are great support, their characters bringing just a small amount of comedy while reinforcing the few bonds that connect IMF with individual lives instead of just faceless masses to be saved. Ferguson is slightly underserved by the script, but does very good work with what she's given. Harris remains a menacing figure, Vanessa Kirby is good fun as a "broker", and Cavill is absolutely brilliant as the sledgehammer who may break our heroes if he thinks things aren't going to plan. You also get some nice work from Alec Baldwin, again, and Angela Bassett. There's even some screentime for Michelle Monaghan.

That covers most of the fun stuff. I could mention how exhilarated I felt watching Cruise ride a motorbike the wrong way around the Arc de Triomphe. I could try to describe the sheer joy I felt while Cruise called Cavill a prick. You get the idea. There are lots and lots of fun moments. And I won't deny that some of the action beats are next-level in their scale and choreography, for a mainstream blockbuster release. The finale is especially adept at jumping from one white-knuckle moment to the next.

The non-fun stuff is also very good. The subtitle here may be Fallout but I suspect that's because Weight just wouldn't sound as good. Believe me, however, when I say that this film is all about weight. The weight of responsibility, the weight of constantly making decisions based on murky and fluid morality, the weight of the practical effects, the weight of emotions. People may remember the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few but this film reminds us all that the choice weighs just as heavily on the person having to make the call, and also that sometimes the end games are one and the same. It also makes an interesting point about the war on terror and how the good intentions can create even more dangers and enemies. I would argue that the two moments in this film that completely sum up Ethan Hunt are a scene in which he apologises to a wounded police officer in French and a scene in which he tells the other team members that he won't let them down, even as everyone realises that they can no longer hear one another. Even with his team, Hunt alone feels the total weight of the job, especially while maintaining a moral code that others may lack.

Where the film falls down slightly, certainly in comparison to the previous missions, is in the scenes which allow it to remind us of the past. McQuarrie ties up loose ends that few people were all that bothered about. He does it well, or as well as he can, but it still feels unnecessary. The same goes for some of the details and callbacks that make the film feel like some grand sendoff rather than just a grand adventure. I'm not going to namecheck them all, and I am not saying that there are lots and lots, but fans of the series will find some moments feeling far too familiar because McQuarrie felt that he needed to include some extra little nods and winks.

The fourth film had amazing set-pieces without a memorable villain, the fifth film had the perfect mix of both. This film sits somewhere between the two. The villains are great, the action is often brilliant, but it's a bit overlong, a bit happy to scamper back and forth to the same well, and sometimes, even for this series, feels a bit too unbelievably coincidental and convenient.

But I'll be just as eager to see the next mission. And I'll be buying this one ASAP.

EDIT: I have changed my mind slightly on this, the bad doesn’t do enough to bother me on repeat viewings, and I think maybe wearing the rose-tinted glasses can be a nice experience sometimes.

9/10

Your mission can be found here.

Dead By Dawn 2016: Jacob's Ladder (1990)

Jacob's Ladder is one of those movies that I missed when it first came out. And I didn't catch it until approximately fifteen years. I appreciate that many other movies came and went in that time that were influenced by this one, but I've still never quite loved it as much as many other horror fans. It's a good film, don't get me wrong, and the cast is a wonderful one. It's just never as horrifying or downright eerie as it could be, especially when you compare most of the movie to a few of the impressively unnerving images that are produced in the first half of the film.

Tim Robbins plays Jacob Singer, a Vietnam veteran who starts to have dark and unsettling visions that affect his health and daily behaviour. It's also making things difficult with his girlfriend (played by Elizabeth Pena). Are the visions the result of some experimentation on his unit during wartime? Are they signs of a mental breakdown? Or are they something more sinister?

Director Adrian Lyne works confidently here, and also makes popular that special effect that we will refer to by the technical term "really fast shakey head and blurry face moves". He doesn't rush things, even when the third act will probably be obvious to many viewers. This is a film more about the journey than the final destination, funnily enough, and that journey is interspersed with some fantastic phantasmagoria.

