Mission: Impossible - VII/VIII (2023/24)

1132133135137138227

Comments

  • Posts: 16,409
    @mattjoes it's so easy to work out plot points in trailers, it's wise to avoid too much information prior to watching a film.
  • Posts: 4,892
    @mattjoes it's so easy to work out plot points in trailers, it's wise to avoid too much information prior to watching a film.

    Absolutely, @Fire_and_Ice_Returns. The filmmakers prepare surprises for us, in terms of story, action, etc., and for marketing purposes, they are revealed in trailers, clips and the like. Understandable to a degree, but it affects the experience of watching the film, so it's something that should be treated with delicacy. Like in Terminator 2. Watch the film and for a while it looks like Arnold is the villain again. But watch the trailer and the twist is ruined.

    Also, I've grown nostalgic of the days in which I got to watch films essentially blind.
  • Posts: 16,409
    mattjoes wrote: »
    @mattjoes it's so easy to work out plot points in trailers, it's wise to avoid too much information prior to watching a film.

    Absolutely, @Fire_and_Ice_Returns. The filmmakers prepare surprises for us, in terms of story, action, etc., and for marketing purposes, they are revealed in trailers, clips and the like. Understandable to a degree, but it affects the experience of watching the film, so it's something that should be treated with delicacy. Like in Terminator 2. Watch the film and for a while it looks like Arnold is the villain again. But watch the trailer and the twist is ruined.

    Also, I've grown nostalgic of the days in which I got to watch films essentially blind.

    I remember those days I started watching films at the cinema in the 80's, I remember watching Octopussy and knowing literally nothing about it other than seeing Sir Roger on a magazine cover. There are so many films fighting tooth and nail for the limelight, it will only get worse with giving way too much away in trailers etc.
  • Posts: 4,892
    mattjoes wrote: »
    @mattjoes it's so easy to work out plot points in trailers, it's wise to avoid too much information prior to watching a film.

    Absolutely, @Fire_and_Ice_Returns. The filmmakers prepare surprises for us, in terms of story, action, etc., and for marketing purposes, they are revealed in trailers, clips and the like. Understandable to a degree, but it affects the experience of watching the film, so it's something that should be treated with delicacy. Like in Terminator 2. Watch the film and for a while it looks like Arnold is the villain again. But watch the trailer and the twist is ruined.

    Also, I've grown nostalgic of the days in which I got to watch films essentially blind.

    I remember those days I started watching films at the cinema in the 80's, I remember watching Octopussy and knowing literally nothing about it other than seeing Sir Roger on a magazine cover. There are so many films fighting tooth and nail for the limelight, it will only get worse with giving way too much away in trailers etc.

    I also watched Op knowing nothing about it, except that Roger was in it and that it involved a circus. It's the last Moore Bond film I saw, and my favorite to this day.

    Shame about the current trailer situation indeed. And now we have trailers for trailers, trailer reviews... this is absolute madness!
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 9,605
    TR007 wrote: »
    I said it before and I'll say it again, why can't EON take their cues from the Mission Impossible franchise, rather than Batman and Logan?

    Not sure I'm ready for the BOND 25 trailer to lay hipster lyrics over The James Bond Theme.
  • Posts: 16,409
    mattjoes wrote: »
    mattjoes wrote: »
    @mattjoes it's so easy to work out plot points in trailers, it's wise to avoid too much information prior to watching a film.

    Absolutely, @Fire_and_Ice_Returns. The filmmakers prepare surprises for us, in terms of story, action, etc., and for marketing purposes, they are revealed in trailers, clips and the like. Understandable to a degree, but it affects the experience of watching the film, so it's something that should be treated with delicacy. Like in Terminator 2. Watch the film and for a while it looks like Arnold is the villain again. But watch the trailer and the twist is ruined.

    Also, I've grown nostalgic of the days in which I got to watch films essentially blind.

    I remember those days I started watching films at the cinema in the 80's, I remember watching Octopussy and knowing literally nothing about it other than seeing Sir Roger on a magazine cover. There are so many films fighting tooth and nail for the limelight, it will only get worse with giving way too much away in trailers etc.

    I also watched Op knowing nothing about it, except that Roger was in it and that it involved a circus. It's the last Moore Bond film I saw, and my favorite to this day.

    Shame about the current trailer situation indeed. And now we have trailers for trailers, trailer reviews... this is absolute madness!

    Studios literally drill a film into the audiences consciousness these days, often when a film fails Skyscraper a recent example, some in the industry say it's because of poor marketing. Some films marketing can almost match its production budget, it's crazy though with the saturation of mass media there is so much competition there is not much option for tent pole films.

    Though I do wish more surprises were held back from trailers.
  • Posts: 1,135
    Went to see the midnight screening of this.
    ...
    Absolutely blown away by it! Still trying to get my head around how action packed it was. Incredible movie! You guys are going to love it! :)
  • Posts: 1,135
    TR007 wrote: »
    I said it before and I'll say it again, why can't EON take their cues from the Mission Impossible franchise, rather than Batman and Logan?

