Mission: Impossible - films and tv series

1309310311312313315»

Comments

  • Posts: 5,265
    I think people were expecting Maverick to give these last two MI’s a bump, but I’m not quite sure why. It’s very common for actors to star in underwhelming box office films after having a major hit. It’s similar to how people thought Fall Guy would be a financial hit because Ryan Gosling was in Barbie. They’re different films.
  • SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ Lekki, Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 2,588
    007HallY wrote: »
    I think people were expecting Maverick to give these last two MI’s a bump, but I’m not quite sure why. It’s very common for actors to star in underwhelming box office films after having a major hit. It’s similar to how people thought Fall Guy would be a financial hit because Ryan Gosling was in Barbie. They’re different films.

    Yeah. This is a good point.
  • edited May 21 Posts: 515
    What if..

    A James Bond Ethan Hunt spin off spy film. The title

    Mission Bond

    Plot
    The IMF is under threat from evil AI/terrorists yadda yadda yadda and MI6 has top secret intel on how to stop the villain. James Bond 007, MI6's top agent, works with Hunt and his team to save the world!

    Could have had awesome potential! 😎 I may do a fan poster (with some AI help). 😉
  • slide_99slide_99 USA
    edited May 21 Posts: 776
    Does anyone think there's a current dislike towards Tom Cruise? Because prior to when DR came out, there was a leaked audio or something where he was very verbally insulting the crew members. I don't know if that audio leak has affected his heroic status on screen. Or what do we think? I don't know.

    It's not Cruise himself, it's that DR was a disappointment and this one is a direct sequel, so general audiences aren't that hyped. It's like if EON had made AVTAK a 2-parter.
  • SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ Lekki, Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 2,588
    slide_99 wrote: »
    Does anyone think there's a current dislike towards Tom Cruise? Because prior to when DR came out, there was a leaked audio or something where he was very verbally insulting the crew members. I don't know if that audio leak has affected his heroic status on screen. Or what do we think? I don't know.

    It's not Cruise himself, it's that DR was a disappointment and this one is a direct sequel, so general audiences aren't that hyped. It's like if EON had made AVTAK a 2-parter.

    Oh, thanks. That's a good point. Because I was beginning to wonder.
  • edited May 21 Posts: 515
    Some people don't like Cruise because (apparently/allegedly) he's completely disowned his daughter Suri. And the other reason is his association with Scientology, a very dubious 'religion'. But his devotion to Scientology has been known for decades so that's not new.

    He's arguably the most successful box office actor of the last 30 or so years and you can't achieve that level of success without a lot of fans. I think he may struggle to remain a big star in his 60s. Top Gun 3 is probably his best way to stay relevant to younger movie goers.

    I very much doubt Hollywood will find the next Tom Cruise. The era of the big movie star has passed. Gen Z and Gen Alpha don't care about movie stars.
  • Posts: 5,265
    I mean, I do find him a little odd to watch in interviews. I can very much see what Christian Bale meant when he said he based Patrick Bateman on Cruise after seeing him on Letterman or whatever - too friendly in an intense kind of way without much going on behind the eyes.

    But honestly, his onscreen persona is a different thing (although I'm not always drawn to him as an actor either). He's definitely a well regarded movie star though.
  • edited May 21 Posts: 515
    All the action stars are 50 to 60 plus! Where's the 30 year old action star? If no new stars... not good for the film business.

    🤔
  • edited May 21 Posts: 5,265
    bondywondy wrote: »
    All the action stars are 50 to 60 plus! Where's the 30 year old action star? If no new stars... not good for the film business.

    🤔

    I mean, action movie stars being the big thing comes and goes based on trends, and even then they were at least 40 anyway.

    There are definitely still young, popular movie stars about. And older living legend types. How much people care about them (or claim to) is another thing entirely.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 14,422
    bondywondy wrote: »
    What if..

    A James Bond Ethan Hunt spin off spy film. The title

    Mission Bond

    Plot
    The IMF is under threat from evil AI/terrorists yadda yadda yadda and MI6 has top secret intel on how to stop the villain. James Bond 007, MI6's top agent, works with Hunt and his team to save the world!

