Mission: Impossible - films and tv series

1314315317319320

Comments

  • Posts: 2,281
    No, doesn't Mission Impossible usually do 4× its opening weekend? 4× 200 million = 800 million, plus Premium VOD, plus the value the movie adds to the franchise as a whole in terms of Bluray/digital sales.

    The movie will most likely make a profit when all is said and done, same as Dead Reckoning did in the end.

    Oh sure, in the long term I would suspect all movies make their money back.

    China is also a major part of determining if MI8 will have a good box office run, but given the massive fall of western movies doing well over there, it would seem unlikely. Previous MI films in China:

    RN - $136m
    Fallout - $181m
    DR - $48m
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,987
    Mallory wrote: »
    No, doesn't Mission Impossible usually do 4× its opening weekend? 4× 200 million = 800 million, plus Premium VOD, plus the value the movie adds to the franchise as a whole in terms of Bluray/digital sales.

    The movie will most likely make a profit when all is said and done, same as Dead Reckoning did in the end.

    Oh sure, in the long term I would suspect all movies make their money back.

    China is also a major part of determining if MI8 will have a good box office run, but given the massive fall of western movies doing well over there, it would seem unlikely. Previous MI films in China:

    RN - $136m
    Fallout - $181m
    DR - $48m

    Not all movies, far from it! But all MI movies, sure, just shows the strength of the brand. B-)
  • edited May 25 Posts: 544
    My guess is $600 to 700 worldwide gross. I think it will do better than Dead Reckoning which was $571 ww gross.

    Final Reckoning may do better because no Barbie/Oppenheimer double whammy competition and the biplane sequence looks thrilling enough to get some extra punters into the cinema. And maybe some of the hardcore MI fans will see it twice because it's the 'final' chapter in the franchise.

    I doubt it will break even or make a profit if it needs to hit one billion. 😮 The cost of MI 8 was crazy.

    "I think this is the last mission impossible, Mr Hunt. This tape will not self destruct."
  • edited May 26 Posts: 2,108
    I saw MI Final Reckoning earlier today. I love it! Tom Cruise outdid himself again. Dont know how he does it. Must be all that scientology. Anyways if you haven't seen this movie go see it now!!!

    Mod edit - No need for the F bombs.
  • mattjoesmattjoes Dakato Johnson
    edited May 26 Posts: 7,157
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    I saw MI Final Reckoning earlier today. I love it! Tom Cruise outside himself again. Dont know how he does it. Must be all that scientology. Anyways if you haven't seen this movie go see it now!!!

    :))
  • BennyBenny Shaken not stirredAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 15,425
    As I’ve already mentioned in my spoiler tagged review, I liken MI : TFR very much in the same vein as the original MI from ‘96.
    IMO, if you took 30-40 minutes from the run time of TFR it would be a much slicker movie.
    Once again,I don’t think it’s a bad film at all, and after watching MI: DR on the weekend, I think TFR stands up very well.
  • edited May 26 Posts: 252
    I saw it yesterday on screenx I liked it but it was messy and a little long. I watched Dead Reckoning the night before and it helped with being up to speed.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,760
    I saw it last night. It was okay but overlong and bloated, and not unlike SP, trying oh so hard to tie together the continuity. There were a lot of beige and gray scenes and the action was...fine. I preferred Dead Reckoning's train sequence to any action in this.
  • Last_Rat_StandingLast_Rat_Standing Long Neck Ice Cold Beer Never Broke My Heart
    Posts: 4,715
    I just saw it and loved it. Much better than DR which I enjoyed as well. The overall
    end of the world/doomsday threat really made it interesting. Loved the callbacks to the orginal movie but could have done without Jim Phelps Jr reveal
  • edited May 27 Posts: 4,751
    It's interesting that McQ wants to do a superhero movie as, looking at FR, the stakes and the mythology of Hunt, it's sort of the next progression, re the running time, when you run through it, there are whole sections that add nothing to the story (and huge bills to the production cost) The impact of a great stunt is big on the first viewing but over time, it's story and character that mean more in the long run.
    PS my son watched Capricorn One for the first time last night, when Brolin gets aboard the Stearman, he shouts "they stole it"
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,790
    I enjoyed the set pieces a lot, this needs to be seen in Imax. I do think a tighter runtime would have improved it or maybe Ethan in a chase/fight between the credits sequence and the first hour.

