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

1134135137139140224

Comments

  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe Still waiting for the Jena Malone Batwoman movie that's never going to be made.Moderator
    Posts: 11,959
    TR007 wrote: »
    @Satorious @MajorDSmythe
    Regarding the cut scenes from the trailer, Sky recently had a behind the scenes special on the movie and Chris McQ and Cavill both admit that many scenes and stunts were cut due to test screenings. Apparently early test audiences said it had too much action!

    There's enough action in the film to satisfy this action fan, so I don't feel cheated. But I would like to see those scenes/stunts inserted back in for the DVD release.
  • Posts: 19,339
    TR007 wrote: »
    @Satorious @MajorDSmythe
    Regarding the cut scenes from the trailer, Sky recently had a behind the scenes special on the movie and Chris McQ and Cavill both admit that many scenes and stunts were cut due to test screenings. Apparently early test audiences said it had too much action!

    There's enough action in the film to satisfy this action fan, so I don't feel cheated. But I would like to see those scenes/stunts inserted back in for the DVD release.

    I just wish the Bond crew would think about the paying public and put deleted scenes on their DVD's as Tom is going to.

    Especially QOS ,Bond vs Haynes has disappeared into thin air,among others.
  • edited July 2018 Posts: 1,644
    Satorious wrote: »
    Interesting article regarding the impact Tom Cruise's injury had on the film (also references EON's Rhythm Section in contrast):

    https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/mission-impossible-fallout-budget-hits-series-high-tom-cruise-injury-1129554

    It's incredible or crazy why Paramount let Cruise do all or most of his stunts. If Cruise suffered a terrible injury - no film to release. Seems a massive risk. Just to muddy the debate even further, some negative reviews on IMDB (very few, mind!) mention overuse of CGI. Modern CGI compositing can look incredible, you'd struggle to notice the joins so it's kinda crazy or hard to believe Cruise can or should do all his own stunts. Anyone seeing Fallout for a second time should look at the action to see if they can see any noticeable greenscreen effects.
  • edited July 2018 Posts: 3,311
    I’ve just seen it and I enjoyed it immensely. Great movie.

    @fanbond123. Who gives a flying monkeys what some morons have posted on IMDb? And why do any of us have to join you in your party pooper sentiments of looking for green screen stunts? You’ve been on a continuous downer about this movie before it was even released, and nothing has changed since. Plus, Cruise did suffer an injury which closed down the production of the movie for a very long time.

    Just to prove my point of the level of moronic on the IMDb here’s one of the few idiotic low scores and comments that you were referring to. I want to emphasise that the majority, so far, are extremely positive.

    5/10
    Worest
    26 July 2018
    I font liked its diffrent not power like old series of mission impossible.

    The imbecile that posted this can’t even comprehend English, so no wonder he/she couldn’t understand the movie. Are these the sort of commentators you want to align yourself with @fanbond123?
  • Last_Rat_StandingLast_Rat_Standing South Florida
    Posts: 3,784
    For those who have seen it, which MI films are recommended to understand Fallout? Asking for my wife who will end up joining me and I don't want her to be confused.
  • Posts: 1,114
    For those who have seen it, which MI films are recommended to understand Fallout? Asking for my wife who will end up joining me and I don't want her to be confused.

    3 and 5 are the two essential ones.

    She'll no doubt enjoy it without having seen them as it moves along quickly and does it's best to try and confuse/out-smart the audience as part of the fun of it all.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe Still waiting for the Jena Malone Batwoman movie that's never going to be made.Moderator
    Posts: 11,959
    TR007 wrote: »
    For those who have seen it, which MI films are recommended to understand Fallout? Asking for my wife who will end up joining me and I don't want her to be confused.

    3 and 5 are the two essential ones.

    She'll no doubt enjoy it without having seen them as it moves along quickly and does it's best to try and confuse/out-smart the audience as part of the fun of it all.

