Mission: Impossible - films and tv series

1281282284286287306

Comments

  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited August 2023 Posts: 16,383
    Thank you. That's presumably from part 2 of the Empire spoiler chat which was released today.
    I think they miscalculated there, it didn't work for me and actually felt slightly empty.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,968
    For me, that feels like a conundrum they backed themselves into, with Ilsa constantly "getting out of the game" and finding a way back in. Given this recent retcon, they should've simply offered her an official spot on the team. At least it seems to confirm she's definitely dead and we didn't get two fake-out deaths from her in a row.
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    edited August 2023 Posts: 2,641
    Thank you for sharing @willowlove
    It didn't work for me
    I disagree with him a bit, because I read the ending of Fallout, that Ilsa and Ethan were going to be a couple and it felt like it the ending of Fallout was ignored in MI7.

    Surely this confirms the fact Ilsa is really dead and it's not a fake out?
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    Posts: 13,978
    That last paragraph makes me a little concerned.
  • Agent_Zero_OneAgent_Zero_One Ireland
    Posts: 554
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    Thank you for sharing @willowlove
    It didn't work for me
    I disagree with him a bit, because I read the ending of Fallout, that Ilsa and Ethan were going to be a couple and it felt like it the ending of Fallout was ignored in MI7.

    Surely this confirms the fact Ilsa is really dead and it's not a fake out?
    That's what I took from Fallout as well.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,216
    Yeah, I totally disagree with the premise McQ presents there. I've always admired how efficient his writing is for these films, but there were several moments in the new film that actually took me out of it because of how wonky the scripting was. It's a great shame.
  • LucknFateLucknFate 007 In New York
    Posts: 1,646
    Maybe the man is just overstretched. To do two Mission films and then Top Gun, then stretched out over a pandemic on two projects that are really three projects if you count the two-parter, it must be exhausting.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,183
    Did he ghost direct TOP GUN? As far as I know, that was all in the can before the pandemic started. That movie was supposed to be a Summer 2020 release, so it didn’t have the kind of production issues that has impacted the two MI films.
  • Posts: 4,615
    Yeah, I totally disagree with the premise McQ presents there. I've always admired how efficient his writing is for these films, but there were several moments in the new film that actually took me out of it because of how wonky the scripting was. It's a great shame.

    100% agree
  • edited August 2023 Posts: 346
    Three observations about MI7 and its box office.

    The recent MI films have been sold on the fact Tom Cruise does his own stunts. Regardless how much cgi 'trickery' is used or not used, (the fight on the top of the train is green screen compositing so Cruise does use cgi in the stunts) the main selling point is Tom Cruise does his own stunts. However that probably backfired on MI7.

    Reasons why...

    1) Revealing too much in advance.

    Paramount made a big mistake showcasing the 'bike jumps off cliff' stunt months before the film's release. Whilst it was good short term click bait and got fans excited it was a misguided overall marketing strategy because the best stunt of the film was revealed. Not only did they show the stunt from an actual cut of the film they went into precise detail how the stunt was created. This meant by the time you paid your ticket and saw the film the stunt had no surprise value. Chances are many fans would have seen it multiple times on YouTube and other social media.

    If you see the big selling point of a film many times online there's less incentive to pay to see it in the cinema. You may feel a bit indifferent about it. Unfortunately Paramount didn't consider the negative impact of showcasing the bike jump stunt months before the theatrical release of the film.

    2) Cruise's ego vs audience indifference.

    Paramount and Cruise believe the main pull of the MI franchise is showcasing Cruise doing crazy stunts. Obviously, they want to make exciting spy thrillers too but Cruise doing stunts is the main selling point. The problem is MI7's muted box office would suggest most film goers don't care if it's actually Cruise doing a stunt or not. Daniel Craig didn't do all his stunts in his Bond films but all five films grossed more than MI7. Bond is the selling point, not Craig doing the stunts, and it seems apparent film goers don't care that much if Cruise hangs onto a plane or whatever. The selling point should be Ethan Hunt and the IMF crew completing an impossible mission.