    Could have had awesome potential! 😎 I may do a fan poster (with some AI help). 😉
    Can the next Bond run faster than Ethan Hunt?!?
  • edited May 22 Posts: 1,988
    slide_99 wrote: »
    Does anyone think there's a current dislike towards Tom Cruise? Because prior to when DR came out, there was a leaked audio or something where he was very verbally insulting the crew members. I don't know if that audio leak has affected his heroic status on screen. Or what do we think? I don't know.

    It's not Cruise himself, it's that DR was a disappointment and this one is a direct sequel, so general audiences aren't that hyped. It's like if EON had made AVTAK a 2-parter.

    The funny thing is that SPECTRE did have a sequel!

    bondywondy wrote: »
    All the action stars are 50 to 60 plus! Where's the 30 year old action star? If no new stars... not good for the film business.

    🤔

    It's easy to understand if you look at young actors today.
  • edited May 22 Posts: 2,255
    I watched the film last night. I was underwhelmed sadly. Some rambling thoughts (spoilers);

    My main criticism is that for a film about the end of the world - the highest stakes possible - the film just felt so small. I don't think this is helped by the lack of large set-pieces in the film (for a MI film this is really odd). There are only two - the submarine and the bi-plane chase, and one isn't really a set piece.

    The first hour is really tough to get through. Its all set up and exposition of both recapping Dead Reckoning, recapping the wider series (with a focus on M:I), and even flashing back to something Hunt said literally 30 seconds ago. It does pick up in the second half when the two set-pieces kick in.

    They're still introducing far too many new characters who get very little screen time and stuff to do - see Hannah Waddingham and Scoot McNairy. Nick Offerman at least gets a heroic death at the end.

    Bringing back Donloe from M:I was a good move and I liked his character and arc (he was in the film way more than I expected). That on its own would've made a good book-ending with the first film. Revealing Brigg's real name was Jim Phelps and he had a grudge against Hunt was both unnecessary and pointless - the script doesn't do anything with this.

    On the note of tieing things back - tieing the Rabbits Foot from MI3 as an early version of The Entity is poor retconning - the device clearly by its markings is some sort of biological weapon.

    There was a lot of mention about how the Sevestapol sunk in 2012 - assuming this film is set in 2023 (its mentioned it is two months on from the events of that film) - I don't know how the timelines worked.

    Probably the biggest issue for me is that it did not solve its villain problem from DR, in fact I think it made it worse. Gabriel was a poor villain in DR and in this he is basically a non-entity (excuse the pun). He is absent from very long stretches of the film and his motivations are poorly thought out. The film (as far as I remember) doesnt address his past with Ethan in a way DR set up, and his death is also very lame. It even felt like the actor was in an 'ah, fuck it' mindset during the finale given his facial overacting.

    Random Thoughts:

    - Why does the team stop chasing Gabriel to get into the AI simulator?
    - Why does Dega switch sides to the good guys?
    - How can the guys on the submarine be Entity supporters, given they would've been on the submarine during the events of the movie to that point?
    - So many nuclear bombs in this film.
    - The score was rather subdued. I picked up on the use of 'The Plot' motif and very little of The Entity's leifmotif, but the use of the main theme wasnt much and overall a step down from Balfe's DR efforts.
    - The film at least looked nice from a technical perspective and the IMAX expanded ration scenes were quite good. That said, the "archive flashback" filter they applied to previous movies, and Dead Reckoning in particular", was odd and looked poor to boot.

    Anyway I will probably expand upon this more once I have thought about it a bit more, but yeah, underwhelmed. Shame.

    I am at least glad they didnt kill Hunt. I didnt think they would given Cruise's ego and stance on giving audiences "what they want".

    If there is to be an M:I:9, I think its is probably time for McQuarrie to move on from writing and directing, bring in some fresh creative blood. Oh, and have a decent script in place before shooting. They managed to get away with it twice (in RN and Fallout) - not with these two.
  • edited May 22 Posts: 274
    @Mallory I agree with you on everything
  • edited May 22 Posts: 515
    bondywondy wrote: »
    What if..