    It's probably been said before, but the first third of the film was a bit exposition heavy.
  • edited May 28 Posts: 4,751
    Running time and huge budget....thoughts
    What did the carrier and US sub bring to the story ? story and characters not progressed but time taken and budget expanded, the more I think about the script, the worse it gets IMHO
    PS Luther's death scene is weird, why the bomb? a "Khan" style scene, seperated by the locked iron gate would have been more personal and impactful,
    ...having said that, seeing it for second time tonight :-)
  • edited May 28 Posts: 544
    I'm doing a new AI version of Mission Bond poster. Coming soon. 😉
  • LucknFateLucknFate 007 In New York
    edited May 28 Posts: 1,936
    patb wrote: »
    Running time and huge budget....thoughts
    What did the carrier and US sub bring to the story ? story and characters not progressed but time taken and budget expanded, the more I think about the script, the worse it gets IMHO
    PS Luther's death scene is weird, why the bomb? a "Khan" style scene, seperated by the locked iron gate would have been more personal and impactful,
    ...having said that, seeing it for second time tonight :-)
    The Carrier and US Sub explain how Ethan is able to get to the arctic and get a special SEAL suit to dive with. He has to get there somehow, and get the suite from somewhere, so they finally just had him source them from the regular government since the IMF is up in the air or whatever.

    Would have been interesting to...
    make the dive suite a smart suit that the entity could hack and mess with, and that's the reason ethan has to remove it. more of a threat than just.. can't fit in the tube like in the movie.

    Having said all that, I am also seeing it again tomorrow. First was IMAX, this time I'm trying 4DX. Should be a fun ride in the final two set pieces.
  • edited May 28 Posts: 4,751
    Hunt globe trots around the World in all of the movies (as does Bond), we see an estabishing shot with "cliche" views of the location (someimes with suitable music), a title telling us the location and then, he is just there. This keeps the momentum of the story nicely moving forward We don't need to see how he got there or get introduced to new characters during the journey (unless that is crucial to the plot) that have no impact on the narrative. The audience can be trusted to "fill in the blanks"
  • edited May 28 Posts: 544
    Paramount and Amazon MGM Studios present:

    Mission-Bond-1.png

    Younger version:
    Mission-Bond-2.png

    Graphic novel version:
    Mission-Bond-3.png

    Do you accept the mission? 😉

  • LucknFateLucknFate 007 In New York
    edited May 28 Posts: 1,936
    Wouldn't Impossible Bond be a more interesting title? Sounds like a comic strip. There's even a double meaning!
  • edited May 28 Posts: 544
    Well Mission Bond makes it sound like a mission.
    😊

    It's amazing how advanced AI has become in a short time. The images of Cruise and Craig are very realistic. ChatGPT rendered the images.

    At the rate AI is going ChatGPT will be directing Bond 27, 28 and Mission Impossible The Reboot. 😂
  • goldenswissroyalegoldenswissroyale Switzerland
    edited May 28 Posts: 4,579
    Back from cinema. I had my expectations lowered due to all the comments that there is a lot of exposition and not much action. If my expectations wouldn't have been lowered I would now be very disappointed. Now, I'm still far away from happy.
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    I do think a tighter runtime would have improved it or maybe Ethan in a chase/fight between the credits sequence and the first hour.

    I don't know how specific we are already allowed to talk about the movie...which is why I write my other thoughts as spoilers.
    Yes, the 30 minutes after the credit/title sequence are without any action at all. This can work but at least for me, this part was hard to get through...Honestly, (imo) the only really highlight of the first half of the movie was the action scene before the title sequence. Sometimes, less is more and this was the only moment where the movie made me smile for a while. (Well the other short laugh out loud moment was the death of a character in the last third: This was an an unexpected mixture between cruel and slapstick...I liked it).

