Mission: Impossible - VII/VIII (2022/23)

1192193195197198221

Comments

  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 7,125
    patb wrote: »
    I wonder if the McQ process of making action movies could work with Bond? a series of action sequences with zero exposition blended together with later shot internals. It's an intriguing idea.

    He does mention in another interview how he saw another big action movie doing exposition in the middle of an action sequence and how it killed both: I suspect he was talking about the car chase in Spectre, and I think everyone agrees that sequence doesn't really work, so he has a point! :)
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 8,684
    No not everyone agrees, it's just one method of delivering the scene to advance the story. Not presented to be the standout action or plot lynchpin of the film.

    It works just fine for me on several sides including comic relief.

  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 7,125
    You think that's a good action scene? I think you're the first I've heard of! :)
  • mattjoesmattjoes matthaujoes
    Posts: 4,238
    I'm the second.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 8,684
    I took it as a Michael Mann sort of stylish night scene. Didn't need gunfire and rockets and explosions. So yes action and otherwise it played fine for me.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 6,353
    I took it as a Michael Mann sort of stylish night scene.

    As a huge Michael Mann fan, I took this insult very personally! ;)

  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 7,125
    Michael Mann? I can’t see that at all.
    For me it’s a very damp squib of an action scene and isn’t anywhere near any action scene from the last three M:I films.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 8,684
    Okay I'm relieved I like it fine. That's all.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 6,353
    I'm glad someone gets something from it, @RichardTheBruce
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 34,269
    I took it as a Michael Mann sort of stylish night scene.

    As a huge Michael Mann fan, I took this insult very personally! ;)

    Same here, there's not one moment from that entire sequence that felt Mann-esque to me. I suppose it's subjective, though, but I don't see it. At least someone enjoyed that sequence and it wasn't a complete waste.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 7,125
    Yeah it's big and silly and light, adjectives I can't apply to any Mann film or scene off the top of my head. It is set at night.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 6,353
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    I took it as a Michael Mann sort of stylish night scene.

    As a huge Michael Mann fan, I took this insult very personally! ;)

    Same here, there's not one moment from that entire sequence that felt Mann-esque to me. I suppose it's subjective, though, but I don't see it. At least someone enjoyed that sequence and it wasn't a complete waste.

    Always nice to hear somebody enjoyed something from a sequence that is generally less regarded. I'm like that with a lot of Mann's more recent films, funnily enough!
  • Posts: 4,302
    Is keeping threads on topic an Impossible Mission?
    Anyway, I watched Rogue Nation again last night and, in view of the directors comments, it is remarkable how standalone the action sequences are (the PTS easily could have been the finale) and how with new editing and dialogue, they could be swapped around to create variations on the plot.n Also remarkable how thin the plot is but McQ on the record that plot not that important. RN aging very well IMHO
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe Still waiting for the Jena Malone Batwoman movie that's never going to be made.Moderator
    Posts: 11,859
    Mission Impossible: Fallout, the franchise's latest installment, came out 2 years ago today.

    tom-cruise-mission-impossible.jpg

    Wait, it can't can't be 2 years since Fallout?
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,534
    Mission Impossible: Fallout, the franchise's latest installment, came out 2 years ago today.

    tom-cruise-mission-impossible.jpg

    Wait, it can't can't be 2 years since Fallout?

    Are you counting time in Tom Cruise years? He hasn't aged a single day since Ghost Protocol in 2011, so I understand the confusion when using this counting method. ;-)
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 6,353
    patb wrote: »
    Is keeping threads on topic an Impossible Mission?

    Ah, an original twist on a boring and overused soundbite!

    Mission Impossible: Fallout, the franchise's latest installment, came out 2 years ago today.

    tom-cruise-mission-impossible.jpg

    Wait, it can't can't be 2 years since Fallout?

    It's hard to believe, isn't it? Time has flown by since then.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 7,125
    patb wrote: »
    Is keeping threads on topic an Impossible Mission?
    Anyway, I watched Rogue Nation again last night and, in view of the directors comments, it is remarkable how standalone the action sequences are (the PTS easily could have been the finale) and how with new editing and dialogue, they could be swapped around to create variations on the plot.n Also remarkable how thin the plot is but McQ on the record that plot not that important. RN aging very well IMHO

    Yeah it's very clever: especially when you have something like the big climax which is so tense (because of the stakes and the plot). Or even the skydive, which is hugely exciting but really makes not all that much sense (why would they have to do a HALO jump to get to Paris? You're allowed into Paris! :) ).
    I noticed the other day with that scene that the IMAX ratio is preserved on home video, so when Ethan walks up to the back of the open plane to look at the storm below, the black bars on the screen slowly open up- very nice!