    A James Bond Ethan Hunt spin off spy film. The title

    Mission Bond

    Plot
    The IMF is under threat from evil AI/terrorists yadda yadda yadda and MI6 has top secret intel on how to stop the villain. James Bond 007, MI6's top agent, works with Hunt and his team to save the world!

    Could have had awesome potential! 😎 I may do a fan poster (with some AI help). 😉
    Can the next Bond run faster than Ethan Hunt?!?

    😂

    I don't recall much running in the Bond films pre Brosnan era. Bond doesn't need to run. He's Bond. 😎
    Mallory:

    Gabriel was a poor villain in DR and in this he is basically a non-entity (excuse the pun).

    ;)) Great pun.
  • edited May 22 Posts: 4,733
    I think possibly one of the issues is, ironically, Cruise's insistance in doing his own stunt, this limits the writers re dramatic options and means the focus is on "wow, look at Tom" rather than drama and plot direction...for example...
    In the submarine scene, there was zero tension/stakes as we all knew he would be OK. Imagine if he and Benji had been in the sub and Benji became trapped under those torpedoes and was running out of air. Sacrificing the "real" stunt for the additional drama/stakes would be worthwhile IMHO with Ethan (a theme from Fallout) risking himself and the Mission to save (or not?) his friend
    on a wider point,so many of the issues were inherited from DR that, with hinsight, I'm not sure they could make a really compelling movie. Fallout was the perfect example of a new story but connected to previous plot points.
  • SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ Lekki, Lagos, Nigeria
    edited May 22 Posts: 2,588
    I wonder why Tom Cruise has never teamed up with Michael Bay. Since they both go for spectacle before story. Because Tom Cruise did team up with Tony Scott, though...whose visual style I think, influenced Michael Bay.
  • Posts: 2,255
    patb wrote: »
    I think possibly one of the issues is, ironically, Cruise's insistance in doing his own stunt, this limits the writers re dramatic options and means the focus is on "wow, look at Tom" rather than drama and plot direction...for example...
    In the submarine scene, there was zero tension/stakes as we all knew he would be OK. Imagine if he and Benji had been in the sub and Benji became trapped under those torpedoes and was running out of air. Sacrificing the "real" stunt for the additional drama/stakes would be worthwhile IMHO with Ethan (a theme from Fallout) risking himself and the Mission to save (or not?) his friend
    on a wider point,so many of the issues were inherited from DR that, with hinsight, I'm not sure they could make a really compelling movie. Fallout was the perfect example of a new story but connected to previous plot points.

    Such is the issue with doing a two parter.

    I wonder how much of 'The Final Reckoning' was written up prior to them committing to and making DR. Also, given how much of these films is written on the go, doing a two parter is even more precarious.

    As for the submarine bit
    It would have made the sequence better, albiet longer, if the Russians had followed him down there. They were literally along side them after all.
  • Posts: 672
    So it sounds like FALLOUT was the high point of the series, with the trio of GHOST PROTOCOL, ROGUE NATION, and FALLOUT being the highlights where each one kept topping the preceding one. I was wondering if the series would ever falter and it sounds like it kinda began with DEAD RECKONING. I’ll still see the new one but I’ll keep my expectations in check. Still an amazing run, especially compared to the Craig Bond run.
  • Posts: 274
    My Final Ranking

    1.Fallout
    2.Dead Reckoning
    3.Rogue Nation (very close to DR, maybe same level)
    4.Ghost Protocol
    5.Mission Impossible 1
    6.Final Reckoning
    7.M:I-3
    8.M:I-2

  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,778
    Just got home from watching it, not sure on how I feel about it. The stunts and action were as amazing as you expect but I kind of thought there'd be more action for a near 3 hour runtime.

    Weirdly this film reminded me of Fallout and TND in places
    Glad Ethan and Benji survived, but I wasn't feeling the "new IMF team" felt somewhat shoehorned in
Sign In or Register to comment.