Mission: Impossible - films and tv series

1139140142144145306

Comments

  • NS_writingsNS_writings Buenos Aires
    Posts: 544
    doubleoego wrote: »
    fanbond123 wrote: »
    Another online article about MI franchise now better than Bond:

    https://screenrant.com/mission-impossible-better-james-bond/
    Daniel Craig will soon reprise his role in Bond 25 in the franchise, to be directed by Slumdog Millionaire’s Danny Boyle. He has said this will be his last time as the character and talk of his replacement has been an ongoing subject since the release of Spectre. It remains to be seen where the franchise will take Craig and Bond and how they can continue on in this new age of cinema. There will always be a place at the table for James Bond but it’s Ethan Hunt who has carved a path forward through fine-tuning the formula and understanding so keenly what audiences want. One can only hope that Bond can keep up with the frantic pace Mission: Impossible has set for the genre.

    In terms of box office, Craig's Bond films make more money than Cruise's MI films. Bond is more popular. I'd put a fiver on Bond 25 making more money than Fallout (domestic US box office and internationally).

    Would the next Bond actor agree to do many of his own stunts - big scale stunts like hanging from moving vehicles? It's hard to imagine the next actor going the Cruise route but if Bond 26's first trailer showed the new Bond actor hanging onto the side of train - some of the pro-MI fans might go "wow, that's just like Cruise in the MI films!"



    Bond will ALWAYS make more money than MI. That's not really impressive considering Bond's standing in cinematic history. However, outside of Bond, Cruise will outgross any of the Bond actors' films. It's a testament to Cruise's star power and the fact that this particular comparison is being made between Bond and MI (Tom Cruise IS the MI franchise)only further cements how big and unique Cruise is. Tom Cruise is Hollywood's last, one and only true superstar.

    This is my answer to all the "M:I is better than Bond nonsense". I agree the last M:I films have taken the lead in terms of action and entertainment, but it takes a lot to become the worldwide cultural icon Bond has been in almost 56 years.
    https://spycommandfeatures.wordpress.com/the-pointless-rivalry-between-007-mi/

    After all, why not rumours on the "Next Hunt" or "Next Hunt Girl"? ;)
  • NS_writingsNS_writings Buenos Aires
    Posts: 544
    Truly. You said it all too well, mate. It’s about time the CIA and the IMF stopped showing each other who’s got the bigger balls. One thing I could recommend further is that the CIA just stopped controlling the IMF, and let the latter answer directly to The White House, and the Secretary should be an employee of the presidential circle or at least the secret service. Not the damn CIA.

    +1. Feels fake and tiresome at this point. You know, we disavow you every time despite you were always right, IMF.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    edited July 2018 Posts: 15,423
    Truly. You said it all too well, mate. It’s about time the CIA and the IMF stopped showing each other who’s got the bigger balls. One thing I could recommend further is that the CIA just stopped controlling the IMF, and let the latter answer directly to The White House, and the Secretary should be an employee of the presidential circle or at least the secret service. Not the damn CIA.

    +1. Feels fake and tiresome at this point. You know, we disavow you every time despite you were always right, IMF.
    +1. Thing is, that’s always been the basis of the series and all (the disavowing aspect) should the agent got caught but that rarely happened. I love the film franchise, but they really should stop repeating the “hero going rogue to make things right” angle. Only the second film didn’t bring that up. It’s not Mission: Disavowed after all.

    Involving the CIA should’ve stopped a long time ago. It’s like the MI5 controlling and dictating the MI6. It’s just wrong. Conceptually, this feels wrong and as such should either be completely sacked, or the IMF should for once and for all become a branch of the CIA, thus making them CIA agents.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    edited July 2018 Posts: 8,205
    I saw it and loved it. It skillfully resolves the story threads initiated in MI:3 and clears the way for what ever story they care to tell in future installments.
    For me, as with new music from a favorite artist, additional viewings will be needed to fully appreciate an incredible film.
    For me The MI films 3 through 6 are an impressive quadrilogy and completely satisfying start to finish.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,789
    talos7 wrote: »
    I saw it and loved it. It skillfully resolves the story threads initiated in MI:3 and clears the way for what ever story they care to tell in future installments.
    For me, as with new music from a favorite artist, additional viewings will be needed to fully appreciate an incredible film.
    For me The MI films 3 through 6 are an impressive quadrilogy and completely satisfying start to finish.

    I can't wait to see it!
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,216
    I've seen it three times now since it came out. That's the same amount of times I saw both Skyfall and Spectre on their respective runs.