    My guess is Paramount and Cruise got carried away with "Tom Cruise does his own stunts so you have to see this!" and this approach backfired. Cruise is set to do quite possibly his most crazy stunt in MI7 Part 2 however it may be greeted with indifference by much of the audience. Indeed, some film goers may see Cruise doing stunts as a vainglorious need for attention. They may find it narcissistic and a detriment to the overall quality of the film.

    3) Cruise's age. Aging action star.

    He is 61 so less gen z film goers will want to watch an older actor in a huge budget film. Liam Neeson has made a career playing older action roles but those films didn't cost 250 or more million!

    Top Gun 2 had strong nostalgia value and was a long awaited sequel. Cruise was meant to be playing an older hero in TG2 to convey the passage of time but MI7 is just another MI film. It has no nostalgia value so Cruise's age is less appealing to gen z film goers.

    For example...

    Imho despite the nostalgia value of a final Indiana Jones film appealing to 1980s film fans, Harrison Ford was too old to get gen z film goers excited.

  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,968
    @bondywondy, #1 is an issue most action films have of late when it comes to their marketing. Showcasing that motorcycle jump over a YEAR in advance wasn't the best idea. I found the same issue with NTTD, where the few really good stunts (mainly in the PTS) were revealed too much in the marketing. It's why it's a smarter bet these days to avoid trailers in the first place.
  • Posts: 7,418
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    @bondywondy, #1 is an issue most action films have of late when it comes to their marketing. Showcasing that motorcycle jump over a YEAR in advance wasn't the best idea. I found the same issue with NTTD, where the few really good stunts (mainly in the PTS) were revealed too much in the marketing. It's why it's a smarter bet these days to avoid trailers in the first place.

    The other issue that figures now, is that whole scenes are screened before the movie, there were a lot of those behind the scenes shown for MI in the weeks before it premiered!
  • M_BaljeM_Balje Amsterdam, Netherlands
    edited August 2023 Posts: 4,516
    Mission Impossible 7 Dutch boxoffice is not that big as Barbie or Opperheimer, but stil doing great. After 4 weaks the movie doing $6,689,720. That's 1,4 million in weak 4. Fallout did $6,363,165 as said before needed a lot more screens.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,968
    I'm not sure it'll even hit $600 million at this stage. Poor thing got wiped out by that unprecedented Barbenheimer success. I'm sure Part 2 will fare better (hopefully, anyway). I worry now it'll feel radically different in tone and atmosphere since its predecessor is gonna lose some big money more likely.
  • Posts: 3,276
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    @bondywondy, #1 is an issue most action films have of late when it comes to their marketing.
    Only an issue for fans who follow the production and watch it no matter what. Trailers and its money shots are directed at doubters, the largest crowd.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,968
    Slightly agree, slightly disagree. The inherent issue is marketing revealing too many money shots and the bigger action beats. Whether you were going to see the film regardless or needed the trailer to sell you on it is irrelevant.
  • Posts: 1,394
    MI7 is a fantastic movie but I agree marketing and the unfortunate timing of Barbenheimer sabotaged it.Showing the train crash and bike off cliff stunt a YEAR in advance was crazy.

    By the time we got to the bike stunt in MI7 it was still impressive to watch on the big screen but it lacked the wow factor as most if the audience had no doubt seen it multiple times on YouTube for the past year.

    While there is still green screen compositing during the train fight,a lot of it was dine for real.Just compare the MI7 train fight to the one in Indy 5,the Indy 5 one is just a murky animated mess.

    Overall though,I still loved MI7 and can’t wait for the next one!
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited August 2023 Posts: 16,383
    I was listening to the big McQ interview a bit more today: apparently there are a load of Spielberg-esque oner shots in it which he’s very proud of: I’ll have to look out for those next time.

