Mission: Impossible Dead Reckoning - Parts 1 and 2 (2023/24)

1130131133135136235

Comments

  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    edited July 2018 Posts: 13,384
  • Posts: 19,339
    barryt007 wrote: »
    Sky Movies has renamed a channel in Cruise's honor. Says a lot about his star power. I don't recall Sky doing this for anyone else.

    Its only a pop-up channel,its lasts about 2 weeks and then another one starts.

    They have done it with Tom Hanks and other stars,they also do it by subject such as : aliens,monsters,Oscar winners,robots,Pixar etc.

    You can record some good stuff on there,films you may have missed.

    There was a Bond one when SF came out as well. That was nice. Just being able to easily stick a bit of a random Bond film on any time.

    Yes indeed,that was great..next time its on i will record and keep all the films i havent got on my Q box yet !!

    Should be soon with B25 gaining momentum.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    edited July 2018 Posts: 15,423
    You know?

    Having just started my marathon of the Mission: Impossible movies again, with the intention of ignoring the overstylized John Woo eyesore and the abysmal soap opera that directly follows it, I'd love for them to involve The Syndicate heading far back as to 1996 and tie it to the Jim Phelps story.

    Hell, I don't expect CGI Peter Graves or a crippled Jon Voight to show up, but I would want Jim Phelps exonerated. They have to fix that mistake. Phelps wasn't a man who would've betrayed his country and allies just because he was "pissed off at the President running the country without his permission" as he puts it. That would never be Phelps.

    They could mention that The Syndicate took him out and replaced him with a substitute. I want that in Fallout.
  • Last_Rat_StandingLast_Rat_Standing South Florida
    Posts: 3,966
    You know?

    Having just started my marathon of the Mission: Impossible movies again, with the intention of ignoring the overstylized John Woo eyesore and the abysmal soap opera that directly follows it, I'd love for them to involve The Syndicate heading far back as to 1996 and tie it to the Jim Phelps story.

    Hell, I don't expect CGI Peter Graves or a crippled Jon Voight to show up, but I would want Jim Phelps exonerated. They have to fix that mistake. Phelps wasn't a man who would've betrayed his country and allies just because he was "pissed off at the President running the country without his permission" as he puts it. That would never be Phelps.

    They could mention that The Syndicate took him out and replaced him with a substitute. I want that in Fallout.

    I like that idea. I wouldn't go as far as Phelps being the originator but a tie in with the first, done right would work. Let's just hope that we don't see pictures of Phelps, Kreigler, Ambrose, Owen Davien, and Kurt Hendricks and they turn out to all be Syndicate members.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    You know?

    Having just started my marathon of the Mission: Impossible movies again, with the intention of ignoring the overstylized John Woo eyesore and the abysmal soap opera that directly follows it, I'd love for them to involve The Syndicate heading far back as to 1996 and tie it to the Jim Phelps story.

    Hell, I don't expect CGI Peter Graves or a crippled Jon Voight to show up, but I would want Jim Phelps exonerated. They have to fix that mistake. Phelps wasn't a man who would've betrayed his country and allies just because he was "pissed off at the President running the country without his permission" as he puts it. That would never be Phelps.

    They could mention that The Syndicate took him out and replaced him with a substitute. I want that in Fallout.

    I like that idea. I wouldn't go as far as Phelps being the originator but a tie in with the first, done right would work. Let's just hope that we don't see pictures of Phelps, Kreigler, Ambrose, Owen Davien, and Kurt Hendricks and they turn out to all be Syndicate members.
    Well, the purpose of my idea is to exonerate Phelps. However they do it, I’d like to see they do in a way that’s not cringeworthy as the pictures and retcons we’ve seen in SP. I want them to fix this idea as long as we do have an Ethan Hunt, because the character ties to him best, as he holds the only key of relevance towards Phelps.
  • 00Agent00Agent Any man who drinks Dom Perignon '52 can't be all bad.
    edited July 2018 Posts: 5,176
    I agree, making Phelps a traitor was the dumbest idea ever. Even from a business point of view because they completely devalued the TV series with that, especially for new fans. No Studio executive would sign off on that nowadays. Instead they would milk the past for all its worth, as they tried to do now with the syndicate.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    00Agent wrote: »
    I agree, making Phelps a traitor was the dumbest idea ever. Even from a business point of view because they completely devalued the TV series with that, especially for new fans. No Studio executive would sign off on that nowadays. Instead they would milk the past for all its worth, as they tried to do now with the syndicate.
    +1. As always, my friend, you hit the nail right on the head.
  • 00Agent00Agent Any man who drinks Dom Perignon '52 can't be all bad.
    Posts: 5,176
    One tries, Mr. Devlin :)
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    A Double-O always succeeds, Mr. ehhh?
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 36,269
    The Jim Phelps twist was good but totally unnecessary. It'd be akin to adapting the Fleming works to film now, and the first movie ends with M being the villain.
  • Posts: 4,479
    I know what people mean but the Jim Phelps twist was a brave move and it's hard to argue that it had a bad effect on the franchise. They knew that the future focus would be on Hunt and the Phelps twist drew a line under the MI heritage and sent a clear message that MI was moving forward rather than stuck in the past. I would guess 99% of those watching Fallout know little of nothing about Phelps. I don't think there is a real need to go back. If anything, with Cruise getting older, it's future characters and character developement that needs attending to IMHO
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger @!#¤%^§
    Posts: 43,562
    I didn t know there are fjords in Kashmir, but American movies teach me something new all the time.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 36,269
    I didn t know there are fjords in Kashmir, but American movies teach me something new all the time.