    It gets better with each viewing. I've seen Cruise being compared to Buster Keaton in terms of his dedication to a physical performance, and while I think that's a stretch, I do see why people could think that.

    FALLOUT is a superb physical performance from him. It's a truly glorious display of craftsmanship. I've seen people complain above about writing, subplots etc. and while I do agree that the film is front-loaded with exposition, I disagree that there are too many characters and/or plot threads. McQuarrie's writing and the films nods to previous films and its tying together of various plot threads is expertly done - it merely took three viewings for the sheer awe of the action sequences to wear off for me to really notice how well put together the story is. Once you get past a messy opening and a dialogue heavy opening 15 minutes, the film is an absolute rollercoaster and very, very rewarding.

    I'm not really sure why people feel the CIA thing is overdone. They've only been a background presence in the first and third film - this is the first film where they've been strongly represented on screen. Maybe people are just bored of inter-agency quarrelling in general in films? We have had it in the Craig-era as well I suppose.

    While I'm not sure MI will become anything like the cultural icon that Bond is, I do hope it will give a jolt to those putting together action films of this type going forward and help give the genre as a whole a kick. Bond could do with a dose of this kind of adrenaline - maybe not with Craig's last but certainly with his successor. Cruise may not be still doing this kind of thing by the time we actually know who Craig's successor is, so maybe there'll be a gap in the market again that Eon can capitalise on.

    Anyway, FALLOUT is the best blockbuster I have seen this year and it deserves every success.
  • Posts: 676
    I enjoyed Fallout. Not as good as everyone's saying IMO, but when a movie is universally praised I usually get my expectations too high. Despite all the crazy stunts on show, I think my favourite part was the shootout in the dark after Lark is exposed. I did prefer Rogue Nation, which was lighter on its feet. Fallout's plotting was more coherent, but for me, part of the fun of Rogue Nation was the feeling that the story was being made up on the spot to justify the action sequences. Which were better there, too - none of the vehicular action in Fallout entertained me as much as the stuff in Rogue Nation. But it was still a fun time.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Second viewing last night and it was even better. This film never EVER gets boring and is very easy to follow even if one hasnt seen the previous films.
    To think, this film was written and directed by the same ONE man as opposed to a mediocre writing team and then getting another 1 or 2 people, sometines a third to write and add yo the script, resulting in a plot riddled, boring mess.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited July 2018 Posts: 8,395
    MI Fallout grosses an estimated 61.5 million in its opening weekend.

    https://www.boxofficemojo.com/weekend/chart/

    The film total domestic + forgein cume so far is 153 million, and won't opening in China until next month.
  • Posts: 2,491
    Boxoffice numbers: 153m worldwide after the first weekend

    It's solid. I hoped for something even better but I guess this movie will be just like the other M:I movies i nterms of BO..probably.

    I am hoping for better numbers as M:I doesn't have big competition in the next few weeks.

    Even tho I wasn't #1 fan of the movie I hope it makes around the same if not more than Rogue Nation

    Btw here are the big movies being released in US in the next 3 weeks:

    The Darkest Minds

    Christopher Robin

    The Spy Who Dumped Me

    The Meg

    Alpha

    Mile 22

    I'd say Fallout has some favorable match ups. It will probably make like 25-30m next weekend, and I expect some solid numbers in the working days as well.

    I see Fallout completely dominating the worldwide numbers tho.
  • Posts: 3,274
    Daniel got his head drilled in SP. There was no stuntman. Let s see Cruise do that.

    All I want to know is: Can Ethan Hunt ski?

  • Posts: 2,491
    Also..this is the highest opening weekend for a M:I movie ever!
  • Posts: 2,491
    Zekidk wrote: »
    Daniel got his head drilled in SP. There was no stuntman. Let s see Cruise do that.

    All I want to know is: Can Ethan Hunt ski?

    Ooh, yeah, I'd like to see a ski chase in MI!

    Also..in what scene of SP did Craig got injured?
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,591
    dragonsky wrote: »
    Zekidk wrote: »
    Daniel got his head drilled in SP. There was no stuntman. Let s see Cruise do that.

    All I want to know is: Can Ethan Hunt ski?

    Ooh, yeah, I'd like to see a ski chase in MI!

    Also..in what scene of SP did Craig got injured?
    Train fight.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,395
    dragonsky wrote: »
    Also..this is the highest opening weekend for a M:I movie ever!