    One fun thing to look for: when Benji puts his mask on to pretend to be Lane his leather jacket suddenly changes colour between shots! And then it changes back again as soon as he takes it off :D
  • edited July 2020 Posts: 4,302
    Looking at the PTS sequence again, TC is wearing his generic suit which makes it easier to fit into another timeline and Benji uses "radio silence" to explain why is not comunicating with Hunt in the buildup to to stunt. Also, Benji has had time to dress in camouflage (you never see him and the plane in the same shot - the back of his head for a very short shot) and put the aircraft in surveilance whilst Hunt just arrives "running", so there are clues (when you look) that the physical stunt is in isolation from the context (which is added later). The exposition comes from Brandt who does not appear within the stunt at all and the same for Luther
    A "race against time" from a city centre to the airbase to save the nerve gas from being dumped/atomised over a city would have been a very decent climax IMHO. McQ keeps his options open.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 6,353
    McQuarrie's less about plot, more about character. The team dynamic is very strong in the last couple of films, despite it generally being regarded as the Cruise show. That's not to take anything away from the lunacy that he does, which is fantastic - but the stakes being so high is helped by the unit being so watchable together. I think the only way to up the stakes in the next couple is to kill someone off; preferably Benji.

    It goes to show how smart McQuarrie is, considering he can and has written some very plot heavy films. He knows what makes these Mission films work.
  • Posts: 4,302
    Agree, there was so much going on in Fallout that Hulney's death was never really exploited fully. Huge warmth for Luther IMHO, (and obviously an original) so I think he could be "in the firing line" re stakes and drama. If writing/producing 2 together, it offers the potential to "setup" a sad ending with a revenge theme for the second.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,534
    patb wrote: »
    Agree, there was so much going on in Fallout that Hulney's death was never really exploited fully. Huge warmth for Luther IMHO, (and obviously an original) so I think he could be "in the firing line" re stakes and drama. If writing/producing 2 together, it offers the potential to "setup" a sad ending with a revenge theme for the second.

    If they do kill off Luther in the next one, I hope they give Ving Rhames a flashback sequence of sorts in M:I:8. It wouldn't sit well with me to have an M:I film without him.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 6,353
    Luther would be a blow, for sure. As you say, he's been around as long as Cruise has, so him being collateral damage would certainly give it a hefty emotional edge.
  • edited July 2020 Posts: 4,302
    With Henry Czerny returning, reference to "the good old days" would make sense and obviously, Luther was a key part of that so it would maximise the impact. How often have we seen Hunt cry? We know Cruise is made for these scenes. I'm welling up already.
  • Agent_OneAgent_One Ireland
    edited July 2020 Posts: 280
    If he isn't the antagonist, Kittridge is almost certainly marked for death. Him and Luther going out at the same time, perhaps?

    I wonder if we'll get a reference to Brandt.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 7,125
    patb wrote: »
    Looking at the PTS sequence again, TC is wearing his generic suit which makes it easier to fit into another timeline and Benji uses "radio silence" to explain why is not comunicating with Hunt in the buildup to to stunt. Also, Benji has had time to dress in camouflage (you never see him and the plane in the same shot - the back of his head for a very short shot) and put the aircraft in surveilance whilst Hunt just arrives "running", so there are clues (when you look) that the physical stunt is in isolation from the context (which is added later). The exposition comes from Brandt who does not appear within the stunt at all and the same for Luther
    A "race against time" from a city centre to the airbase to save the nerve gas from being dumped/atomised over a city would have been a very decent climax IMHO. McQ keeps his options open.

    Apparently they did intend the plane stunt to be a big main setpiece, much like the Burj Kalifa climb in the previous one, but they couldn't find a place for it in the plot so just used it in the beginning (some of the thinking was also that the audience would have seen it in the publicity and would be hanging on to see it, so may as well just give it to them straight away!). They cheekily use it in the end credits again anyway so get their mileage out of it!
    I guess it's possibly the most straightforwardly Bond-like the series has ever been: doing a big pre-titles stunt like that.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited July 2020 Posts: 7,125
    McQuarrie's less about plot, more about character. The team dynamic is very strong in the last couple of films, despite it generally being regarded as the Cruise show.

    It's true. I was watching the early ones recently and the first film got a lot of flak for not being Mission: Impossible because it supposedly turns into the Cruise show, but I don't think that's fair in fact. M:I the TV show was about tricking baddies: it's basically a succession of cons- like 'Hustle' but with spies. And the '96 film has Hunt, at the end, pull a con on Jon Voight: he tricks him and his accomplice to flush them out on the train and arranges for Kitteridge to be there so he can clear his own name too (plus Luther ensures that Max's side of the plot is taken care of so there is a team dynamic to a small extent). And I think that's the key difference between M:I and Bond (as long as you've got a bit of team too): Hunt should trick the baddies. He does it again to some extent at the end of MI2 (surprisingly!) when he dresses Richard Roxburgh up as himself, but MI3 doesn't have any of that and I think it rather falls apart at the end as a result- it's just a fight in an old shop, really. Ghost Protocol ends in a big trick but weirdly we see their plan fail completely (you could chop out all of the stuff with the party in India and Jeremy Renner floating because it all comes to nothing), and then Rogue ends with pretty much the best and most satisfying trick of all of them.
    Fallout's climax has no con/trick element at all but gets away with it because it's basically the most thrilling climax to an action movie in decades. I'd certainly like to see it return though- these are heist movies spliced with action movies and it's a combo I really like.

