 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Magnificent news! His "Jack Reacher" score was fantastic.
And director Christopher McQuarrie obviously worked was impressed by him, too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Sep 20, 2014 - 2:44 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
DeputyRiley
(Member)
|
Wow, I know Giacchino and McQuarrie don't have a working relationship and McQuarrie and Kraemer do -- and Giacchino's probably ready to move on after two entries in the franchise -- but this is kind of disappointing news.
I think that franchises like these (that have been around for decades) are much, much more fun when different composers and filmmakers get to work on each entry.
While I wouldn't have protested if Giacchino had signed up with a third different director, I do agree with you here, absolutely -- I just don't happen to care for the particular chosen composer for this film nor, as it happens, for McQuarrie (outside his script for The Usual Suspects).
I thought The Way of the Gun had an amazing cast and was indeed stylishly effective but was too uneven and I thought Jack Reacher was terrible. I didn't care for the first two M:I films and I thought parts III (J.J. Abrams) and Ghost Protocol (Brad Bird) were tremendous films and commendable steps forward for the franchise, I just don't know that McQuarrie can attain that high level of quality that Abrams and Bird are capable of, IMO. I am willing to bet that McQuarrie will please a lot of fans with his version of M:I, I'm just cautious about how I will receive it based on my appreciation of his past work but as I've said, you never know, so I'll try to keep an open mind!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Sep 22, 2014 - 9:18 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Mike Esssss
(Member)
|
Not to be glib, but I don't need to explain why CARTER and NARNIA didn't work because Stanton and Adamson have nothing to do with Brad Bird. Who knows why. You were only asking about a MISSION IMPOSSIBLE movie.
You can watch THE INCREDIBLES and GHOST PROTOCOL, two somewhat similar team-on-a-mission movies with very similar action beats, and see the same basic building blocks at work. The shot composition, the pacing, the editing. Most specifically, you can see the way Bird builds an action sequence like a clock, layering an amalgam of exquisitely timed small beats into a cohesive (and exhilarating) whole that never loses its bearings. Spatial mechanics are completely clear from start to finish. That kind of precision is pretty much a necessity with a meticulous form like animation of course, but the same basic principles apply to making an action movie. THE INCREDIBLES is very much a live action movie that happens to be animated. Then when you add Bird's gifts with balancing character moments with the action beats, as evidenced in everything he's ever done, it wasn't a stretch to expect basically more of the same with a MISSION IMPOSSIBLE movie.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Sep 22, 2014 - 11:06 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
John Mullin
(Member)
|
Yes, but although the end results of THE INCREDIBLES and MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE: GHOST: PROTOCOL may appear similar on screen, the way in which an animated movie is made (where an army of artists and and story producers have the luxury of planning, attempting, and redoing shots and sequences over several years) is completely different from how live-action movies are made (where a physical crew needs to go out into the world with a very limited amount of time to shoot... and the director needs to commit to on-the-spot decisions, and grapple with his actors' egos, weather conditions, physical space limitations, locations that they can't keep indefinitely, light going away, and a ticking clock that gets very, very expensive when people go into overtime).
Managing all that is a totally different skill-set, and frankly, it wasn't a "lock" that Bird would be adept at it. Bringing up Andrew Stanton is very relevant because he's an example of someone who wasn't able to adapt to live-action. Both Bird and Stanton had directed two excellent Pixar movies each at that point, and although JOHN CARTER wouldn't come out until a few months after MI4 did, there was already plenty of gossip around the industry throughout 2011 about how poorly Stanton had managed the shoot... going way, way over-schedule and doing endless takes for perfection's sake (at the expense of other aspects of the movie that probably needed more attention).
I didn't necessarily think Bird would make an embarrassing Mission: Impossible movie, but I ALSO didn't suspect that he would make to make one of the best action movies I've seen in the last decade or so. Neither scenario was a guarantee. It never is. Established, experienced directors can made lousy movies, and novice directors (live-action or otherwise) can make great ones. Same deal with composers. Same deal with Chris McQuarrie and Joe Kraemer.... you can't really judge how they've done until they've done it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, but if the ability to make an excellent animated movie directly translates into being able to make an excellent live-action picture as well... explain JOHN CARTER to me.
Easy: John Carter is a great movie.
It was Disney's marketing that dropped the ball there, not Stanton.
Yavar
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
