Disappointing

Rating: 4/10 (22 May 2012)

My hopes were high for this movie, maybe too high. Being a huge fan of Brian de Palma (at least as far as 1996), I still love his film and still consider it the best of the bunch. John Woo's offering is perhaps his worst film (absurd plot developments involving removable faces, terrible casting, tiresome action sequences) and, even factoring in the high-octane focus of Missions 3 and 4, still seems totally out-of-place. The third film was a huge surprise; tremendous fun and a more evidently tongue-in-cheek approach to the necessarily ridiculous plot. It also featured Phil Hoffman as one of the most quietly bad-ass villains of recent years.
Ghost Protocol is closest in tone to the third film, but the balance of gravity and levity JJ Abrams brought to the proceedings has eluded Brad Bird's grasp. The main problem for me is the cast. In Abrams' film, Hoffman anchored everything so that everyone else could just have fun. Even Laurence Fishburn seemed to be winking in a "we really don't want you to take any of this too seriously" way.
In Bird's film, the usually dependable Jeremy Renner seems to think he's not allowed to have any fun at all and appears to be taking his role far more seriously than it demands, making it painful viewing. Renner is a great actor, so I'm tempted to blame Bird's direction. Simon Pegg simply doesn't work. Ironically, they've toned down the jokes and given him a more substantial purpose in the story, which seems like a total waste of Pegg and an otherwise credible character. The bad guys here are all totally forgettable, to the point where I really can't come up with anything more substantive to say about them. The same goes for the dialogue and plot; some Russians, some codes, some camaraderie....
The action sequences are pretty fun but, by the time the bullets start flying, you simply won't care enough about the characters or their dilemma to really enjoy the show. By the time we hit the two-hour mark, I was just willing it all to end. I was then made to endure a totally unnecessary, tacked-on ending.
Essentially, the problem boils down to the fact that the film can't seem to decide how seriously it wants to be taken. If it were just balls-to-the- wall fun, fine. If it could muster a fraction of the tone of, say, the Bourne movies (which it clearly tries to emulate), I would happily let myself take it seriously. Sadly, it falls short of its own apparent expectations. And mine.