    Not sure I'm ready for the BOND 25 trailer to lay hipster lyrics over The James Bond Theme.

    If you're referring to the track on the first trailer for Fallout, that's not the MI theme with lyrics dumped on top, that's an Imagine Dragons song from three years ago.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe Given the circumstances
    edited July 2018 Posts: 7,331
    RC7 wrote: »
    Christopher McQuarrie is considering to return yet again and direct Mission: Impossible 7, as he and Tom Cruise are already discussing possible stunts for another installment.

    Which is where the difference lies. I’m not convinced EON are sat around discussing stunts, they’re looking for directors to tell stories. Whether that’s what certain Bond fans want is debatable, but that’s the situation. Bond and M:I aren’t competing as far as I can see, they’re on different courses. The best option is to embrace M:I and quit bitching about Bond.

    Then how is it that SP had no discernable story (beyond surveillance = bad)?

    Rogue Nation had a much better, tighter script than SP had. Even if that wasn't the case, there was still a time when Bond could go toe to toe with any other Action franchise on the planet, in any department. Guess those days are long gone.

  • Posts: 3,314
    TR007 wrote: »
    Went to see the midnight screening of this.
    ...
    Absolutely blown away by it! Still trying to get my head around how action packed it was. Incredible movie! You guys are going to love it! :)
    I’ll be seeing it tomorrow, but I’m sure the question on everybody’s lips is how was Cavill?
  • Posts: 1,135
    Cavill was fantastic. Physical and imposing, but not only that, it was probably the strongest role I've seen him act in. First time I saw him as being more than just a pretty face.
  • Posts: 3,314
    Great. Thanks for the feedback @TR007. Glad you enjoyed the movie.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    RC7 wrote: »
    Christopher McQuarrie is considering to return yet again and direct Mission: Impossible 7, as he and Tom Cruise are already discussing possible stunts for another installment.

    Which is where the difference lies. I’m not convinced EON are sat around discussing stunts, they’re looking for directors to tell stories. Whether that’s what certain Bond fans want is debatable, but that’s the situation. Bond and M:I aren’t competing as far as I can see, they’re on different courses. The best option is to embrace M:I and quit bitching about Bond.

    Then how is it that SP had no discernable story (beyond surveillance = bad)?

    Rogue Nation had a much better, tighter script than SP had. Even if that wasn't the case, there was still a time when Bond could go toe to toe with any other Action franchise on the planet, in any department. Guess those days are long gone.

    Whether they execute it well or not is moot, I’m just saying that’s their aim, hence hiring Danny Boyle this time around.

    I think it’s also worth noting that M:I is an exception. It’s star is essentially a stuntman. Back in the day you could pull off elaborate set pieces using doubles, hence the groundbreaking stuff Bond was able to achieve. It’s a much more difficult proposition these days because the doubles are much more identifiable.

    Would I like some inventive stunt work? Yes. But I think you have to adjust your expectations based on their current trajectory, because unlike M:I they aren’t trying to sell their movies on Craig’s ability to perform death-defying stunts.
  • Posts: 19,339
    TR007 wrote: »
    Cavill was fantastic. Physical and imposing, but not only that, it was probably the strongest role I've seen him act in. First time I saw him as being more than just a pretty face.

    Bond material ?
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    That would be Super Man ! :D
  • edited July 2018 Posts: 1,646
    I dread to think what Tom Cruise will do in the next MI film! Strap himself to a nuclear missile?

    Tom:

    "I discussed this cool idea with the director. I strap myself to a nuke and it's launched at the enemy. Just before it hits the ground I jump off and parachute to safety!"

    13xu9c.jpg


    :P



  • 00Agent00Agent Any man who drinks Dom Perignon '52 can't be all bad.
    Posts: 5,172
    He will get his leg blown off in an explosion, and will sew it back on while in the middle of a firefight...
    In order to be able to do this, Tom will do extensive training for 2 years to become a Surgeon until shooting begins.
  • Posts: 4,431
    "Studios literally drill a film into the audiences consciousness"

    Sounds messy
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    I've heard in a couple of reviews that it helps if you've seen mi3,4 & 5 as there are a few pay offs. It's not necessary to enjoy it but if you've seen the previous movies you'll enjoy it More.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe JenaMaloneforBond.comModerator
    Posts: 12,221
    TR007 wrote: »
    Went to see the midnight screening of this.
    ...
    Absolutely blown away by it! Still trying to get my head around how action packed it was. Incredible movie! You guys are going to love it! :)

    Just got back myself, and I agree with this. In order to top MI:Fallout, Tom is going to have to do a space jump. If this film doesn't cause EON to make a severe course correction, nothing will.
  • SatoriousSatorious Brushing up on a little Danish
    Posts: 215
    Just come back from watching. Not sure if it's my favourite (could be - will need more time to digest), but even if not it's extremely well made. Definitely the most action packed entry in the series. Cavill, Ferguson and Kirby all shine.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,090
    RC7 wrote: »
    Christopher McQuarrie is considering to return yet again and direct Mission: Impossible 7, as he and Tom Cruise are already discussing possible stunts for another installment.

