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
Yes. And like most of the time, the producers of "Mission: Impossible" plan ahead much earlier, contract cast & crew much earlier in the pre-production process as opposed to the way too tight (pre-)production schedules of Bond films (and NTTD).
And look what happened with "SPECTRE" as opposed to "Mission: Impossible".
Great casting, I am a fan of Hayley
Well "SPECTRE" wasn't exactly a critically acclaimed success in comparison to "Rogue Nation" and "Fallout".
It's quite funny really. Between 2014 and 2022 there will have been four "M:I"-films and only two "007"-films (I'm pretty certain the Bond-franchise will be mothballed for another 4 years when Craig quits next April).
I love the MI films. Since GP they've really set the bar higher and higher each time. And credit too them. I think Tom Cruise is amazing, for the work, effort and risk to his life that he commits to these films.
But I don't compare them to Bond.
Box Office Mojo says:
So what?
MI is a mixed bag for me on the whole. First one was okay but even as a big John Woo fan the second was disappointing. The third one I really liked and the fourth one was even better, felt really fresh and exciting, but I was very disappointed in RN. The action was great but it just felt quite bland and souless imo. The others were all distinct, but RN to me just seemed like a big bloated attempt at creating another GP (like MR in comparison to TSWLM).
Fallout to be fair was a lot better. Didn't like how they kept teasing going dark then bottling it (that dream sequence where he's forced to massacre the police really annoyed me, why tease a proper moral dilemna like that then reveal he was just imagining it?), but other than that it was pretty good. Overall though I can't really say that I see what all the fuss is about. None of the films are a patch on Bond or even Bourne or Kingsman imo.
It’s kind of rich too, given that M:I films used to take between 4 to 6 years between films for 20 years. The only reason we’re getting them three years apart now since FALLOUT is because Cruise knows he can’t keep doing this forever so he’s going to do however many he can before he’s 60. Paramount is desperate for hits as they’re not doing so well and this is their only reliable IP. And of course Cruise isn’t as big outside of I:M anymore given how many films have underperformed, with THE MUMMY being his biggest flop most recently.
But certain fans wanna complain that Bond isn’t doing as many films as they want, just like Trek fans complaining that the TV shows only do 13 episode seasons instead of 26. It’s the “I WANT MOAR” mentality.
Whatevs. Let Tom Cruise and EON work at their own pace. They’re not competing against each other. The classiest thing Tom Cruise did one time was when he was asked on the red carpet if he thinks Ethan Hunt can take down Bond, and Cruise avoided that bait and simply expressed his love for the Bond movies and Daniel Craig. CLASS ACT!
This is not the box office topic. I was talking about how they were perceived, quality-wise, by critics (fans, newspapers, movie websites). And subsequently, Bond films barely appear in cinemas these days, and most definitely in a slower pace than Ethan Hunt.
The very fact such a video exist, media are asking such questions to Cruise, and that we (you) eventually repost it, shows how impossible it is not to compare Bond with Hunt.
“Oh no! He’s gone rogue! Another government mole! How incompetent is this spy organization? It’s gotten personal! Can’t it just strictly be about the mission?”
I rate it 6/10.
Still, I'll catch the next installment when it shows up on cable -- but only for Hayley Atwill.
Firstly, she's a little too similar to Rebecca Ferguson. Secondly, she's a tad boring. She's just been playing bit parts in Disney movies for years. Basically, she's built a career cameoing as Captain America's underdeveloped love interest.
I recently saw Atwell in 'Christopher Robin' and she faded dramatically into the scenery. Her days turning in performances such as in 'Black Mirror' seem long behind her.
I hope McQ has the smarts to make her the central villain.
I’ve just looked that up: my goodness it looks dangerous! :D
It´s amazing that even so long after the film was released, this pre-release assumption that Fallout raises the bar action-wise still holds up in some people´s heads.
I´m not even sure if Fallout even has more action than the previous films. For sure it has more scenes that rather drag. The action setpieces in M:I 4 and 5 still stand out as more original and spectacular. And better filmed. The bike chase sequence in Paris in Fallout loses a lot of impact by the way it´s filmed and edited.