It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
Not crazy about it either, but it’s one of those things I brush it aside like seeing Sir Rog in front of a rear projection in the PTS for TSWLM.
Random appearance of Scott Adkins in the MI thread, courtesy of Bajle. And I am here for it.
Yes, I've noticed the words "Mission: Impossible" have gotten bigger and bigger since the fourth film. M:I-3 underperformed at the box office and Paramount very clearly downplayed the "M:I" name in the next movie. I swear they were trying to trick the general public into going to see a Tom Cruise action movie called Ghost Protocol. Then the words "Mission: Impossible" have gradually increased in size for Rogue Nation, Fallout, and now Dead Reckoning.
That would some way to sell movies. Double editions containing two movies with the same name.
Buy Michael Mann's timeless crime masterpiece, Heat (1995), and also get to see Burt Reynolds kicking ass as Nick Escalante in the 80's classic, Heat (1986).
Buy the otherworldly love story of Kristen Stewart and Robert Pattinson in Twilight (2008), along with the detective story of Paul Newman in Twilight (1998). There's no better double bill than teenage vampires and PIs!
https://www.darkhorizons.com/mi-7-confirmed-as-longest-mission-yet/
It's hard to determine with Cruise and MI.
That's great, thanks. Fallout didn't feel overlong at all so I'm happy with another that length.
No good movie is too long and no bad movie is short enough. -Roger Ebert. Same with books and video games.
I think that was utilized as a sort of marketing/publicity stunt but seems poised to actually be in the film. That's a lot of work for it not to be in the final film, anyway, so I hope it is.
And yes, runtime is irrelevant to me, it's all about pacing. I've seen 90-100 minute films that felt like they were never going to end and three hour epics that flew by.
Here we go down this rabbit hole again. But I'll play along.
Does it matter for quality? No, not fundamentally so. But it still matters in a certain way, depending on what the filmmakers are trying to achieve with the film. And a long film is inherently different from a short one.
Your math is wrong. The link you provided says “without credits”, so if we were going by that metric NTTD is 153 minutes without credits, which makes MI7 three minutes longer.
Who cares as long as the film is awesome I'll be happy so far by the trailers it looks awesome.
I'd love to know what went on with him and McQ though.
Elfman's has always been a score I really enjoy.
The weirdest thing for me is that I think still no-one has produced a better version of the main theme than Elfman did for his opening titles.
Maybe he should ask Paramount to move his own release date rather than demand that from rival studios. I get it. By only opening it a week before OPPENHEIMER, that only allows one week on IMAX.
Not that it matters to me, I was never going to see MI7 in IMAX, whereas I'll absolutely see OPPENHEIMER on that because it was actually shot with 65 mm IMAX film.