    When my students write their texts with ChatGPT I often have the feeling that I recognise it: it's full of smart sounding sentences without much substance...maybe the monologues of this movie were also KI-generated? Maybe by the entitiy itself? So much talking about fate and choices and trust and zzzzzzzz (sorry, I fell asleep for a second). For example the last monologue of the movie: Does someone of you like this stuff? I didn't...

    And why is there a fan trailer of all the other M:I in this movie? I mean, I like a good Bond trailer with snippets from all the movies on Youtube but I don't need a trailer of the earlier movies in the newest one??

    And someone mentioned that there are too many flashbacks in general, especially a flashback of a scene that happended 1 min before...this was also odd for me. Why should you edit it that way?

    What I even missed more than the action was the fun: I'm a big fan of Simon Pegg and Benji always amused me but he doesn't get funny lines this time.

    The final thrill is good but a bit too similar to Fallout, isn't it?

    And why doesn't Hunt like kissing?

    Enough negativity from my part. Let's mention some good things:
    I love the cast. So many great actors. I always loved Hunt's team: Grace works fine for me (but I still miss Ilsa), Paris is cool and I liked William and his wife way more than expected. Briggs and Degas are likeable chaps but they don't have much to do...Also Angela Basset does a good job (her scenes are almost the only "talking scenes" I wouldn't shorten...)

    And what about the two big set pieces? The first (the wet) one was solid stuff. An interesting contrast, especially because it was so calm...the music was also somehow more reduced there and I thought it worked well this way). The second big set piece was good but I preferred the train stuff from DR and it can't compete with the thrills of the Fallout finale (imo).

    The best thing about the movie? The beautiful green landscape of South Africa. (The rest of the movie is more dark and grey in colour).

    I love the 5th and 6th M:I movie and I have a good time with the third, 4th and 7th (DR). I would rank TFR as #7 between the first M:I movie (good thriller but not my piece of cake) and M:I 2 (I prefer every dialogue in TFR to Hunt's annoying MI:2-grinning and the stupid car chase between Hunt and Nyah).

    I prefer every Bond movie to TFR.


  • meshypushymeshypushy Ireland
    Posts: 189
    I saw this for the second time tonight - this time in 4DX. It’s not the best 4DX experience I’ve had (TG Maverick and Wick 4 were more suited to the format) but the final act, in particular, is a blast with the additional effects.
    I came away from the second viewing more impressed than the first. The movie has its issues, as all movies do but this gets away with it, for me. It’s classic MI and definitely up there with MI1, Ghost Protocol and Fallout. Unlike DR, I will definitely return to this many times once it gets a home release.
    My wife hated it on first viewing and loved it second time around. If this is Cruise’s last MI, he’s gone out on top form, unlike Craig’s finale in NTTD.
    No DouDou either, other than the first two notes of the theme tune…
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,998
    I'm one of the few who love SPECTRE despite some dodgy retcons & tie-ins to prior films, but this last M:I film did both incredibly well IMO. As last franchise movies go, this was Tops. And
    Hunt did not have to die
    .
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,864
    I was glad they resisted the urge for a sappy or overly emotional ending.

    One thing that Calvin mentions in his review, and upon reflection I agree with him, there is a lot of "Ethan you are the only one who can do this" and "Ethan you are worthy of being our supreme leader" or "Ethan you are the only one that can save humanity." It gets a bit much and is repeated by many in this film. Not sure what was driving that, but I did find it a bit over the top.