The script, by Bruce Joel Rubin, is equally confident, taking the time to flesh out a number of the supporting characters while leaving plenty of breathing room for the moments of tension and spookiness. In fact, it could bee argued that the main strength of the film is how it gets you to invest in a number of people who could so easily have been consigned to much smaller roles without any real damage to the central horror strand of the narrative.

That's also helped by the casting. Robbins has always impressed me in the way that he can equally use his full height to his advantage or fold himself up to make himself more vulnerable, depending on the role. This is somewhere in between, with Jacob a man who has clearly left his army days far behind him yet retains the strength to withhold a sustained attack on his mental faculties. Pena is a strong woman opposite him, alternating between sympathy for what Jacob appears to be going through and reminding him that she will only put up with so much shit. Elsewhere, Danny Aiello is a chiropractor who tries his best to guide Jacob through his dark path, Jason Alexander pops up momentarily to portray a lawyer who may or may not end up helping the ex-soldiers find out what was done to them, and Pruitt Taylor Vince, Ving Rhames, Eriq La Salle, and one or two others play the men who fought alongside Jacob in his platoon.

As influential as it is derivative, Jacob's Ladder remains an impressive horror that is relatively interesting and intelligent throughout, and also played completely straight. Which perhaps explains, more than the actual premise, why it went down so well in 1990, when first released.

If you enjoyed this review, and live in the UK, feel free to browse and buy some shit here - https://www.amazon.co.uk/

If you enjoyed this review and live in the USofA then feel free to browse and buy some shit here - http://www.amazon.com/

7/10

Noir November: Out Of Sight (1998)

George Clooney has a lot to thank Steven Soderbergh for. The two have had a successful working relationship for some years now, but Out Of Sight seems to be where it all began. Adapting the novel by Elmore Leonard, it really feels like this film had the benefit of great timing. Any closer to the releases of Pulp Fiction and Get Shorty and this could have been lost among the tidal wave of imitators that came along. Any later and it might have all felt irrelevant. At the very least, the full cast might not have been available, and this is a movie that gets some major brownie points thanks to the casting.

Clooney is Jack Foley, a bank robber who can do more with his brains and charm than many others could do with guns and violence. But it's not so easy being a career criminal when you're currently behind bars. When he finds out about a potential big score, one that won't wait around forever, he engineers a prison break. The bad news is that he breaks out of the prison just as U.S. Marshall Karen Sisco (Jennifer Lopez) pulls up in her car. Jack then has to take her hostage, the two of them stuck in the boot of a car while his main accomplice (Buddy, played by Ving Rhames) drives them to a safe spot. The good news is that the two seem to immediately feel something between them. But will it be enough to make Sisco forget her duty as a Marshall?

Scott Frank takes the source material and transfers it all to the screen in a way that nicely balances out the humour and violence, while never once losing a single drop of cool. Soderbergh helps, obviously, with his filming style, shot choices (kudos to editor Anne V. Coates), and the brilliant decision to let David Holmes create an appropriate score, mixed with some classic choices (Dean Martin, The Isley Brothers, and Herbie Hancock all make an appearance - well, not an "appearance" but you know what I mean).

Clooney and Lopez are both fantastic, generating the kind of heat between them that seems to emanate off the screen in waves. Okay, so the former can make that happen with many a co-star, but let's not take anything away from a real highlight in the career of Lopez. She's sexy, strong (apart from her bad choice in men), and feels very much like an equal to her male co-star. Rhames is a constant delight as Buddy, a criminal who always has to confess his misdeeds to his sister, Don Cheadle is suitably menacing as the kind of criminal Foley and Buddy would never want to work with, and Steve Zahn is very funny as a hapless crook who thinks he can run with the big boys. There's also some great support from Dennis Farina (playing Sisco's father), Albert Brooks (the mark), Michael Keaton (revisiting the character he played in Jackie Brown), Luis Guzman, Isaiah Washington, Catherine Keener, Nancy Allen, and Samuel L. Jackson.

Funky, funny, and pretty damn sexy too, Out Of Sight occupies a space nicely in between the two other Leonard adaptations mentioned here. It's neither as funny as Get Short, nor as rich in characterisation as Tarantino's film, but it mixes those two main ingredients together to create an end result that easily ranks alongside those movies.

