Mission Impossible 4 - Ghost Protocol

“Your mission, should you chose to accept it…blah, blah, blah… this message will now self destruct.”

Every Mission Impossible movie and most episodes of Inspector Gadget start this way. I’ve always found it odd that no one has ever refused the mission. Wouldn’t it be hilarious if Ethan Hunt (Tom Cruise, Days of Thunder, Oprah’s Couch) just said no, went home and chillaxed for once? Then you would have Mission Impossible with no impossible mission. What do you get when you take out all the action, danger, explosions and thrills out of a Tom Cruise film? Vanilla Sky, that’s what.

It’s hard to believe this is the fourth silver screen installment in the MI series. John Voight (Mission Impossible, 1996), director John Woo (Mission Impossible 2, 2000), and character actor Phillip Seymour Hoffman (Mission Impossible 3, 2006) have made their mark in past installments. Now, after 15 years, writer/director J.J. Abrams (Star Trek, Super 8, LOST) has taken the helm of the franchise and got the most anyone possibly could have out of it.

MI4 follows the story of super agent Hunt (Cruise), some forgettable token hot chick (Paula Patton), and William Brandt (Jeremy Renner, The Hurt Locker). In terms of comic relief, Simon Pegg (Shaun of the Dead) reprises his role as tech geek Benji. Thankfully, he’s funny in a funny way and not in a British way.

The movie follows four rogue agents whose firm, the Impossible Mission Force, has gone “Ghost Protocol”, meaning it has officially shut down and all of its agents are considered liabilities. I guess that’s what you get when the name of your employer is “The Impossible Mission Force.” Their last mission, which they did choose to accept, was to stop a doomsday scientist trying to usher in a new golden age by first wiping the slate clean with World War III.

What’s best about this movie is that it doesn’t take itself as seriously as previous installments did. Characters rightfully admit that their missions are absurdly impossible, which humanizes them a bit. One of the most stunning scenes is when Ethan scales the side of Dubai’s Burj Khalifa (the tallest building in the world), which made me more than a little anxious. Renner excels as the team’s newest super agent, and heir apparent to Hunt’s lead role.

Given that Cruise is pushing 50, one would have to think that his days of being an action star are over. Still, Cruise has fared better than fellow Top Gunner Val Kilmer, who these days looks like Chaz Bono. On that note, if you have any desire to see a solid action-thriller that does not involve Michael Bay, you would be remised if you missed Ghost Protocol. It’s about as good as these movies get.

4/5 stars

Hangover 2

“I can’t believe this is happening again”.

These were the words of Ed Helms’ character, Stu, in this summer’s comedy blockbuster sequel The Hangover 2. These words came to haunt me, just as they will come to haunt you.

In its defence, this movie is exactly what it says: the story of a second hangover. But any adult can tell you this is a dumb idea. The first movie was great because it was the story of the first hangover, which is a rite of passage into adulthood. The second hangover and every hangover afterward is nothing but a reminder that you’re irresponsible, shallow, and desperate. And this is what the Hangover 2 is and why it sucks.

Reprising their roles from the original are the same mischievous morons: Ed Helms (The Office, Cedar Rapids) as Stu the risk-averse dentist; Bradley Cooper (Limitless, and the sexiest man alive!) as a repressed fratboy family man and the unforgettable Zach Galifianakis (Between Two Ferns, Bored to Death) as Alan, the eccentric stay-at-home son. This time the setting is in Bangkok, Thailand (or “thye-land”, as Alan sees it), where the crew are celebrating Stu’s wedding to his attractive Thai fiancé. Unfortunately for him, she comes packaged with a disapproving, demanding father (not an Asian stereotype at all). The story is as follows: Stu gets drugged, wakes up, convolutedly puts together the previous night and then returns to wedding just in time to get married and tell off his father-in-law. Meh.

This movie falls victim to the same things most re-packaged blockbuster sequels do: a lack of original content concealed by an overuse of gimmicky hooks, an over-reliance on formula and a lazy, rushed script. In the industry, they call this the “Transformers Effect”. The cast was beefed up, the stakes were raised, but the premise and script were unchanged. The movie cashed in financially, but failed to deliver on any comedic or artistic level. Note to hipsters: there’s an art to making a good movie, and it doesn’t even have to involve Ryan Gosling, consignment shop clothing, or a summertime scarf.