  • goldenswissroyalegoldenswissroyale Switzerland
    edited May 29 Posts: 4,579
    @meshypushy why did your wife enjoy the second screening so much more? Maybe because she already knew who would survive? Or is there also hope for me that I like it more the second time? I didn't hate it but it wasn't a good experience for me.
  • meshypushymeshypushy Ireland
    Posts: 189
    @meshypushy why did your wife enjoy the second screening so much more? Maybe because she already knew who would survive? Or is there also hope for me that I like it more the second time? I didn't hate it but it wasn't a good experience for me.
    I think she was surprised by the darker tone of the movie first time around and that might have clouded her initial perception. Also, I think some of the details of the various plot points were missed first time around (I had the same experience but to a lesser extent). I’m not a fan of DR and no amount of rewatches have changed or will change that, so I can’t say that subsequent rewatches of TFR will change your view of it. My second viewing was on a bigger screen, with better sound - this may have helped to clarify some of the more confusing / ambiguous elements of the plot.
  • goldenswissroyalegoldenswissroyale Switzerland
    Posts: 4,579
    Thanks for answering @meshypushy . Great that both of liked it. I can't watch Cruise movies wih my wife. She doesn't accept any movie mission with Scientology Tom.

    The quality of screen and sound can definitely also help. For me, the Venice party in DR is an absolute highlight, also with my sound system at home. The bass there lets my heart pump in excitement.


  • edited May 29 Posts: 544
    thedove wrote: »
    I was glad they resisted the urge for a sappy or overly emotional ending.

    One thing that Calvin mentions in his review, and upon reflection I agree with him, there is a lot of "Ethan you are the only one who can do this" and "Ethan you are worthy of being our supreme leader" or "Ethan you are the only one that can save humanity." It gets a bit much and is repeated by many in this film. Not sure what was driving that, but I did find it a bit over the top.

    This is a reflection of Tom Cruise's narcissism. Since Mission Impossible 2 when he did the opening sequence mountain climb, he's made a deliberate effort to tell people he is doing the stunts.

    It's always brought up in interviews/press junkets. Cruise always says "I fly planes, helicopters, I train for ages, we took years to figure it out, I held my breath for six minutes yadda yadda yadda."

    Cast always praise Cruise for his hard work ethic, dedication, bravery, how talented he is.

    Do you know Cruise spends more time with his stomach revealed/shirtless in Final Reckoning than any other MI film. Kinda strange? Well, not if you're trying to say "hey, I'm 62, look at my impressive body. See how good I look for my age. No pot belly!"

    He's trying to tell people how fit he is for his age, to impress the audience.

    And of course the subtext in FR - Cruise's Hunt is a demigod.

    Demigod - dictionary definition:
    What does it mean if you're a demigod?
    : a mythological being with more power than a mortal but less than a god. 2. : a person so outstanding as to seem to approach the divine.


    A person so outstanding as to seem to approach the divine. Sounds like Hunt in Mission Impossible The Final Reckoning!

    I don't care if Cruise is narcissistic. Donald Trump is narcissistic and people with obvious narcissism attract people as they do repel people. If Cruise wants to do his own stunts and seek endless validation, that's his choice. If it adds to the enjoyment of the film that's a benefit.

    Hollywood can be very lazy and put the A list stars in front of greenscreens and we all know it's fake so Cruise doing the stunts for real (or semi real - the bike jump in MI 7 is cgi when Hunt is falling. Cruise was on a wire and was forced back off the bike, not forward) adds more authenticity to the action sequences. But I think it's reasonable to say Cruise is narcissistic and arguably his narcissism extends to the dialogue with characters saying Hunt is a modern day Jesus Christ messiah saving the world.

  • meshypushymeshypushy Ireland
    Posts: 189
    cruiseisnothunt.com is available, as of this moment
  • Posts: 2,065
    Cruise needs to make his Unforgiven.
  • LucknFateLucknFate 007 In New York
    Posts: 1,936
    God forbid Cruise tries to make himself entertaining for an audience! Screw that guy! What a dick for trying to make me happy!
  • Posts: 4,751
    second viewing last night....
    it really is all over the place or I'm missing stuff...a six megaton nuclear bomb to kill Luther? ....Grace takes a dog sled to go and save Hunt (with lessons on how to steer the dogs) when they have a perfectly good DC-3?....an even bigger nuclear bomb to blow up the South African servers? and, considering their friendship, Benji makes no reference to the death of Luther
Sign In or Register to comment.