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
This. Plus, we have no idea what's in store for Part 2 yet, past some miscellaneous footage cut out of the trailers from the first part that could appear later and some of the stunts we've seen Cruise filming.
I'm personally a huge fan of what they managed with the Entity here. The idea that it's able to run endless computations in seconds to predict the probability of future actions, thereby influencing the villains and heroes alike in the process, is masterful to me.
Not every film needs a hero and a villain in the traditional sense. Usually, what we expect is for the protagonist to have to face obstacles to face. In a disaster film, the main obstacle is the disaster, and secondary obstacles might include people who are not helping in the catastrophe, or are out to save themselves at the expense of everyone else. On a more psychological level, another obstacle might be a character's own limitations, doubts or faults, like in The Poseidon Adventure. As far as I'm concerned, disaster films can work well within these parameters.
So did Dead Reckoning, with Esai Morales. This works by complementing the "impersonal villain", but it doesn't imply said villain is deficient, or a poor idea on which to build a story.
https://www.listchallenges.com/30-most-evil-movie-computers
PS with TI, the corrupt engineer and his actions created the fire. Our heroes identify the villain and protect victims from the consequences of his actions (ie fire). With DR, the creator of the Entity is not the villain. The Entity is the villain (and as with God analogies), who, then created the Entity ? Are they not the villain ? computer code does not just exist. Humans create code and have motivations for doing so. (T2 dealt with this issue very well IMHO) I know I'm being picky, dont get me wrong, these are small but interesting things. Love the whole MI series
Yeah I think it works; I don't have any massive issues with it. I suppose the one aspect which gives me slight pause is that I like M:I to be really hi-tech - they have all of the clever gadgets, and in a different way to Bond. Bond has stuff which comes in useful, and more often than not is a weapon in disguise, whereas the IMF have items which are used for very precise uses and nothing else (like those things which allow Benji to change the door numbers in the Burj- Bond wouldn't exactly be carrying those around just in case!). So if anything we've seen the Entity will force them to go low tech, with the biplanes etc. and although I guess that's a new avenue to take M:I down (and I know Cruise and McQ love their analogue tech) I kind of think the gadgets and computers and all that are part of the MI aesthetic so I hope it doesn't feel less MI for losing them.
https://variety.com/2023/film/columns/mission-impossible-series-future-dead-reckoning-espionage-1235688839/
Bond continues to remain a major attraction. ;)
I think the writer overstates it slightly, but I don’t entirely disagree. Considering that McQ began directing them with Rogue Nation, which had the peerless opera sequence (made not just of action, but tension and cleverness with a wonderfully intelligent climax) and ended on a superbly satisfying trick rather than big action climax, I’m perhaps a little disappointed that he’s moved to stringing along action scenes.
He’s been saying recently that he feels there are only three things a Mission movie must have, and those are: the theme music/title sequence; a mission briefing for Ethan; a mask gag. And I disagree: I think you need a heist, a plan. M:I does require a bit of cleverness in there, and I’d happily trade the mask gag for that.
I recently revisited GHOST PROTOCOL. Man, what a breath of fresh air that was after MI3. If Cruise had wanted to bow out, I think GP would have been perfect. It’s all about trying to rebuild the IMF with their last mission by the secretary. It’s Ethan finding peace with where he’s at as he watches his love one move on in the distance.
Not that he shouldn’t have made more films, but this would have left the series at its highest IMHO.
I really do wonder if making the films part 1 and part 2 is a factor in this.
The only thing that really bugs me is Ilsa. Her character is absolutely wasted, she barely speaks and I’m pretty sure they were forced to basically cut her out from the film due to scheduling conflicts because of all the Covid delays and her busy schedule with Silo and Dune.
Still I’m not ruling out the possibility
It would've felt slightly more believable if:
As for Grace as a character
I definitely got the impression it didn't know what to do with the two CIA guys chasing Ethan. I think you could have lost those and had little impact on the story.
They pretty much just serve as living, breathing action beats. Ethan chases bad guys, they turn up to slow him down and increase drama by keeping him further away from what he's after.
The second time I saw it in theaters, I got a hearty laugh out of Degas entering the train car and trying to calmly get everyone to start moving to the front before Jasper enters, pulls out his gun, cocks it, and starts yelling to get the point across.
I hope those two return in Part 2.
No, I think you're wrong on that one. As others have said, they serve to slow Ethan down, and stop him moving on with his mission. It would have been too easy for Ethan if Briggs and Degas weren't there.
https://ew.com/movies/impossible-dead-rebecca-ferguson-death/