    Yeah, seems like MI will finally push through the 700 million mark with this entry.
  • Last_Rat_StandingLast_Rat_Standing Long Neck Ice Cold Beer Never Broke My Heart
    Posts: 4,583
    I'm on a family vacation this week but I still plan on seeing it between now and Wednesday.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,967
    Oof. Had a friend wanting to see it tomorrow, but I would've had to call off work so he elected just to go tonight. Think I'm still going to catch it next weekend too (provided, as unrealistic and improbable as it is, that I don't somehow hate it). So pumped!
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,967
    So tired this morning, but that was worth it. I'm still out of it, was such a late night going out to see it and I demand another viewing to get all my thoughts together, but I'm certain that's easily my favorite in the series. Tense and nerve-wracking without being too overly dramatic, the action scenes were stunning (and expertly bled into the next one, the pacing for them was expertly done), the cast was in fine form as always, and as many of you echoed, I felt a real high-stakes feeling for all of the characters during this mission. Already dying to see this one once again.

    It might've been noted, and it may not even be an easter egg, but this little bit made me think of M:I 2:
    When Ethan takes the helicopter deep into the valley during the finale, he gets some sort of automated "Terrain, terrain, pull up, pull up" message, reminiscent of the plane crash from the opening of M:I2.

    And I will say that:
    It was wildly obvious from the opening minutes that Walker would end up being Lark, but was that supposed to be him hiding in the shadows firing at Ethan and Benji in the opening? Sounded like he had a British accent, but nothing was brought up about it after that, unless I missed a key moment. I sort of wish he could have continued to be the bad guy for the series, but his death scene was too damn cool.
  • Seven_Point_Six_FiveSeven_Point_Six_Five Southern California
    Posts: 1,257
    I’ll be seeing Fallout on in few hours from now. I’ve done a pretty good job avoiding reviews and whatnot so I’ll be going in fresh.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,395
    I’ll be seeing Fallout on in few hours from now. I’ve done a pretty good job avoiding reviews and whatnot so I’ll be going in fresh.

    Great, let us know what you think.
  • RC7RC7
    edited July 2018 Posts: 10,512
    patb wrote: »

    Interesting line she throws out at the top - ‘an unlikely 22-year phenomenon that shows no signs of tiring’. I think it’s very clear it did indeed run out of steam post-III. They went away, figured out what worked, honed their USP and returned 5 years later with a finely tuned, genuinely exhilarating action film.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,216
    I gave it an appraisal on my Letterboxd. If anyone from here uses the app, give me a follow and I'll follow back.

    My ★★★★ review of Mission: Impossible - Fallout on Letterboxd

    https://boxd.it/uH2N1
  • edited July 2018 Posts: 12,837
    RC7 wrote: »
    patb wrote: »

    Interesting line she throws out at the top - ‘an unlikely 22-year phenomenon that shows no signs of tiring’. I think it’s very clear it did indeed run out of steam post-III. They went away, figured out what worked, honed their USP and returned 5 years later with a finely tuned, genuinely exhilarating action film.

    Haven't seen the new one yet, but my problem with Rogue Nation was that after they'd figured out what worked and delivered with GP, they'd stopped taking any real risks with the sort of film it was. RN was really well made and well done in pretty much every way but I just felt bored. The stunts were cool but it felt like I'd seen it all before, exact same sort of tone/story as the last one. What made GP so great for me was how fresh and different it felt at the time (coming out at a time where dark and gritty was what most blockbusters were going for), and what I admired about the first few was how different they all were. RN played it pretty safe I thought.

    This seems like it'll feel more fresh though, with the talk of it being darker and them fleshing out Hunt's character more. Seems like a different sort of film. I'll probably wait until it's on Sky to catch it though.
  • edited July 2018 Posts: 4,044
    Saw it at the weekend in IMAX (recommended) and it was very enjoyable. I would say that what it does is it gets the basics right. It isn't particularly innovative but it puts together what you'd expect in a good actioner and then makes each action set piece as good as possible.

    I'm not sure its essential for Cruise to do all his stunt work, but the helicopter license he worked for pays off.

    I don't think the bad guy is very threatening. I'm slightly influenced there by the actor being on UK TV, and generally playing a snivelling little git.

    I've read a few reviews that slate the music, but I thought it was fitting and memorable, if somewhat Zimmeresque.

    I don't quite get the need to compare Bond vs MI, I'm more than happy to have both and they don't need to battle for my attention.

    But one area that I wish Bond would match MI on now is production speed. Inside 3 years since Rogue Nation they have managed to make this movie whilst Cruise has done his own action work, broken his ankle and held up production by months, got a pilots licence, and been able to fit in making 3 other movies. Surely EON can match a 3 year schedule.

