Quote (TrouNce @ Dec 31 2011 08:43am)
Sherlock Holmes plays too strongly to the "strength's" of the previous film (A lot like Hangover 2) It's generic, the banter between Downey and Law gets old pretty fast. That's not to say its a bad film but you got tricked by the pageantry of the movie. Ghost protocol did a few things new and original to the mission impossible franchise. For starters, the new movie was not a big budget inflation of Tom Cruise's ego which was the main issue in the original's. Don't get me wrong
Im all for enjoying movies for what they are, entertainment. Just wanted to point out you ironically calling out cheesy movies like Mission Impossible and missing the cheesy crap in 2 movies that follow the same criteria.
Girl with the dragon tattoo may very well be entertaining but it doesn't give hollywood the right to take an already solid film and remake it Just because. We (As Americans) Need to read more, I suggest starting small (Subtitles) and eventually moving to bigger things (Books). Personally if I were a Swedish director and Americans took my film, repackaged it, filled it with americanized actors, I'd be pretty offended.
If I got tricked, i'm happy because I thoroughly enjoyed Sherlock Holmes. I thought it was clever with good humor. Ghost Protocol, like I said, is just way too cheesy with its gadgets... like for example the stupid rendezvous "train car" that is full of 21st century technology and apparently full of mountains of gadgets considering the next scene they're off with all these new toys... not to mention the entire god damned movie is a not-so-subtle Apple ad (this may have spoiled me more than anything else)
The first thing I thought when I saw GWTDT was "why", because it almost linearly followed the original film (with some obvious changes, but in general) and it was even still supposedly occuring in Sweden, with Swedish newspapers, signs, everything, aside from the dialog... essentially telling the viewer that this remake is based solely for those who are too lazy to read the subs. I absolutely acknowledge that. But that still doesn't change the fact it was a good David Fincher movie, with good actors, and a good movie in general.