› ›

Mission: Impossible - films and tv series

1…173174176178179…306

Comments

  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,009
    ProfJoeButcher wrote: »
    CraigMooreOHMSS wrote: »
    ProfJoeButcher wrote: »
    CraigMooreOHMSS wrote: »
    Resurrection wrote: »
    boldfinger wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    boldfinger wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    boldfinger wrote: »
    BT3366 wrote: »
    I don't agree every MI film has tried to copy Bond. There are bound to be variations of stunts in all sorts of films.

    Bonds have done variations of earlier films over and over again for years and have borrowed from other films themselves, so I wouldn't exactly extend exclusivity. Some would call it inspired by.
    I have no Problem with what RN did, I find the film very entertaining and consistent. But there are Scenes in there that I cannot with the best of will call "inspired by". It´s ripped off and made something out of.
    To an extent this could be semantics, but surely the 'made something out of' is what removes something from the direct rip off realm and takes into inspired territory?
    The way those Elements were used was inspired, but the way they were lifted from other films was not.
    If you could give me an example of a direct lift in RN in particular I'd appreciate it, because I'm only seeing inspiration. There are only so many things one can do with a plane, car, bike etc. without some throwback to something somewhere.
    The opera Scene in RN made me think more of QoS than of anything else. It also made me think of Hitchcock, but in a more subtle way. I would differentiate between "inspired by" and rip-off by the measure the Scene guides my mind to another Topic than the film itself. If it lets me enjoy the aesthetic, mood and tension of a director I can´t enjoy otherwise anymore (because he doesn´t live anymore) without losing its own identity, I would call it "inspired by". If it makes me think, "But that´s what we just saw a few years ago in another Blockbuster spy Franchise", then it loses a bit of its own identity, and that makes it a rip-off in my book.
    As I´ve said before, I am of the opinion that, while ripping Things off, RN made very good stuff out of it.

    Agreed and not just the opera scenes but there was a lot of things common in SP and mi5 which can't be a mere coincidence but still RN is still my favorite and had high rewatchabality for me.



    I have posted a link if anyone wants to see the similarities between the two.

    Christ almighty. No offence intended @Resurrection, but 90% of that video is total rubbish.

    I mean, "Agent Jumps Off Roof"?

    Spectre and RM have loads in common.

    Okay, go for it.

    Our hero goes rogue to take on a massive secret criminal organization all on his own.

    Meanwhile, the agency he works for is under attack from within, though a tech genius on the inside goes against his boss to help our hero.

    Our newly introduced heroine has an intimate connection to the baddies, but ultimately turns out to be a goody.

    In the climax, our hero is forced to make a difficult decision regarding whether or not to save someone close to him that the villain has strapped to a bomb.

    After facing each other down through bulletproof glass, the hero has the villain apprehended rather than killed, a rare situation for the franchise.

    Name the film!

    And both take place in a rain-soaked London at night.
  • ProfJoeButcherProfJoeButcher Bless your heart
    edited February 2019 Posts: 1,714
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    [

    And both take place in a rain-soaked London at night.

    OH it goes on and on.
    SaintMark wrote: »
    Rogue Nation? Or the Dark Knight?

    Most of that doesn't apply to TDK.
  • SaintMarkSaintMark
    Posts: 7,653
    Only MI did it better than SF, unless you think shooting down a helicopter from a speedboat or destroying SPECTRE headquarter with a mere handgun does not show that the scriptwriter or the director deserves a kicking in the family jewels.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,009
    SaintMark wrote: »
    Only MI did it better than SF, unless you think shooting down a helicopter from a speedboat or destroying SPECTRE headquarter with a mere handgun does not show that the scriptwriter or the director deserves a kicking in the family jewels.

    I still "love" how that crippling brain torture somehow turned Bond into an implausibly accurate shot.
  • ProfJoeButcherProfJoeButcher Bless your heart
    Posts: 1,714
    SaintMark wrote: »
    Only MI did it better than SF, unless you think shooting down a helicopter from a speedboat or destroying SPECTRE headquarter with a mere handgun does not show that the scriptwriter or the director deserves a kicking in the family jewels.

    Oh I love Dark Knight, Rogue Nation, Skyfall, and Spectre. I'm not making a value judgment. But CraigBondOHMSS or whatever somehow didn't notice the massive similarities between Spectre and Rogue Nation and challenged me to explain it.
  • 00Agent00Agent Any man who drinks Dom Perignon '52 can't be all bad.
    Posts: 5,185
    https://metro.co.uk/2019/02/06/rebecca-ferguson-confirms-shell-back-mission-impossible-7-8453457/
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    00Agent wrote: »
    https://metro.co.uk/2019/02/06/rebecca-ferguson-confirms-shell-back-mission-impossible-7-8453457/
    I'm not surprised, but it's great to get confirmation regardless. Summer of 2021 can't get here fast enough.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Terrific! Love Ilsa Faust.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,230
    ProfJoeButcher wrote: »
    SaintMark wrote: »
    Only MI did it better than SF, unless you think shooting down a helicopter from a speedboat or destroying SPECTRE headquarter with a mere handgun does not show that the scriptwriter or the director deserves a kicking in the family jewels.