    And all states have massive, NYC-level skyscrapers.
  • edited July 2018 Posts: 2,115
    Edgar Wright weighs in. (He liked the newest installment.)

  • Posts: 5,767
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    I didn t know there are fjords in Kashmir, but American movies teach me something new all the time.

    And all states have massive, NYC-level skyscrapers.
    You mean all states of Kashmir ;-)?

  • mattjoesmattjoes What is the BUDANAYCHUR?
    Posts: 5,164
    I disagree about Phelps. I understand it may be a source of annoyance given how it runs counter to the original series, but ultimately that's the film they chose to make, one that defied expectations-- it begins as one would expect from a hypothetical M:I film, but soon the team gets wiped out, and Phelps is eventually revealed to be a traitor. They took the story in that direction and there's no turning the clock back. If they try to retroactively change that by making Phelps an imposter, they're just undermining that film, and furthermore, they're not really fixing the issue, since the original film is still about him as a traitor. I don't think one rewatches a film holding the thought that seven films down the line, a character will be revealed as a substitute. In terms of the story's twists and turns, one always watches it as if it was the first time, otherwise one wouldn't relate to each scene as it unfolds. So Phelps will always be a traitor in that film.

    And personally, I don't closely associate that first film with the TV show. It uses the show as a springboard to do its own thing. It plays in the sandbox of the show --takes its premise and a character-- but eventually goes off in another direction. It's a twist, a variation on M:I, not intended to be that closely related to the original thing (except for brand recognition).

    I don't like retcons, but if you have to do them, it's better to just ignore what came before, not to come up with explanations. So in this particular case, if the idea would just be to clear Phelps' name, and not to do anything new with the character, they would be better off leaving it alone.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    It's as abominable as making Bond the main villain in the film only for him to be killed off by another 00-agent, and thus a new franchise is born. I hope I wouldn't live to see that day.
  • MurdockMurdock Mr. 2000
    Posts: 16,141
    I just consider it an alternate universe to the original series. The "Ethan" timeline if you will. :P
  • BennyBenny Classified Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 12,377
    Edgar Wright weighs in. (He liked the newest installment.)




    This is what I like about the MI series. It's become an event. They're exciting action films that go out of their way to entertain us. What more could one want.



  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,534
  • BennyBenny Classified Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 12,377
    The last time I was this pumped for a movie was Spectre.
    Opens in Australia August 2nd.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,244
    Murdock wrote: »
    I just consider it an alternate universe to the original series. The "Ethan" timeline if you will. :P

    Precisely.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,534
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    That was funny. :))
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe JenaMaloneforBond.comModerator
    Posts: 12,474

    I know Tom has a harness attached, but that fall from the choppa still takes some balls. I have to respect this man for the lengths he will go to please his audience. I haven't seen an MI film on the big screen since MI2, but I am feeling like this one I definitely want to see on the big screen.
  • Posts: 4,479
    Just learning to fly a helicopter in itself is a great acheivement. They are tricky things, much harder than planes. He is a unique guy, no doubt,

    100% agree re that fall set piece
  • Posts: 579
    Just an FYI to everyone reading about the film. The Guardian has an article titled "Mission Impossible 6 Director Teases Huge Fallout Twist." I read the article, thinking from the title that it would TEASE the twist...but it gives it away completely. So take it from a dummy (me): I suffered so that you don't have to. Don't read the article!!
  • Posts: 1,145
    @PDJamesBond Thanks for the heads up. Will be catching the midnight screening tonight so really want to avoid spoilers as much as possible!
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe Given the circumstances
    Posts: 7,338
    [When does mission impossible 6 officially release in the UK?
Sign In or Register to comment.