eonbluedan-1

I'll say it up front: This probably tops any previous outing in the globetrotting franchise for its ridiculousness! It's totally stupid! If you ever disliked how previous instalments, or indeed any previous Tom Cruise action film, asked you to suspend your disbelief quite as much as they did, then this one will have you utterly incredulous! But, if it's not completely bonkers, are you really watching a 'Mission: Impossible'?

With the return of Christopher McQuarrie to the helm, we have, arguably, the most enjoyable instalment, and for me, perhaps the most exciting action film since 'The Raid 2'. Indeed, it seems that this team of Cruise and McQuarrie are the perfect pairing for the franchise. At this stage, with a sixth film released, it is truly a pleasant surprise to be able to say it doesn't feel tired, and that, despite being a tad heavy on the plot exposition, it remains a joy due to wall-to-wall, jaw-dropping stunt work, chase sequences that echo classics from 'The French Connection' and Nolan's 'Batman' series, more than a smattering of on-point charm, and stunning location shooting. Even in spite of the inner voice that says they really should stop now, you can't help but smile ear-to-ear for the entirity of its mammoth runtime.

Doing a lot of the heavy lifting is the team themselves: Rebeccara Ferguson, Simon Pegg, Tom and Ving Rhames, as well as the boss, Alec Baldwin, remain as likeable as ever (an area in which the franchise has steadily improved), with that now familiar sense of camaraderie that proves so important to the success of these movies. Despite all the explosions, chases, and fights that threaten to test the patience, the fact is that you believe in and care about these people, and so find yourself well on board. Of course, fresh meat is always nice, and this film's addition of Henry Cavill as a strangely mustachioed good bad guy (bad good guy?) makes for a couple of fun gags. Personally, I remain unsold on the man as an actor, but he carries a lot of physical heft needed for some of this stuff to work.

And the action? Well, relentless might be a word for it, and in less talented hands it would definitely be too much, but McQuarrie understands the importance of the audience's empathy and smarts (Remember, this is is the writer responsible for 'The Usual Suspects'), so there is never a sense that he is being distracted; every action sequence pushes us forward and usually gives us something more to chew on, as well as being sheer entertainment. This goes a long way. Whether it be the best car chase I've witness on the big screen for years, not one but two of the best aerial set-pieces since 'The Dark Knight Rises', or the most surprisingly crushing fight sequence since the aforementioned 'The Raid 2', you never lose sight of why it's happening or what's at stake.

A new paragraph...just for the running! Yes, there is a lot of it, and that's the point. Trust me, in time, the extended sequence of Tom Cruise running around London's rooftops and bridges will be a staple-point in cinema. It may not carry the same ground-breaking weight as Gene Hackman driving after a train at full speed, but it is very similar to that scene in spirit, and carries in its DNA the same sense of gritted determination (As with Hackman's Doyle, you really are rooting for Ethan all the way!). It uses smart editing from other points of view to provide a sense of how he is faring moment to moment, drawing us in to the chase, and it shows off a post-millennium London in beautiful, proud glory, so as to make for a classic moment in film history - Guaranteed!

So, a bit too much explaining of things? Yes. A bit too long? Probably. A heap of reasonably intelligent fun at the movies? Very much so! Probably the most fun you'll have with an action movie in 2018, in fact.

And is it the end? It's tough to say, but if McQuarrie sticks around, and Tom doesn't DIE during shooting (Remember, nearly everything you see him doing, he is actually doing!), I wouldn't be against a finale to what would effectively be a trilogy from this team.

Is she or isn't she, they ask? Frustratingly, the answer is too obvious too quickly, but it does not appear to be the point.

A seasoned director with a catalogue of work that covers almost every genre, nobody can ever say Steven Soderbergh isn't an exciting, experimental artist. of course, with that comes an unpredictability. I have loved and occasionally loathed the man's output, but here we have a strange beast, a film that tiptoes precariously across the tightrope that separates the two camps. Not actually the first film to put iphone to use, but certainly the first to receive a major release, Soderbergh is clearly keen to explore the technical possibilities, the framing and use of light adding a compelling b-movie grit to proceedings. Claire Foy leads with predictable conviction as a woman who is actually less likable that one might have assumed, which is of course intended.

In fact, everything is intended; nothing here isn't part of Soderbergh's plan, including, we must assume, the gaping plot holes and over-egging of the situation, so as to turn the film into an hysteric, hyperbolic drama, whose intention becomes increasingly socially conscious rather than realistically plausible. Dare I say, a metaphor? This is admirable, but it must be said the lack of realism does tend to reduce the possibility for engagement or tension, and his economical, efficient storytelling here gets, at times, a bit too economical and efficient for its own good, leaving the viewer oddly uninvolved in some pretty dark story points. Where the intense style and distance may not be a problem in the hands of the likes of Aronofsky or Lanthamos respectively, with whom such business comes with the territory, it is more of an issue when we are being asked to fully empathise with real world characters like Soderbergh's.

He's done better, and he's done worse. It's a reasonable effort, with an important intention, but not enough sticks to elevate it beyond b-movie schlock.

Paddy Considine directs a surprisingly fierce film about "redemption in the darkest of places" with Tyrannosaur. Joseph is a seriously damaged, raging man, already well on his way down the spiral, when he walks into a Christian charity shop, run by Hannah. It becomes clear that neither of them are what we perceive them to be, both hiding deep personal scars, and both dealing with those scars in ways that could not be more extremely different. As unlikey a pair as they seem, they find something in each other they didn't realise they were looking for, or had perhaps simply stopped believing could exist in another person.

This is an 18 for a reason; it has moments that are pretty tough, sexual violence and violence towards animals included, and the film deals with subject matter that some may find difficult to bear with, but if you can, 'Tyrannosaur' turns out to be a film by which you are deeply moved, and on which you can't help but reflect. The film works as a lesson to us all on the damage we can cause with our pre-conceived notions about others, acknowledging the truth that we are never black and white. Despite the fact I feel no desire to sit through it again, it is a highly recommended watch, not least due to the two leads: Peter Mullan is terrific, and Olivia Colman (Green Wing, Peep Show, Hot Fuzz) took my breath away with an astonishing turn as Hannah; she delivers everything with weight and complexity. She is absolutely perfect. Where was her Oscar nod?