    Oh I love Dark Knight, Rogue Nation, Skyfall, and Spectre. I'm not making a value judgment. But CraigBondOHMSS or whatever somehow didn't notice the massive similarities between Spectre and Rogue Nation and challenged me to explain it.

    It's wasn't so much a challenge, as a request, hence "go for it" as opposed to "I think you're wrong, prove it."

    And my name is literally right there, no need for the "whatever". Cheers.
    00Agent wrote: »
    https://metro.co.uk/2019/02/06/rebecca-ferguson-confirms-shell-back-mission-impossible-7-8453457/

    Great news. Ilsa is extremely important to me ;)
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    edited February 2019 Posts: 8,247
    Very interesting. it's generally been believed that Renner was to be Cruises' heir apparent in the MI franchise; obviously there was a change of plan.

    https://screenrant.com/mission-impossible-ghost-protocol-alternate-ending-tom-cruise-retire/
  • FrankXavierFrankXavier
    Posts: 678
    All hail Ilsa Faust.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,230
    That's very interesting. Thankfully they saw sense!

    I don't have any issue with Renner and I like Brandt as a character, but that just wouldn't have worked.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Couldn’t agree more. I like Brandt well enough. But, he’s not a leader material at all. Seems more like a brainstorming pencil pusher who just has experience in the field and skills of a competent agent.

    I want Ilsa Faust to take over from Hunt when he retires. It’s meant to be like that. She has a leadership quality to her none of the other team members do. Let Luther retire from the field, as well. He could become a chief of staff of sorts. But, knowing him, he’d probably want full retirement. I’d include a new member to the team alongside Benji and Faust, a Rollin Hand type of an agent either played by Michael Fassbender or Jon Hamm. I hope Paula Patton returns, too.
  • boldfingerboldfinger
    Posts: 5,767
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    Couldn’t agree more. I like Brandt well enough. But, he’s not a leader material at all. Seems more like a brainstorming pencil pusher who just has experience in the field and skills of a competent agent.

    I want Ilsa Faust to take over from Hunt when he retires. It’s meant to be like that. She has a leadership quality to her none of the other team members do. Let Luther retire from the field, as well. He could become a chief of staff of sorts. But, knowing him, he’d probably want full retirement. I’d include a new member to the team alongside Benji and Faust, a Rollin Hand type of an agent either played by Michael Fassbender or Jon Hamm. I hope Paula Patton returns, too.
    Those are actually quite appealing propositions, @ClarkDevlin.

  • 2Wint2Kidd2Wint2Kidd
    Posts: 698
    Stumbled across this video talking about some of the faults of Fallout. While I don't necessarily agree with everything he says, I do agree with some of the flaws he points out within the story and to a certain extent the action sequences. It's quite long, but I would be interested in your guys thoughts.

  • patbpatb
    Posts: 4,617
    I lasted 4 mins, when he claims that the movie is "objectively bad", that's enough for me.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited February 2019 Posts: 15,722
    I stopped that video at barely a minute in, when the narrator said ''I genuinely believe that M:I Fallout is objectively a bad movie. And if you disagree with that, it doesn't mean we have to hate each other.''

    Objectively: In a way that is not influenced by personal feelings or opinions.

    In other words, this guy's video says that, factually, M:I Fallout is a bad movie. I cannot argue against facts/truths, so why does he then care if I disagree with him or not?

    As soon as someone uses that word, I tune out. I don't have time to waste arguing with/listening to someone that says 'M:I Fallout' is objectively a bad film, or GE is objectively a terrible Bond film, or whatever. When you present your opinion as factual, there is no room for debate, and I have better things to do than watch a 45 minutes video of someone's opinions being put forward as facts.
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    edited February 2019 Posts: 2,541
    Most of the video was bad but only a few fair points regarding storylines.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,230
    I find some of the points he made regarding the writing, especially the London footchase, supremely bizarre.

    So, a hero shouldn't bother trying to catch up with the bad guy now because they have a tracker in him that would enable them to catch them later?

    Imagine a real-life scenario like that and how, if it came to light, they would be scapegoated for not doing their job.

    I only made it to the halfway point. If your video about why a film is bad needs to be 45 minutes long, then the film has done pretty well I think. Most action films would struggle under that level of scrutiny.
  • Fire_and_Ice_ReturnsFire_and_Ice_Returns I am trying to get away from this mountan!
    Posts: 25,363
    MICh_03.jpg

    One of my favourite IMF team members Chico the dog
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,439
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,247
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »

    Spot on...