    I would also include the first film as well. So it's 1, 3 and 5 are recommended viewing before Fallout.
  • 00Agent00Agent Any man who drinks Dom Perignon '52 can't be all bad.
    Posts: 5,172
    Do we also get to see who the Author of all of Ethan Hunts Pain was?
    Some relative perhaps?

    Just kidding, can't wait to see it.
  • Posts: 1,644
    I feel the topic link below could be worthy of a new thread!

    WHY MISSION IMPOSSIBLE KICKS JAMES BOND ASS

    https://nypost.com/2018/07/25/why-mission-impossible-kicks-james-bonds-ass/
    Like no franchise other than, perhaps, “Star Wars,” James Bond is beloved by fans for its nostalgia: the retro kitsch, the elegance, the womanizing, the Cold War crime solving. But in a tiresome effort to modernize 007, they’ve stripped away these distinguishing factors, making the character not all that distinct from Matt Damon’s Jason Bourne, or Liam Neeson in anything, really.

    For James Bond to regain its quality — not to mention its place in pop culture — may be mission: impossible.

    Whether you agree or disagree with the opinions expressed in that item, I think it's reasonable to assume EON will stick with the current format for Bond 25. I don't see them changing their style. Craig's Bonds make more cash than Cruise's MI films. However, EON could change things when Bond is recast. Bond 26 could be closer to MI? I dunno if that is good or bad. As long as it's still a Bond film and not a blatant copy of some other spy film or whatever is popular at the time, I don't mind a bit of tinkering with the format. But no female James Bond, please!

  • Posts: 564
    00Agent wrote: »
    Do we also get to see who the Author of all of Ethan Hunts Pain was?
    Some relative perhaps?

    Just kidding, can't wait to see it.

    :D Hahahaha. This comment just made my day!
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe Still waiting for the Jena Malone Batwoman movie that's never going to be made.Moderator
    Posts: 11,959
    00Agent wrote: »
    Do we also get to see who the Author of all of Ethan Hunts Pain was?
    Some relative perhaps?

    Just kidding, can't wait to see it.

    Don't worry, the horrors of SP aren't repeated in Fallout.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,090
    tumblr_p3njykG4Yn1rei3gfo3_540.gif
  • Posts: 1,114
    I don't want to think of MI and Bond as competition between one another. I love Bond and I really appreciate having another spy franchise to look forward to inbetween 007 adventures.
  • Posts: 19,339
    doubleoego wrote: »
    tumblr_p3njykG4Yn1rei3gfo3_540.gif

    Looks like Cavill handles the fight scenes very well if this clip is anything to go by.
  • Posts: 12,400
    fanbond123 wrote: »
    I feel the topic link below could be worthy of a new thread!

    WHY MISSION IMPOSSIBLE KICKS JAMES BOND ASS

    https://nypost.com/2018/07/25/why-mission-impossible-kicks-james-bonds-ass/
    Like no franchise other than, perhaps, “Star Wars,” James Bond is beloved by fans for its nostalgia: the retro kitsch, the elegance, the womanizing, the Cold War crime solving. But in a tiresome effort to modernize 007, they’ve stripped away these distinguishing factors, making the character not all that distinct from Matt Damon’s Jason Bourne, or Liam Neeson in anything, really.

    For James Bond to regain its quality — not to mention its place in pop culture — may be mission: impossible.

    Whether you agree or disagree with the opinions expressed in that item, I think it's reasonable to assume EON will stick with the current format for Bond 25. I don't see them changing their style. Craig's Bonds make more cash than Cruise's MI films. However, EON could change things when Bond is recast. Bond 26 could be closer to MI? I dunno if that is good or bad. As long as it's still a Bond film and not a blatant copy of some other spy film or whatever is popular at the time, I don't mind a bit of tinkering with the format. But no female James Bond, please!

    I disagree with most of that because it's just wrong, and I say that as someone who wasn't really a fan of the Craig era at all until Skyfall came out.