9/10

http://www.amazon.com/Out-Sight-Collectors-George-Clooney/dp/0783229402/ref=sr_1_2?s=movies-tv&ie=UTF8&qid=1416847022&sr=1-2&keywords=out+of+sight

You know how you can show your appreciation for bloggers? If you share and share then every additional reader helps. Connect through Google or Blogger or any way you can, and rest easy in the knowledge that you've made little ol' me a very happy man.

And/or you could also buy my e-book, that has almost every review I've written over the past 5 years. It's very reasonably priced for the sheer amount of content.

The UK version can be bought here - http://www.amazon.co.uk/TJs-Ramshackle-Movie-Guide-Reviews-ebook/dp/B00J9PLT6Q/ref=sr_1_3?s=digital-text&ie=UTF8&qid=1395945647&sr=1-3&keywords=movie+guide

And American folks can buy it here - http://www.amazon.com/TJs-Ramshackle-Movie-Guide-Reviews-ebook/dp/B00J9PLT6Q/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1395945752&sr=8-1-fkmr0&keywords=TJs+ramshackle+mov

As much as I love the rest of the world, I can't keep up with all of the different links in different territories, but trust me when I say that it should be there on your local Amazon.

Piranha 3DD (2012)

How do you follow up something as ridiculously over the top and entertaining as Piranha 3D, the loose remake of the cracking Joe Dante movie? Well, if you're director John Gulager then you try to take the basic idea and use it for something even MORE ridiculously over the top and entertaining. Sadly, he only manages to achieve the first part of his aim.

Danielle Panabaker is Maddy, a young woman disgusted by the plans of her stepfather (David Koechner) to make his new waterpark a resounding success by populating it with lots of large-breasted women who aren't averse to showing off their assets. Unfortunately, in an effort to cut costs, the waterpark is also draining water from somewhere it really shouldn't. Somewhere that might contain some large, deadly piranha. While a number of horrible things happen to individuals who go playing around in nearby water, viewers are one step ahead of the characters onscreen as things build up to a piranha-filled, bloody finale.

There's certainly some fun to be had with Piranha 3DD. As well as Panabaker and Koechner in their roles, the cast contains the lovely Katrina Bowden, Matt Bush being sweet, David Hasselhoff portraying himself as an egotistical asshole, and Ving Rhames returning after his encounter with the deadly fish in the first movie. It's good to see Christopher Lloyd back, too. There are also, of course, a number of beautiful women in almost every scene, all fed up of being constrained by those old-fashioned bra things.

The special effects are wildly varied, with some shockingly bad CGI appearing, but they're more than a match for the many outrageous gore gags scattered throughout the movie, the script by Marcus Dunstan and Patrick Melton is pretty weak, and the direction from Gulager fails to balance things well enough for anyone wanting anything coming close to tension or thrills. The mix of gore and off-the-wall humour worked when the same team of writers and director gave audiences Feast, but it's mishandled here.

Don't get me wrong. This is an easy film to have some fun with, if you can watch it without rolling your eyes every few seconds. But it's not an easy film to like.

4/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews

Zombie Apocalypse (2011)

It's another movie from The Asylum and it's another low-budget zombie movie from some global production line that seems to do nothing more than churn out low-budget zombie movies. And yet I keep watching, because if a movie has a zombie in it then I'll give it a go. A lack of budget CAN be a good thing when the director and crew find other ways to cover their shortcomings. Of course, that's rarely the case with movies from The Asylum. They not only fail to cover their shortcomings, but they coat them in neon paint and place them in position to be seen by all and sundry. I love and hate them in equal measure.

In Zombie Apocalypse there's been a bit of a zombie apocalypse, as if you couldn't have figured that out from the title. The opening of the movie isn't too bad, sketching out a timeline of events and showing things on a global scale. Sadly, it's all downhill from there. Viewers are forced to spend time with some of the worst survivors of a zombie epidemic that I can think of. One of them is played by Taryn Manning, none of them would be alive if this movie was trying to provide a semblance of reality. It's okay, however, because they're soon joined by a group that includes Ving Rhames, and we all know that Ving Rhames is a bad motherfucker who can fend off zombies. These people then wander around, killing zombies and making a number of bad decisions, until they meet more people. Then they all wander around some more, aiming for a dock that should allow them to catch a ferry to their ultimate destination. Because there's nothing more reliable in the midst of a zombie outbreak than a scheduled ferry service.