  • ringfire211ringfire211
    Posts: 655
    talos7 wrote: »
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »

    Spot on...
    Absolutely!! Just think for a minute. FALLOUT wasn’t nominated but BLACK PANTHER was. Who in their right mind could seriously think the latter was a better film???? I tried to watch it and had to turn it off after 15 minutes because it was the biggest bunch of tripe I’d ever seen. It’s like the director was on drugs and had this totally bizarre bonkers dream and decided... hmm this might make a good film. Heck, it might even win me an Oscar. But then that whole Oscar crowd is such a bizarre and creepy bunch that I refuse to watch any of it. It’s like watching some kind of a cult - zombies sitting and nodding in unison at whatever the person on the stage says. That’s why I respect guys like Albert Finney who refused to be a part of any of that. Plus with politics now being part of the Oscars? Uh, no thanks.

    So is it any wonder why genuinely fantastic and entertaining films don’t get nominated while agenda-driven nonsense or the-more-bizarre-the-better type of crap wins plenty of awards?! That’s right, you won’t find FALLOUT there, you won’t find CREED 2. You know - films that most people actually look forward to seeing. Films that people actually watch and enjoy.

  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    edited February 2019 Posts: 2,541
    I enjoyed both fallout and black panther but none of them are deserving for best picture imo.
  • patbpatb
    Posts: 4,617
    Now I've seen Fallout a few times, it's interesting to consider, how good would/could it be without Cruise. On the basis that another actor would not do the stunts. the action sequences would be different obviously BUT the interesting thing IMHO is how strong the movie is as a standalone movie. There are so many strong points to this movie that it does make you think that the franchise could move forward without Cruise.
  • 2Wint2Kidd2Wint2Kidd
    Posts: 698
    I think what people are not getting is the social significance of Black Panther. Whilst both films are both great in their own ways, Fallout didn't necessarily capture the imaginations of many people the same way Black Panther did, which is really what the Academy looks for these days.
  • patbpatb
    Posts: 4,617
    Fair point but when did social significance become such a big factor rather than a decent/good movie? Are we now seeing an era where a movie can be great in every way but, as it has no social significance, it has no hope of award recognition? So what do we need? A racist bad guy who takes a dislike to Luther? A new, gay member of the team? etc etc It's all rather sad IMHO that theses factors seem to dominate cinema.

    Black Panther versus Fallout? There's no contest IMHO
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,230
    patb wrote: »
    Fair point but when did social significance become such a big factor rather than a decent/good movie? Are we now seeing an era where a movie can be great in every way but, as it has no social significance, it has no hope of award recognition? So what do we need? A racist bad guy who takes a dislike to Luther? A new, gay member of the team? etc etc It's all rather sad IMHO that theses factors seem to dominate cinema.

    Black Panther versus Fallout? There's no contest IMHO

    Social significance has always been a huge factor in awards races. It's nothing new.
  • patbpatb
    edited February 2019 Posts: 4,617
    Another thought, one of the themes that the writer has been developing is the essential "goodness" and morality within Hunt's character and his stuggle to keep to this but, at the same time, complete his mission and the above video sees this clearly. (although non of this gets in the way of the movie IMHO)

    On the basis that we have the same writer, the natural conclusion (if Cruise has to leave) of this is for Hunt to sacrifice himself for the needs of the team and/or the mission when there is no other option. (we have never seen Hunt face the "Kobayashi Maru" test) I'm not saying this will happen but, if it does, nobody can claim it would be out of character.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited February 2019 Posts: 23,883
    patb wrote: »
    Now I've seen Fallout a few times, it's interesting to consider, how good would/could it be without Cruise. On the basis that another actor would not do the stunts. the action sequences would be different obviously BUT the interesting thing IMHO is how strong the movie is as a standalone movie. There are so many strong points to this movie that it does make you think that the franchise could move forward without Cruise.
    I watched it for the first time since the theatre last night (it was my counterprogramming for the crapfest known as the Oscars). It's a great film, and my favourite of last year. I actually felt the opposite about Cruise though. I think he's instrumental to the film working for me. His performance in the last three has been pitch perfect imho, and I'm really quite engaged about his character and want to see where they take him next. Despite all the action in the film, I feel he really shines and I was reminded of what a top notch actor he is (it's sometimes forgotten since he's been getting so much publicity for his stuntwork and also for his beliefs lately).
    patb wrote: »
    Another thought, one of the themes that the writer has been developing is the essential "goodness" and morality within Hunt's character and his stuggle to keep to this but, at the same time, complete his mission and the above video sees this clearly. (although non of this gets in the way of the movie IMHO)

    On the basis that we have the same writer, the natural conclusion (if Cruise has to leave) of this is for Hunt to sacrifice himself for the needs of the team and/or the mission when there is no other option. (we have never seen Hunt face the "Kobayashi Maru" test) I'm not saying this will happen but, if it does, nobody can claim it would be out of character.
    I agree on the morality interplay. I think they handled it well. However, I was thinking last night that he should 'choose' not to accept his mission at the end of MI8. That would be a better sendoff for me than sacrifice. Ultimately, he has a choice, and Lane highlighted that in Fallout.
Sign In or Register to comment.