    This movie did remind me of why I like traditional action movies over the current trend of CGI and Marvel. It's just way more involving for me to see real people doing almost real things, rather than some green screen extravaganza where everyone has the power to do anything.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,967
    @vzok, I noticed that point you mentioned, too:
    The trailers involving the bathroom fight really amped up how powerful and deadly Walker was going to be, but he seemed to get his ass handed to him pretty regularly throughout the movie.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    I intentionally avoided all the trailers and ads prior to my viewing on the weekend, and it truly benefited me because I experienced everything pretty much for the first time onscreen. I shall try to do that more often going forward for films I anticipate.
    ----
    RC7 wrote: »
    patb wrote: »

    Interesting line she throws out at the top - ‘an unlikely 22-year phenomenon that shows no signs of tiring’. I think it’s very clear it did indeed run out of steam post-III. They went away, figured out what worked, honed their USP and returned 5 years later with a finely tuned, genuinely exhilarating action film.

    Haven't seen the new one yet, but my problem with Rogue Nation was that after they'd figured out what worked and delivered with GP, they'd stopped taking any real risks with the sort of film it was. RN was really well made and well done in pretty much every way but I just felt bored. The stunts were cool but it felt like I'd seen it all before, exact same sort of tone/story as the last one. What made GP so great for me was how fresh and different it felt at the time (coming out at a time where dark and gritty was what most blockbusters were going for), and what I admired about the first few was how different they all were. RN played it pretty safe I thought.

    This seems like it'll feel more fresh though, with the talk of it being darker and them fleshing out Hunt's character more. Seems like a different sort of film. I'll probably wait until it's on Sky to catch it though.
    I get your point, but personally thought that RN was sufficiently different from GP, with its focus on the syndicate. I agree that they both had a similar tone, but it didn't really bother me as much perhaps because both films remind me of the feel of the Connery and Moore eras (my personal Bond faves). Moreover, as you said, nobody is making films like these anymore regrettably. They both have a lightness and thrilling sense of adventure to them. If they were released during Brosnan's run for instance then I may not have found them as fresh.

    In terms of differences, I thought that RN felt more intimate, personal and grounded (like a Glen film), while GP to me felt much larger in scale and detached (like a Gilbert film). Both had Cruise in full 'suave' mode, and I think it suits him well. He is one of the last great bona fide movie stars after all, and both GP & RN put that star power & undeniable charisma front and centre, to their credit. I actually didn't like RN as much upon first viewing, but when I revisited it the film quickly became my favourite (although I think Fallout has now overtaken it in my rankings).

    I recommend viewing the new one on the big screen if you can. Some scenes are filmed using IMAX cameras (Nolan style) and they really pop in the cinema. There are actually some action sequences which remind me of Nolan's work on the Bat films and I find myself wanting to revisit those landmark entries on account of Fallout.

    Hunt is indeed fleshed out more, and credibly too. In fact, this last one has made me appreciate MI:3 (which I've not been a fan of in the past) much more. Everything is tied together nicely.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,967
    @bondjames, I had the same intention, despite breaking it and watching all the trailers and TV spots like a madman. I'm usually pretty good about holding off, but sometimes the anticipation is too much.

    And yes, I didn't get to catch it in IMAX, but the regular theater I was in was impressive enough and the audio was absolutely booming - I can only imagine it sounded like a war zone in IMAX. I recall seeing Blade Runner 2049 in IMAX, feeling deafened by the blasters that sounded like cannons.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    @Creasy47, you were actually someone who motivated me to avoid the trailers. I think you did that for SP (if I recall correctly) and I admired your discipline. I'm going to try and avoid spoilers for B25 going forward.

    I actually had my first viewing of Fallout on Saturday in a non-IMAX theatre, but in 3D (which was completely unnecessary). As you noted, it was absolutely amazing (especially the audio) even in regular format, so I can't wait to catch it again, but this time in all its IMAX glory.

    I'm glad you liked it as much as I did. A truly stellar effort and I feel it peaks beautifully, unlike some of the other MI entries which peak a bit early.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,967
    I sadly did not with SP, but that's my goal for Bond 25. I've been attempting to avoid the Production Diary like the plague for that reason alone, I want to go in as blind as possible. I did manage to avoid listening to the title song from the last two Bond installments, though, until I heard it in theaters for the first time.

    Awesome! You'll have to let us know how that IMAX viewing goes for you. The closest one to me is a good two hours away, so my second viewing will sadly be in regular theaters once again.
Sign In or Register to comment.