    Another fun nugget: in the scenes where he jumps out of the train carriage and at the beginning, when he meets the takeaway delivery guy (among others) Cruise is wearing a wig! :)
  • BennyBenny Shaken not stirredAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 15,135
    72prf7hpr2fn.jpg

    Just found this image online whilst seeking something else.
    Presumably for MI DR part 2.
  • Fire_and_Ice_ReturnsFire_and_Ice_Returns I am trying to get away from this mountan!
    Posts: 25,103
    Benny wrote: »
    72prf7hpr2fn.jpg

    Just found this image online whilst seeking something else.
    Presumably for MI DR part 2.

    That is awesome.
  • RyanRyan Canada
    Posts: 692
    I haven't been on the forum in ages, but having watched Dead Reckoning three times this summer I thought I'd pop back in with some thoughts.

    I absolutely loved it. Perhaps Fallout is the more cohesive film as a whole, but when "End Part One" flashed on the screen at the end of my first viewing I was immediately hooked. By the time Part 2 arrives I think the two parts together could very well form my favourite spy film of all time.

    Christopher McQuarrie has done very well to continue giving each of his films a slightly different feel. In particular, I thought the slower, tense opening of this film worked to its advantage. Take the time to set up everything we need to know and then take us to the races.

    The Kittridge mask gag into the opening credits followed by Shea Wingham's character setting up the airport scene (my favourite scene in the film) was just a nice little shot of adrenaline. I initially feared I'd find his character somewhat annoying - perhaps a second rate Tommy Lee Jones in The Fugitive - but how wrong I was. He has a bunch of great small moments throughout the film. I especially love when his partner is trying to calmly evacuate and the train and he, well, has a different idea. His subtle dark humour I felt was something absent since Jeremy Renner's character, and so it was a welcome addition for me.

    Plus, it was nice to see him in a sizable action role that wasn't "Okay, so Paul Walker's character is going to break your nose in this scene." :D

    Of the returning players, I was really happy to see that Henry Czerny wasn't wasted. He was a real highlight of the film for me. I like that, together with Alanna Mitsopolis, the "Max" relationship was explored further. I honestly missed that on my first couple of viewings of Fallout. Indeed - McQuarrie confirmed in the audio commentary that the line in Fallout about Alanna being the daughter of Max was added in post-production (originally, her character was singing in the club scene rather than giving a speech). Nice to see it all come together without feeling too forced.

    Esai Morales made for a decent villain I thought. I suppose the true villain is The Entity, but as the villainous face of the film, I liked him. His performance reminded me somewhat of James Mason in North By Northwest - a likable, charming villain with an understated menace. Even some of his line deliveries seemed to have a similar cadence. Interesting that he was added to the film after the COVID delays forced scheduling and casting changes. I do wonder how the dynamic would have been had it been a younger villain in Nicholas Hoult as planned.

    Benji and Luther were excellent as always. I don't have much to say other than I felt they were used as much as they needed to be used. They both continue to be a very welcome team in the franchise.

    Okay, the elephant in the room - a certain character probably not returning in a future film. Honestly? I'm okay with it. I would hate for this franchise to pull a "Fast & Furious" and suddenly tell us "look it was someone else in a mask." I think it worked for the moment it needed to convey, and I think it saves covering the same ground that has already been covered in the previous couple of installments. It was a daring move (if not as polarizing as a certain other move in a certain other spy franchise), but I think it fit the film.

    Now - the shining star of the film - Tom Cr... I mean, Hayley Atwell. I was crazy about her from the start. I found Grace to be a well developed character going on a journey from arrogance to acceptance to pure fear. In particular, I liked the little moments on the train between her and Ethan. Earlier on, the car chase was an absolute blast and her and Tom made for quite a dynamic duo throughout. A terrific performance all around.

    And Tom. He's one of a kind. One of the last true "movie stars" left in my opinion. I continue to appreciate his dedication to these films.

