It's no "james bond"--that's why i liked it - Mission: Impossible Reviews

Over the years, the "James Bond" movies haven't been very satifying--I think the last Bond movie I've appreciated that starred Pierce Brosnan was "Goldeneye." And now, in 2004, after having seen the many other "Bonds" that Pierce has starred in, including "Die Another Day," I feel like the only reason Bond movies are continued to be made are because of explosions, and sex--not that it's those aspects are a bad things--but with the "James Bond" installments, that's not why I would go to see a movie. This is why I appreciated "Mission:Impossible" alot. Made in 1996, it seems to surpass "Die Another Day," 2004, by a long shot. The plot is a little choppy, and for those who do not pay close attention, they will be lost in the forest. And though I would like to have summarized the plot for YOU, I would much rather you see this movie rather than get a summary of it from me. But where the plot contains holes, the acting stiches those holes up. The cast contains some actors of which I have never heard of, but I was convinced to give them a chance, because Tom Cruise and John Voight's performances made them look good. The direction was a bit awkward at times. The camera angles were tilted in certain scenes, that I, at a point, wanted to tilt my head so I would not get dizzy. For a film made in 1996, the visuals kept me on the edge of my seat. The editing that was done on this film made the visuals crisp and clear, and only added to the movies greatness. My favorite two visually edited scenes are the computer scene (where Tom Cruise, a.k.a. "Ethan Hunt") and the climactic train scene. "Mission" is witty, clever, and action-packed--everything a action/spy/thriller should be...let's hope the "James Bond" movie can be a contender...