artyyeo

The franchise succeeded from MI1 - M6, with a MI2 a little weak.

When it comes to MI7, there was a sudden change in editing style. Suddenly, there is a lot of conversations, a lot of posturing, a lot of talk about doomsday, a lot of explanations; sometimes, the explanations and points were repeated. In short, the editing was a little sloppy and there were a few scenes where we looked at each other and asked when was this going to over.

MI8 (the Final Reckoning) increased the weakness of the editing in M7 by two to threefold. After the first 25 minutes, we turned to each other and asked when is the real story going to start. It's OK to draw from previous movies to connect the whole storyline, but the time spent and the footages were too excessive. Again, points were repeated and after a while it began to feel like the movie was long-winded and draggy. I was beginning to yawn when the clock hit the 30 minute mark and was feeling very let down by an action movie that began its first 25 minutes like a soap opera. Too much talking and screenplay was poorly constructed. I am not the slightest bit inspired by the conversations. The screenplay attempts to sound intelligent but they do not. In short, the new editing style, which started in MI7, is under par even to mediocre movie editing. Motorcycle chasing and car chasing scenes were too long and repetitive.

If Tom Cruise wants to wrap up this franchise, this last movie is leaving a bad taste in the mouth.

I feel a little cheated for paying full price to watch this movie in the theater. I should have waited and get the Blu-ray. I thought they would have received enough feedbacks from the MI7 to avoid the same mistakes but not only did they not correct it, they deepened the mistakes. The franchise is going down hill.

The battle scenes were typical of Ridley Scott and up to par. I enjoyed those very much.

The flow of moving from scene to scene was abrupt and has no continuity. Jarring is the right way to describe it.

Character development was pretty much under par. There was not enough time devoted to develop the characters. Sadly, the screenplay was weak and did little to support the character development. The character of Josephine could have been gloriously captivating; but, alas, it did not happen. For such a historic drama, character development could have been dramatic and absolutely captivating but Ridley missed the great opportunity.

I say again, the screenplay department seems to be asleep on the job. I cannot find a single phrase that was inspiring, compared to Gladiator. In other words, dialogs were mundane, and commonplace; nothing napoleonic in nature.

The sexual scenes were comical and stood out like a sore thumb. Was this a serious historic drama or a rough back-alley comedy. I cannot tell what's the goal of this movie. It made Napoleon and Josephine behaved like a pair of white mice in a pet shop copulating at just about any corners they can find. Needlessly so and I hope he was not trying to compensate for the lack of content.

Some say that a Director's Cut can redeem it. I doubt it. A Director's cut can improve things by, perhaps, fleshing out an already good movie. This movie has a failing grade and I do not think a Director's Cut can salvage it. When the movie is structurally weak, it cannot be redeemed.