    I'd comment on the box office, but I'm sure there isn't much I can add that hasn't already been said. It would have been a respectable gross as is had it not been for the budget, and it likely would have performed stronger without the unprecedented success of Barbenheimer. I'd suggest Part 2 serves to have a stronger take and a smaller budget, but now with the ongoing strike we may see yet some more delays.

    Still, Tom and McQuarrie delivered us an excellent film and I personally cannot wait for the next one.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,968
    I still want another rewatch (upset I didn't get to see it in cinemas a third time before it was unceremoniously yanked) but I'm still thinking this might be my favorite installment yet, despite how perfect Fallout is.
  • goldenswissroyalegoldenswissroyale Switzerland
    edited August 2023 Posts: 4,483
    Nice to read about your enthusiasm @Ryan. I had a great time with the movie, too, and I agree with your praise for Atwell. Wingham was also very good, despite the short screentime.

  • RyanRyan Canada
    Posts: 692
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    I still want another rewatch (upset I didn't get to see it in cinemas a third time before it was unceremoniously yanked) but I'm still thinking this might be my favorite installment yet, despite how perfect Fallout is.

    My local cinema has quite a few screens so most films seem to get quite a long stretch there much to my advantage. I've been debating going one last time before summer is out.
    Nice to read about your enthusiasm @Ryan. I had a great time with the movie, too, and I agree with your praise for Atwell. Wingham was also very good, despite the short screentime.

    Cheers! And yes, I most certainly look forward to seeing more of them in the next installment.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,968
    @Ryan, you absolutely should. I had another semi-local theater randomly bring it back for a weekend but all the showtimes were at 9:00 at night.
  • Posts: 4,615
    It's interesting that some are saying that the impact of viewing DR1 is lessoned as we know so much about the stunts and, at the same time, we are learning much about the stunts in DR2. I think, IMHO, they have to decide whether the stunts are there as a promotional tool or to add to the enjoyment of the move "in real time". I remember watching Capricorn 1 as a 13 year old (knowing nothing of the stunts) and the ending was something I will never forget. You simply lose that feeling when you have seen so much in advance. They need to rebalance.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,968
    Nothing official announced yet but looks like the DVD/blu-ray/4K release date is set for October 31st, which means we'll likely have a digital release around October 17th, if not sooner.
  • Junglist_1985Junglist_1985 Los Angeles
    Posts: 1,032
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Nothing official announced yet but looks like the DVD/blu-ray/4K release date is set for October 31st, which means we'll likely have a digital release around October 17th, if not sooner.

    I think I just read Oct 9th for streaming. Already put my pre-order in for the 4K BluRay on Amazon (due end of October). Very excited!
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,968
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Nothing official announced yet but looks like the DVD/blu-ray/4K release date is set for October 31st, which means we'll likely have a digital release around October 17th, if not sooner.

    I think I just read Oct 9th for streaming. Already put my pre-order in for the 4K BluRay on Amazon (due end of October). Very excited!

    Exciting times! I hope the next month flies by then. I haven't bought a physical release for a film in quite some time but I'm definitely making an exception for this one on 4K.
  • edited August 2023 Posts: 654
    patb wrote: »
    It's interesting that some are saying that the impact of viewing DR1 is lessoned as we know so much about the stunts and, at the same time, we are learning much about the stunts in DR2. I think, IMHO, they have to decide whether the stunts are there as a promotional tool or to add to the enjoyment of the move "in real time". I remember watching Capricorn 1 as a 13 year old (knowing nothing of the stunts) and the ending was something I will never forget. You simply lose that feeling when you have seen so much in advance. They need to rebalance.
    Those aerial stunts near the end of CAPRICORN ONE must have been something to behold back in 1978. They still look thrilling even today. You just can’t beat practical stuff. It always holds up.

    I still consider the film to be one of the very best of the 70s. And certainly the most forgotten/underrated. Along with 1977’s BLACK SUNDAY. Two terrific thrillers! I own both on DVD. Both also having great and very suspenseful soundtracks courtesy of Jerry Goldsmith and John Williams, respectively.

Sign In or Register to comment.