    First of all, "bland villains" and Skyfall in the same sentence. Silva's one of the best Bond bad guys as far as I'm concerned. And even if you don't like him he was hardly bland, Bardem didn't get a BAFTA nomination for it for nothing. Also seems funny to mention that in an article about the MI films (Phillip Seymour Hoffman was pretty good but the rest? Who even was the villain in the fourth one?).

    We all know the slash my wrists stuff was a joke taken out of context and say what you will about Craig but he always gives it 100% when they actually make the films. He's the only Bond actor to really get in shape for them for one thing and he does plenty of the stunts himself to the point of getting injured a couple of times. No he doesn't kill himself like Tom Cruise but what other Hollywood actor does?

    SF and SP had a more retro aesthetic to them than any other Bond film, plenty of elegance and plenty of womanising. There's also been just as much humour as any of the old Bond's outside of Moore. But lets ignore all that because nothing says Bourne or Taken like ejecting from a bulletproof Aston Martin or a tuxedo wearing Bond battling a massive henchman on an unrealistically classy retro train, right?

    What a dumb article. I found the pop culture bit stupid too. Bond hasn't lost his place in pop culture. That's pretty much set in stone no matter how bad the films get (not that the films are even bad now, funny how there's been such a quick turnaround when we were all raving about SF just a couple of years ago). MI meanwhile will die as soon as Cruise can't handle the stunts anymore. There's no substance there. The theme song is pretty iconic I guess but apart from that it's all about the stunts Cruise does. Which is fine because the action is really good, but it's also why they won't be successful when he's too old. Bond meanwhile will carry on as it always has.

    I think I need to take a break from here. I'm not one of those who polices others opinions, I haven't actually been that positive myself (I didn't really want Craig to do another one and before Boyle came onboard I wasn't excited at all), but the endless negativity that this gap has caused is starting to wear me down a bit.

    The last film was divisive and we haven't had a new one to get people back on side. That's what it comes down to. But Bond is fine. The series isn't in any trouble. Just a few years ago we were celebrating the most successful film of the series. So can we stop pretending that the franchise is dying on its arse please.
  • 00Agent00Agent Any man who drinks Dom Perignon '52 can't be all bad.
    edited July 2018 Posts: 5,172

    The last film was divisive and we haven't had a new one to get people back on side. That's what it comes down to. But Bond is fine. The series isn't in any trouble. Just a few years ago we were celebrating the most successful film of the series. So can we stop pretending that the franchise is dying on its arse please.

    I guess we will have to wait until the promotion of B25 officially starts, with the december press conference, or early 2019, for people to get positive again.
    But i am with you, the constant negativity here can wear you down a bit.
    I love the Craig era, even despite the long gaps (hey, i have 20+ continuation novels to read still, and Dynamite is releasing first class Bond comics since 2015).
    You can always rewatch the other 20 movies if you get bored too much.
  • Posts: 12,400
    00Agent wrote: »

    The last film was divisive and we haven't had a new one to get people back on side. That's what it comes down to. But Bond is fine. The series isn't in any trouble. Just a few years ago we were celebrating the most successful film of the series. So can we stop pretending that the franchise is dying on its arse please.

    I guess we will have to wait until the promotion of B25 officially starts, with the december press conference, or early 2019, for people to get positive again.
    But i am with you, the constant negativity here can wear you down a bit.
    I love the Craig era, even despite the long gaps (hey, i have 20+ continuation novels to read still, and Dynamite is releasing first class Bond comics since 2015).
    You can always rewatch the other 20 movies if you get bored too much.

    Exactly. At least it should all be over soon. I think Bond 25 will be a good one, Boyle is very talented. And hopefully even if there's another long gap after that, having a more well recieved film fresh in people's minds will stop morons like the guy who wrote that article from gaining any traction.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,468
    00Agent wrote: »

    The last film was divisive and we haven't had a new one to get people back on side. That's what it comes down to. But Bond is fine. The series isn't in any trouble. Just a few years ago we were celebrating the most successful film of the series. So can we stop pretending that the franchise is dying on its arse please.

