Mission: Impossible - films and tv series

1228229231233234306

Comments

  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,213
    FALLOUT wasn’t that great.

    The first M:I film remains the best, with GHOST PROTOCOL a very close second.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    edited March 2022 Posts: 8,231
    I really like Ghost Protocol but I have both of the McQuarrie helmed entries above it.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,251
    I’ve watched Rogue Nation and imagined it as a Craig Bond. Obviously with a little tailoring, it would have been outstanding.
  • I consider the first M:I, Ghost Protocol, and Rogue Nation the strongest of the series. The original is a well done thriller with a great climax aboard the bullet train; Ghost Protocol is just plain fun all around with wild stunts, cool locations, and ample humor (basically how I would like the Bond films to be these days); and Rogue Nation takes a more serious approach (along the lines of Craig's films) but with fantastic stunts and action.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,693
    I consider the first M:I, Ghost Protocol, and Rogue Nation the strongest of the series. The original is a well done thriller with a great climax aboard the bullet train; Ghost Protocol is just plain fun all around with wild stunts, cool locations, and ample humor (basically how I would like the Bond films to be these days); and Rogue Nation takes a more serious approach (along the lines of Craig's films) but with fantastic stunts and action.

    +1. I like the third because of Phillip Seymour Hoffman. Best villain of the series (for me). PSH gone too soon.
  • MaxCasino wrote: »
    I consider the first M:I, Ghost Protocol, and Rogue Nation the strongest of the series. The original is a well done thriller with a great climax aboard the bullet train; Ghost Protocol is just plain fun all around with wild stunts, cool locations, and ample humor (basically how I would like the Bond films to be these days); and Rogue Nation takes a more serious approach (along the lines of Craig's films) but with fantastic stunts and action.

    +1. I like the third because of Phillip Seymour Hoffman. Best villain of the series (for me). PSH gone too soon.

    I agree, he was one of the most interesting and well performed M:I villains. While I'm not all that crazy about III, the bridge battle and the Vatican sequence are both pretty cool too.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,213
    I do miss getting another director at the helm. It was an aspect I looked most forward to with each film.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,590
    I like Ghost Protocol a lot but I think it falls apart a little at the end (they have a whole impossible mission in the Indian party/Renner hovering in the tunnel which they just fail completely!) and Rogue Nation is stronger, although they’re both great. I perhaps enjoy the more serious tone of Fallout a little less but it is perhaps an even better film, with a brilliant climax packed with tension.
  • I do miss getting another director at the helm. It was an aspect I looked most forward to with each film.

    This was an aspect of the films I enjoyed too, but I guess Cruise has found his "guy."
    mtm wrote: »
    I like Ghost Protocol a lot but I think it falls apart a little at the end (they have a whole impossible mission in the Indian party/Renner hovering in the tunnel which they just fail completely!) and Rogue Nation is stronger, although they’re both great. I perhaps enjoy the more serious tone of Fallout a little less but it is perhaps an even better film, with a brilliant climax packed with tension.

    There is some real excellence in Fallout, including the London chase and the helicopter battle. But personally I find the film overly long and overly serious and can't enjoy it or appreciate it the way I do the other two you mentioned.
  • edited March 2022 Posts: 440
    It's tough to compare the two in terms of thrilling setpieces because the Mission Impossible films (especially as they've gone on) have always been very focused on individual action setpieces whereas Bond never really has been.

    Of course, Bond has had great action but those setpieces aren't huge focal points for the movie and its marketing campaign.

    Bond usually tends to focus much more on characters, locations, costuming, cars, gadgets whereas Mission Impossible films really are basically all about the action.

    And I mean that quite literally as Cruise and company have gone on the record about developing the sequences first and then rewriting the story while filming to juggle them all together.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,590
    I think you can look at times where an action set piece has been held over from one Bond film to the next though; they’re not immune to that. I think they definitely became about the action setpieces in the 90s, but certainly less so now: Skyfall actually barely has any action.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    Posts: 13,999
    I actually like all 6 MI films so far. Ok... MI2 is my least favourite, but even that one has some good parts. I just happen to think that Fallout perfectly blended the series' signature set pieces with more dramatic stakes. Not just a series high, but a genre high point. The Helicopter chase still catches my breath now, as it did when I say it on the big screen. I still can't believe they did that for real.

    Cruise is an absolute nutter, but I can't fault his dedication to giving his audience entertainment.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,590
    I actually like all 6 MI films so far. Ok... MI2 is my least favourite, but even that one has some good parts. I just happen to think that Fallout perfectly blended the series' signature set pieces with more dramatic stakes. Not just a series high, but a genre high point. The Helicopter chase still catches my breath now, as it did when I say it on the big screen. I still can't believe they did that for real.

    Yeah I do think the tension of that whole sequence is what makes it, even beyond the actual stuntwork (although seeing that's it's clearly real also adds to the tension). I think I literally was on the edge of my seat for that one.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited March 2022 Posts: 16,590
    Not sure if there is a Maverick thread, but in the meantime here's the new trailer for it which does look rather impressive, and it finally gets released on 27th May



    Amazing to think we were waiting for this before NTTD came out.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,011
    It's been almost three years since the first trailer came out. Wild.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,590
    I guess part of the delay at this point is that Cruise has been busy making MI to promote TGM? I suppose it probably missed its slot a couple of times too maybe, I haven't really been following it.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,011
    mtm wrote: »
    I guess part of the delay at this point is that Cruise has been busy making MI to promote TGM? I suppose it probably missed its slot a couple of times too maybe, I haven't really been following it.

