Sign In Now ►
or Create A New Account ►
Rank This Matchup or Comment/Reply Below
Two Cruise movies that weren't anything new story-wise. Instead they went for the breezy humor that doesn't take itself too seriously, which gave them an amiable quality that was difficult to take issue with. Ghost Protocol suffered from having another race against time nuclear bomb situation where the hero must stop the launch at the last second. That's not a spoiler. It's standard issue. Also, the villain was blah. Jack Reacher is like many other detective films, as far as the colorful cast of suspects. I did appreciate that Cruise was particularly violent and adept at inflicting punishment on bad guys. And Werner Herzog was an amusing head villain. I could've done without the save the girl climax, but I suppose that's less ho-hum than the last second bomb diffusion climax. You know, because girls are prettier to look at than a countdown screen. Rosamund Pike just sits there and waits for Cruise to rescue her all prim and proper. She doesn't even have mussed hair or anything.
I really didn't feel "Jack Reacher". Tom Cruise has pretty much nothing to do with the book character and hell,they repeat the name "Jack Reacher" over n' over again,on a outrageous amount of times right on the first minutes of the movie. (Really,count it. It's ABSURD.) That just shows you how much the book transition suffered...really bad lines overall. This is the average action-movie-of-the-week Seagal did a thousand times. They ruined a excellent book. But that's just like...my opinion,dude.
Comparing Jack Reacher to Seagal, even as an intentional form of hyperbole, is an insult to Jack Reacher, Jack Reacher, Jack Reacher and the entirety of existence (excepting Seagal of course). I hate Seagal. I wish nothing but pain, misery and fat upon him and his fat fat. Jack Reacher is pulpy in the best kind of way and, from what I recall, the Jack Reacher books (like, fuck reading though, yo) weren't anything other than pulpy. But people being people being people will take issue with adaptations from a "cerebral" medium to a "lay" medium. Fuck that noise. Adaptations don't need to be faithful. Shit, girlfriends don't need to be faithful. Adaptations just need to be good (and girlfriends just need to wear rubbers). Reinterpret shit if you want. Fuckin fuck that shit up in a blender till you come up with something new. Just make sure it tastes good. Jack Reacher tastes good. Philosophically elegant, smart, charismatic, sucker free, bullshit free and well designed. Even a little subversive, but not ever in a 'Look at me!' way. And I've never really been a fan of Rosamund Pike, but having seen her in Jack Reacher, I can safely say I would smash it, wife it, smash it, divorce it and be content. Anyway, you know what you get at the bottom of a blender? Pulp. Yeah, that's how well constructed my shit is. Pound it.
Daps and pounds, my brutha. Why isn't McQuarrie getting more jobs? Dude knows how to write a screenplay and he directs action better than (and this isn't an exaggeration) 99% of the guys out there who call themselves directors. What gives? Still, as much as I enjoyed Reacher, I have to give it to M:I4 on this one. Bird's kind of got a Spielberg thing going on with his stuff. Sweet Jesus, does that guy know how to have some fun. Reacher's long-ish for its type, but it's lean and it never drags. Loved everything about it, from the car chase and the (excellent!) gunfight at the end to Herzog as the villain and Jai Courtney as Reacher's almost-physical-equal. Good shit. Bird's movie is just a bit better.
Ghost Protocol was way better for me. Couldn't take Cruise seriously as Reacher, even though the fights were pretty enjoyable. Lines like 'I'm a drifter with nothin' to lose!' didn't help.
jack Reacher wasn't a bad movie it was just a very average one MI4 was a way better the expected.
M:I:4 wins this pretty easily although I did like Reacher.