Nick Lyon is the man trying to lead from the director's chair, but he's hampered by the script from Brooks Peck and Craig Engler. Scripts have never been strong in movies from The Asylum so it's hard to hate Peck and Engler for not rocking the boat. It's just a shame that they made the movie so dull. A few CGI-enhanced deaths in the opening scenes provide a bit of fun, but they soon become tiring when you start to spot the same special effect being used again and again (which is also another signature move from The Asylum).

As for the cast, Manning seems to be fleeting in and out of a vegetative state for most of the movie, Rhames repeats some of his standard tough guy act, and the likes of Eddie Steeples, Gary Weeks and Johnny Pacar try to look handsome and/or strong and/or vulnerable while Lesley-Ann Brandt, Lilan Bowden and Anya Monzikova try to look pretty and/or strong and/or vulnerable.

This is not the worst zombie movie ever made, by a long shot, but that says more about the amount of shockingly bad zombie movies out there than it does about the quality of this one. Zombie Apocalypse might be an adequate time-waster for you, but only if you've exhausted ALL other possibilities.

4/10

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Zombie-Apocalypse-DVD-Ving-Rhames/dp/B00767CMLK/ref=sr_1_10?ie=UTF8&qid=1363037622&sr=8-10

Dark Blue (2002)

It's April 1992. A turbulent time for Los Angeles, with all eyes watching the trial of the police officers accused in the beating of Rodney King. If those men are acquitted, the whole city might just burn. Kurt Russell stars as Eldon Perry, a policeman who was brought up by gunslingers and sees himself as a man who does a lot of things wrong to get the right results. His superior (Brendan Gleeson) agrees, he knows that whenever he wants ANY mess cleaned up he can ask Perry to get it done. Unfortunately, many other people view Perry as a monster including his wife (Lolita Davidovich), his young partner (Scott Speedman) and an officer (Ving Rhames) intent on uncovering the truth about a recent shooting incident and, in turn, corruption within the LAPD. In fact, as the movie unfolds, Perry starts to think about his own actions and how others view him. He starts to suspect that they may be right.

Written by James Ellroy and David Ayer, this is exactly the sort of thing you'd expect from the writers of L.A. Confidential and Training Day, respectively. Eldon Perry is a larger than life character, a bit of a bully and a braggart even to those he loves, and his moral compass has been thrown so far out of whack that it's unsure whether or not he can find his direction again. Ron Shelton does a great job in the director's chair, allowing for the actors to do their best with the material while he makes sure that all of the threads are winding together to complete the big finale.

Russell excels in the lead role, it's arguably his best performance from his 21st century filmography. He IS a bit of a monster and a horrible person, overall, but he's also a fully fleshed-out character with moments that show that he does have a heart (one scene with him being yelled at by Gleeson really starts to make him slightly sympathetic, while another involving Davidovich reading out a letter to him turns into something unexpectedly affecting). Speedman is okay in his role, he's young and acts naive enough and that's what's needed of him. Gleeson is superb, but Gleeson is always superb. In this movie, however, he's even more superb than usual, his performance sharpened by the gradual development of his true character. Ving Rhames, ahhhh Ving Rhames, he gives a subdued, sweet performance that reminds you of the actor who once seemed so great. Why did he ever start to take roles in every other Straight To Disc (or STD, if you will) piece of nonsense? I'll never know. Thankfully, there will always be performances like this one to look back on. Lolita Davidovich and Jonathan Banks have their supporting roles that allow them one or two moments to shine. And shine they do. Michael Michele may have the most thankless role, but she does okay with it.

Putting these characters together and seeing how things unfold makes for a solid drama. Setting everything on the brink of those 1992 L.A. riots makes for something much more. It's tense, it's incendiary and it's an unflinching reminder of just how easily corruption can insidiously filter through even the most well-meaning of people.

8/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share