    I guess we will have to wait until the promotion of B25 officially starts, with the december press conference, or early 2019, for people to get positive again.
    But i am with you, the constant negativity here can wear you down a bit.
    I love the Craig era, even despite the long gaps (hey, i have 20+ continuation novels to read still, and Dynamite is releasing first class Bond comics since 2015).
    You can always rewatch the other 20 movies if you get bored too much.

    Agreed. This is just clickbait.
  • edited July 2018 Posts: 2,107
    TR007 wrote: »
    I don't want to think of MI and Bond as competition between one another. I love Bond and I really appreciate having another spy franchise to look forward to inbetween 007 adventures.

    Yes, this because 4 of the 6 movies are more enjoyable than most of the recent Bond films. If you really think about it, MI films are my generation's Bond.

    Edit: Scratch that. Haven seen Fallout yet.

    Edit2: Mean't to say, compared to most of the recent Bond films.
  • Posts: 178
    SharkBait wrote: »
    TR007 wrote: »
    I don't want to think of MI and Bond as competition between one another. I love Bond and I really appreciate having another spy franchise to look forward to inbetween 007 adventures.

    Yes, this because 4 of the 6 movies are more enjoyable than most of the recent Bond films. If you really think about it, MI films are my generation's Bond.

    Edit: Scratch that. Haven seen Fallout yet.

    Edit2: Mean't to say, compared to most of the recent Bond films.

    What generation are you? Does it make a difference that Bond still makes more money?
  • edited July 2018 Posts: 2,107
    I was 11 when the first MI film with Cruise was released.

    I don't care how much money a movie makes. I just find MI movies more even in tone compared to Bond and fun like Bond should be.
  • Posts: 178
    SharkBait wrote: »
    I was 11 when the first MI film with Cruise was released.

    I think I was 10, but you didn't answer my second question.
  • RC7RC7
    edited July 2018 Posts: 10,468
    SharkBait wrote: »
    I was 11 when the first MI film with Cruise was released.

    I don't care how much money a movie makes. I just find MI movies more even in tone compared to Bond and fun like Bond should be.

    I guess it depends how into Bond one is. I was 12 when the first M:I was released, by which point I’d been immersed in Bond for 8-9 years. Bond was, is and always will be my thing and nothing they’ve done has sullied my enjoyment, even through the widely accepted blips.

    The history is too rich and the sheer enjoyment factor of the novels, films, the scores... it’s incomparable for me. Everything adds to the tapestry - even the so called ‘awful Craig films’ as some fans describe them these days.

    That doesn’t mean the M:I films aren’t great in their own right, but that’s all they are to me. Bond is part of culture.

  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 16,351
    RC7 wrote: »

    That doesn’t mean the M:I films aren’t great in their own right, but that’s all they are to me. Bond is part of culture.

    You've shot the snail in the head here. I concur.
  • Posts: 178
    SharkBait wrote: »
    I was 11 when the first MI film with Cruise was released.

    I don't care how much money a movie makes. I just find MI movies more even in tone compared to Bond and fun like Bond should be.

    I'm not saying you should care I'm asking if means MI is really the Bond of your generation.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe "I need a year off" Craig
    Posts: 7,305
    I disagree. The problem is that Bond has forgotten what it is, and hasn't found a new identity to replace what it used to be with. Each film has a completely different ethos, whereas as MI has picked up a continuity along the way. "Gritty reboot" worked well for CR, but it wasn't the long term fix that they obviously thought it would be, but the bandage that keeps falling off over and over again.