    Most of the delays I saw were due to the constant coronavirus surges, and I'm sure filming M:I7 and 8 back-to-back didn't help things.
  • Posts: 1,926
    I do miss getting another director at the helm. It was an aspect I looked most forward to with each film.

    This was an aspect of the films I enjoyed too, but I guess Cruise has found his "guy."
    mtm wrote: »
    I like Ghost Protocol a lot but I think it falls apart a little at the end (they have a whole impossible mission in the Indian party/Renner hovering in the tunnel which they just fail completely!) and Rogue Nation is stronger, although they’re both great. I perhaps enjoy the more serious tone of Fallout a little less but it is perhaps an even better film, with a brilliant climax packed with tension.

    There is some real excellence in Fallout, including the London chase and the helicopter battle. But personally I find the film overly long and overly serious and can't enjoy it or appreciate it the way I do the other two you mentioned.

    I thought the same on Fallout. Part of the problem was the drama seemed overdone and the finale was rather predictable. I knew that would just happen to be the camp Julia would be at, that there would be yet another impossible countdown, that Benji would be in over his head and endangered, that Luther would get frustrated trying to stop the bomb, etc. And the end confrontation with Cruise and Cavill drug out to the point I just wanted it to be over. Less can be more sometimes, Tom.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,590
    Well the end of Rogue Nation is pretty much the definition of less is more, and it was terrific.
  • Posts: 1,926
    mtm wrote: »
    Well the end of Rogue Nation is pretty much the definition of less is more, and it was terrific.

    Agreed.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,251
    mtm wrote: »
    Well the end of Rogue Nation is pretty much the definition of less is more, and it was terrific.
    My favorite.

  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    edited April 2022 Posts: 24,251
    Cruise is an absolute nutter, but I can't fault his dedication to giving his audience entertainment.

    This.

    I generally don't agree with Cruise's private choices--actually, I have no business agreeing or disagreeing with the man's private life--but he's a committed actor who's willing to turn Hollywood make-belief into hardcore reality. I also think he's a really good actor, period. And he's built something awesome with these M:I films. One day people will look back on his career and realise that Tom Cruise gave his heart and soul to a physically challenging, eight-film series, spanning almost 30 years of his life. I still think all his efforts, commitment and crazy, risky stuntwork are often overlooked. It's Tom, we expect nothing less. But actually, this guy is doing way more than most actors, who comfortably slide into a role when the paycheck looks good and the stunt doubles take over before a little nose bleed is risked. Yes, he's nuts. But he also deserves way more credit than people are usually willing to give him. This man persistently defies the quintessential cliché of the actor who portrays a hero yet is afraid of falling and hurting a knee. Cruise takes the risks, no doubt to satisfy his ego, but also for our entertainment. When did Vin Diesel take those helicopter lessons again? When was Seagal actually hanging from a flying plane? Exactly.
  • Posts: 655
    Seagal needs a stunt double just to move that hamburger closer to his mouth. LOL!
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,011
    Seagal needs a stunt double just to move that hamburger closer to his mouth. LOL!

    I don't think that big boy needs any help in this regard.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,590
    New BTS featurette for Top Gun which looks as crazy as we all thought it was:
  • edited April 2022 Posts: 4,294
    To be honest, as cool as Cruise's stunts are, I feel the fact that audiences are hyper aware that he does them himself outshines the actual films, which I personally find a bit hit or miss.

    I remember watching an interview where Timothy Dalton talked about stunts in his Bond films, especially after the use of (sometimes noticeable) doubles during the Moore era. He said you don't want the audience to think "that's a stunt double". Equally you don't want them to think "that's Timothy Dalton (or in this case Tom Cruise) doing a stunt, that's cool!" They should think "that's James Bond/Ethan Hunt in a perilous situation."
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,251
    I can't help being less than excited for Maverick. I've always treated Top Gun as a fun '80s flick that can stand on its own without needing a sequel, especially almost 40 years later. Another M:I film every couple of years for nearly three decades makes sense; it's about a team of spies and heisters who can easily slip into a new adventure every time. Top Gun was much more about characters, especially about young Pete, who learns that the road to success is paved with challenges of all sorts. Now we jump to this man's life two generations later, when he's at that point in life where we left Skeritt's Viper last time. So the student will now be the teacher; the lectures will be given by him, not to him. While, in essence, that all sounds interesting, especially if you were ever invested in the Maverick character in the first place, I'm still not convinced it's a film I'm dying to see. Unlike Trainspotting 2, which took a deep dive into what middle-aged life means to former rascals and drug addicts from the lower-income parts of Scotland, I can't see Maverick hitting on hard themes that acknowledge Cruise's advancing age. But I've been proven wrong so often in the past, I'll probably just watch the film when it comes out and I may even be pleasantly surprised. That said, I'm way more excited for M:I 7 and 8...
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,011
    I've still never seen Top Gun but I hope to eventually just so I can see this new one. The air combat angle never really excited me so it's why I never bought into similar type films but this one does look pretty wild at times.

    Of course, I'm infinitely more excited for these next two M:I installments and am desperately eager to get a teaser for 7 at least sometime soon. It's nice knowing we'll have a trailer before the year's out and it's almost May already. I can't wait.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,231
    I am a Cruise fan and also a huge Tony Scott fan, so it's still surprising to me that I never had much fondness for Top Gun. The sequel looks hugely more impressive, and not just in the obvious ways. I'm looking forward to it.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,590
    Yes I'm not hugely bothered by the original Top Gun at all (I remember it being fun enough when I saw it as a kid but I've never felt the need to watch it again) but this looks like a different kind of experience, and probably one which will need a cinema trip.

    I guess I may need to revisit the first one to understand everything that goes on in this one though (although I guess it'll disappear off to Paramount+ imminently)
Sign In or Register to comment.