    It goes to show how smart McQuarrie is, considering he can and has written some very plot heavy films. He knows what makes these Mission films work.

    Yeah he's so savvy about that sort of thing. He knows exactly what's satisfying to an audience, and I think that's key. I wish the Bond writers could get some of that magic sprinkled on them.
    Luther would be a blow, for sure. As you say, he's been around as long as Cruise has, so him being collateral damage would certainly give it a hefty emotional edge.

    Yeah certainly. I actually thought they were going to kill Benji at the end of Fallout when I saw it for the first time: it was genuinely tense. And as you say: that's an advantage of the team setup because you feel that one of the leads actually could die (whereas in a Bond film we know Bond can't of course).
    Ving is looking a little out of shape recently (not to be uncharitable) so it does feel like he is one who could exit.
  • Posts: 1,546
    mtm wrote: »
    McQuarrie's less about plot, more about character. The team dynamic is very strong in the last couple of films, despite it generally being regarded as the Cruise show.

    It's true. I was watching the early ones recently and the first film got a lot of flak for not being Mission: Impossible because it supposedly turns into the Cruise show, but I don't think that's fair in fact. M:I the TV show was about tricking baddies: it's basically a succession of cons- like 'Hustle' but with spies. And the '96 film has Hunt, at the end, pull a con on Jon Voight: he tricks him and his accomplice to flush them out on the train and arranges for Kitteridge to be there so he can clear his own name too (plus Luther ensures that Max's side of the plot is taken care of so there is a team dynamic to a small extent). And I think that's the key difference between M:I and Bond (as long as you've got a bit of team too): Hunt should trick the baddies. He does it again to some extent at the end of MI2 (surprisingly!) when he dresses Richard Roxburgh up as himself, but MI3 doesn't have any of that and I think it rather falls apart at the end as a result- it's just a fight in an old shop, really. Ghost Protocol ends in a big trick but weirdly we see their plan fail completely (you could chop out all of the stuff with the party in India and Jeremy Renner floating because it all comes to nothing), and then Rogue ends with pretty much the best and most satisfying trick of all of them.
    Fallout's climax has no con/trick element at all but gets away with it because it's basically the most thrilling climax to an action movie in decades. I'd certainly like to see it return though- these are heist movies spliced with action movies and it's a combo I really like.
    Yeah, the first film did get a lot of flack, but it still holds up just fine for me. It's not non-stop stunts, not that there's anything wrong with that.

    I will disagree about Fallout's climax. It's really just a repeat of other films with the ticking bomb countdown and Hunt getting the hell knocked out of him to stop it as the seconds tick down. I'm still not entirely sold on Fallout being as great as others do.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe Still waiting for the Jena Malone Batwoman movie that's never going to be made.Moderator
    Posts: 11,859
    Mission Impossible: Fallout, the franchise's latest installment, came out 2 years ago today.

    tom-cruise-mission-impossible.jpg

    Wait, it can't can't be 2 years since Fallout?

    Are you counting time in Tom Cruise years? He hasn't aged a single day since Ghost Protocol in 2011, so I understand the confusion when using this counting method. ;-)

    Never mind 2011, he has barely aged since 1996! Meanwhile, i'm over here, 34 and allready going grey. No, i'm not the least bit bitter towards Tom Cruise. ;)
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 7,125
    It is weird watching that first one and realising it's an actual old movie! Burnt-in captions, the old Paramount logo, hilarious depictions of the internet etc. and Ethan Hunt basically as the kid of the team- it's kind of amazing. It's also so stylish: I know it's one of De Palma's regular tricks, but doing a scene from Ethan's POV is the sort of thing you just wouldn't see in any other M:I movie. It's brilliant, possibly still the best.

    And I definitely think Elfman did the best version of the theme music: yet to be topped!
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 6,353
    mtm wrote: »
    It is weird watching that first one and realising it's an actual old movie! Burnt-in captions, the old Paramount logo, hilarious depictions of the internet etc. and Ethan Hunt basically as the kid of the team- it's kind of amazing. It's also so stylish: I know it's one of De Palma's regular tricks, but doing a scene from Ethan's POV is the sort of thing you just wouldn't see in any other M:I movie. It's brilliant, possibly still the best.

    And I definitely think Elfman did the best version of the theme music: yet to be topped!

    It, like GoldenEye did for Bond at the time, also had a Cold War hangover in terms of atmosphere and style. It was very much a film with one eye looking backwards. We haven't really had a sequence of "pure spy" intrigue in the M:I films since that first film.
Sign In or Register to comment.