    This is why I actually think Boyle is a good choice for a final Craig film. Each last film in a tenure tonally gives away where the series is headed, whilst remain faithful to what the actor brought to the role. It's sort of like having one foot in and one foot out. Boyle is an obvious choice to remain faithful to the Craig tenure, with introspective character study at the heart, heavy thematic elements etc. But at the same time, unlike others who would approach drama with a certain soberness, Boyle is characterized by a frenzied energy comedic edge which could indicate a shift back to the more lighthearted after a new actor does come in.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,468
    I disagree. The problem is that Bond has forgotten what it is, and hasn't found a new identity to replace what it used to be with. Each film has a completely different ethos, whereas as MI has picked up a continuity along the way. "Gritty reboot" worked well for CR, but it wasn't the long term fix that they obviously thought it would be, but the bandage that keeps falling off over and over again.

    This is why I actually think Boyle is a good choice for a final Craig film. Each last film in a tenure tonally gives away where the series is headed, whilst remain faithful to what the actor brought to the role. It's sort of like having one foot in and one foot out. Boyle is an obvious choice to remain faithful to the Craig tenure, with introspective character study at the heart, heavy thematic elements etc. But at the same time, unlike others who would approach drama with a certain soberness, Boyle is characterized by a frenzied energy comedic edge which could indicate a shift back to the more lighthearted after a new actor does come in.

    You disagree with what?
  • 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
    I never understand why I always see posts about Bond needing to be like Mission Impossible, Kingsman, or Fast & Furious. All 4 of these franchises are 1. very popular, 2. very successful and 3. very different from one another. M:I is not the Ethan Hunt franchise, despite Tom Cruise being the very clear leader. So I don't want the James Bond franchise, which has Bond as its core central focus, becoming a team spy effort. Ving Rhames in 6 films by himself has more screentime than Q, Moneypenny and M combined over the course of 10+ films. Similarly, I don't want Bond to copy the CGI heavy action set pieces of Kingsman (and I also don't want to see M:I copy that). Same with Fast and Furious: I don't want Bond or M:I going all 'we're a family' like this franchise.

    All of the franchises above are doing their own thing and are clearly popular and successful, so let's continue letting them have their specific direction and style that they've been doing very well for a while now.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe "I need a year off" Craig
    edited July 2018 Posts: 7,305
    RC7 wrote: »
    I disagree. The problem is that Bond has forgotten what it is, and hasn't found a new identity to replace what it used to be with. Each film has a completely different ethos, whereas as MI has picked up a continuity along the way. "Gritty reboot" worked well for CR, but it wasn't the long term fix that they obviously thought it would be, but the bandage that keeps falling off over and over again.

    This is why I actually think Boyle is a good choice for a final Craig film. Each last film in a tenure tonally gives away where the series is headed, whilst remain faithful to what the actor brought to the role. It's sort of like having one foot in and one foot out. Boyle is an obvious choice to remain faithful to the Craig tenure, with introspective character study at the heart, heavy thematic elements etc. But at the same time, unlike others who would approach drama with a certain soberness, Boyle is characterized by a frenzied energy comedic edge which could indicate a shift back to the more lighthearted after a new actor does come in.

    You disagree with what?

    That Bond is simply a part of history and culture and will therefore continue being successful regardless of whatever decisions those behind the films make. I prefer to think of it as a ancient vase which hither to has been mirticuaously cared for and maintained, but at any time can be mishandled or damaged. The thing I have always given EON credit for is that they always seem to feel the heat of the fire rising around them, and react before it's too late. As described, I hope they are able to sense that changing of the tides which has been in motion for the past half decade or so. We are in another situation like 2002 where mainstream cinema has moved on, but where the threat back then was Bourne with its ultra realism, personal emotional storytelling, now it is from the more upbeat and frothy end of the spectrum with Mission Impossible with its explosive, crowding pleasing appeal. It's an exact 180 degree flip.
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    Three of Craig's Bond films are in the top ten most successful British films ever made ! One held the top spot for a long time.
    I don't think given their box office success and critical acclaim, the Bond producers will be changing their formula.
Sign In or Register to comment.