    Which is where the difference lies. I’m not convinced EON are sat around discussing stunts, they’re looking for directors to tell stories. Whether that’s what certain Bond fans want is debatable, but that’s the situation. Bond and M:I aren’t competing as far as I can see, they’re on different courses. The best option is to embrace M:I and quit bitching about Bond.

    Then how is it that SP had no discernable story (beyond surveillance = bad)?

    Rogue Nation had a much better, tighter script than SP had. Even if that wasn't the case, there was still a time when Bond could go toe to toe with any other Action franchise on the planet, in any department. Guess those days are long gone.

    Yep. Also, EoN have been getting directors to more or less tell the exact same uninspired story for the past 20 odd years.
  • Posts: 8,940
    Friday night I am seeing it can’t wait
  • Posts: 1,696
    mattjoes wrote: »
    mattjoes wrote: »
    @mattjoes it's so easy to work out plot points in trailers, it's wise to avoid too much information prior to watching a film.

    Absolutely, @Fire_and_Ice_Returns. The filmmakers prepare surprises for us, in terms of story, action, etc., and for marketing purposes, they are revealed in trailers, clips and the like. Understandable to a degree, but it affects the experience of watching the film, so it's something that should be treated with delicacy. Like in Terminator 2. Watch the film and for a while it looks like Arnold is the villain again. But watch the trailer and the twist is ruined.

    Also, I've grown nostalgic of the days in which I got to watch films essentially blind.

    I remember those days I started watching films at the cinema in the 80's, I remember watching Octopussy and knowing literally nothing about it other than seeing Sir Roger on a magazine cover. There are so many films fighting tooth and nail for the limelight, it will only get worse with giving way too much away in trailers etc.

    I also watched Op knowing nothing about it, except that Roger was in it and that it involved a circus. It's the last Moore Bond film I saw, and my favorite to this day.

    Shame about the current trailer situation indeed. And now we have trailers for trailers, trailer reviews... this is absolute madness!

    Studios literally drill a film into the audiences consciousness these days, often when a film fails Skyscraper a recent example, some in the industry say it's because of poor marketing. Some films marketing can almost match its production budget, it's crazy though with the saturation of mass media there is so much competition there is not much option for tent pole films.

    Though I do wish more surprises were held back from trailers.

    Skyscraper just sounded like yet another generic Dwayne Johnson action film and a lot of people likely thought it sounded inferior when it takes parts of two other genre classics with similar plotlines that people like better - Die Hard and The Towering Inferno.

    Johnson is really overexposed these days anyway. He seems to be in a new film every other month.

    I think some of the most intriguing teaser trailers were what hooked me without revealing any footage from the final film and were specially shot for that purpose. Clint Eastwood's In the Line of Fire jumps to mind. The teaser for QoS with Craig walking with the gun is another. Superman the Movie, Face/Off and a few others made me want to see these without the need of another trailer.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    doubleoego wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    Christopher McQuarrie is considering to return yet again and direct Mission: Impossible 7, as he and Tom Cruise are already discussing possible stunts for another installment.

    Which is where the difference lies. I’m not convinced EON are sat around discussing stunts, they’re looking for directors to tell stories. Whether that’s what certain Bond fans want is debatable, but that’s the situation. Bond and M:I aren’t competing as far as I can see, they’re on different courses. The best option is to embrace M:I and quit bitching about Bond.

    Then how is it that SP had no discernable story (beyond surveillance = bad)?

    Rogue Nation had a much better, tighter script than SP had. Even if that wasn't the case, there was still a time when Bond could go toe to toe with any other Action franchise on the planet, in any department. Guess those days are long gone.

    Yep. Also, EoN have been getting directors to more or less tell the exact same uninspired story for the past 20 odd years.

    Yep.
  • Posts: 2,107
    I've heard in a couple of reviews that it helps if you've seen mi3,4 & 5 as there are a few pay offs. It's not necessary to enjoy it but if you've seen the previous movies you'll enjoy it More.

    Let me guess, it has something to do with Mrs. Hunt...
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    I have no idea but I'll find out Friday :D
  • SatoriousSatorious Brushing up on a little Danish
    Posts: 215
    It makes sense to watch MI3/4/5 to get the best out of it, although if you only have time to watch one, then MI:5 is the most important one.
  • Posts: 1,135
    It's enjoyable without having seen the others but I would argue that 3 and 5 are the two ones to check out if you haven't done so already.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited July 2018 Posts: 15,534
    The Mission Impossible franchise is IMO the best from both worlds in terms of continuity - you can watch any of them without seeing the others and you can understand what's going on, and yet there are plenty of call-backs to previous installments to satisfy those who've seen them all. I still get a kick of Ilsa Faust's key ring having the form of a rabbit foot at the start of Rogue Nation, a reference to the macguffin of M:I:3.
Sign In or Register to comment.