Without a doubt, the most redeeming quality of this comedy is the hit-or-miss one-liners from Alan. He confuses a Buddhist monastery for a PF Chang’s, claims he is a nurse that just isn’t registered, and likens a med student’s future to the eventual sexual orientation of Doogie Howser. Supposedly, Mel Gibson was originally meant to play the tattoo artist, but was pushed out by the cast and crew amidst his spousal abuse allegations. Apparently a racist, religiously fundamental, ill-tempered actor was too low-brow for a movie that blasts your face with a tranny’s genitals and features man-eating woman-abusing Mike Tyson as a happy-go-lucky singer.

Overall, this movie was an Adam Sandler-calibre effort that bored more than it amused. Take solace in the fact that all of the main characters are now married (well… except Alan, but realistically who would marry Zach Galifianakis?), which means the likelihood of another bachelor party is extremely low. But trust me on this: to cure The Hangover 2 you’ll need Tylenol 3s.

Oh yeah, there’s a monkey in it.

1.5/5 stars.

The Expendables

Here are some sinfully delicious foods: ice cream, pizza, fried chicken, chocolate and cheeseburgers. Don’t they all sound good? Now throw them all into a turbo-charged ninja blender and drink the toxic sludge that results. This taste is the taste of The Expendables, a movie that fearlessly but foolishly blends superstars from different eras and subgenres into a single ensemble. Be prepared for bloody and explosive diarrhea.

While this film did well financially, I know it’s a bad movie, and I never give a bad movie a free pass. My biggest problem is actually the film’s biggest hook: the cast. Aside from Stallone, Jason Statham, Jet Li, Dolph Lundgren (remember him from Rocky IV?) and Mickey Rourke all play major roles. Bruce Willis and Arnold Schwartzenegger cameo but not star (contrary to promotional material) while Terry Crews and Randy Couture star but not act (celebrity diss, feel free to light up my twitter).

When we were kids these guys kicked ass. But we are now adults and our childhood heroes are seniors heading towards their golden years. Given the precarious situation the cast was in, writer/director Stallone had a unique opportunity to look at aging in a whole new way (for reference at previous attempts, see the following list). Such a focus could have made a compelling story (as in The Wrestler), or at least some ripe comedy (like Murtaugh in the Lethal Weapon series). After all, the movie is about a group called “The Expendables”, so you have to figure these guys are used up, chewed up and spit out. But what could have been a fertile premise is instead an insult to the intelligence: the filmmakers try to maintain the illusion that these senior citizens are still sexy rebels, but sadly only the actors seem fooled. Did I mention that Steve Austin is also one of the villains? Thankfully, he only talks with his fists in the film—just like in his home life.

This movie’s plot is pretty straightforward. Stallone leads a mercenary band to a job on an island in the Gulf of Mexico, which is inexplicably controlled by a South American dictator. General Garza (Dexter sad sack David Zayas) rules the island with an iron fist, but is himself no more than a pawn controlled by an ex-CIA American ‘entrepreneur’, who, you guessed it, is into the production and distribution of illegal drugs to the U.S. I won’t ruin the ending for you, but suffice to say, his business model didn’t factor in explosives and throwing knives, and Sly’s continual fascination with being a white underdog fighting against people of different colour and culture.

For most people, this is a so-bad-its-good movie (though for me it’s just so bad). If you see this movie, you’re seeing it for the actors, not their characters or their stories. Owing to its ancient cast, the film has a nostalgic effect even though it’s not even two years old.

If you missed this movie a year and a half ago when it came out, consider it missed and move on. I’ve played video games with crisper action and better storytelling, and I mostly just play Mario Kart. But brace yourself, you’ll get a second chance: The Expendables 2 is due in 2012, and my review shortly after. For a switch, the third Expendables the film might consider utilizing washed-up writers/directors instead of just washed-up actors. I think M. Night Shamaylan, William Shatner and George Lucas might be willing to sign up – what else they got going on?

1.5/5