Mission: Impossible - films and tv series

1298299301303304306

Comments

  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,423
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    Having rewatched DR Part 1 recently, I think there was just too many characters and too much exposition.

    Yes I agree- that ponderous opening briefing scene with all the US generals and things: why are they explaining who the IMF are to me? I know this- it goes on forever. As you say, Falluot has a bit of exposition as they're walking to the plane to jet off on on a mission: it's so much tighter.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,217
    mtm wrote: »
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    Having rewatched DR Part 1 recently, I think there was just too many characters and too much exposition.

    Yes I agree- that ponderous opening briefing scene with all the US generals and things: why are they explaining who the IMF are to me? I know this- it goes on forever. As you say, Falluot has a bit of exposition as they're walking to the plane to jet off on on a mission: it's so much tighter.

    It felt like that entire exchange was an excuse to put in an IMF joke that I've seen multiple times online in the last decade. It was sort of cute the first time but I found it a massive chore on rewatch.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,976
    DR is my favorite of the lot but that early briefing scene, while looking slightly cool in some ways, does feel very stilted. More and more lately, those obviously choreographed bits of dialogue and detail have really stood out, like here when they're somehow perfectly cutting in to continue the briefing, with each person getting a line or two in each time. It's all really unnatural.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited April 4 Posts: 16,423
    mtm wrote: »
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    Having rewatched DR Part 1 recently, I think there was just too many characters and too much exposition.

    Yes I agree- that ponderous opening briefing scene with all the US generals and things: why are they explaining who the IMF are to me? I know this- it goes on forever. As you say, Falluot has a bit of exposition as they're walking to the plane to jet off on on a mission: it's so much tighter.

    It felt like that entire exchange was an excuse to put in an IMF joke that I've seen multiple times online in the last decade. It was sort of cute the first time but I found it a massive chore on rewatch.

    Yeah; all they have to do is explain that there's a bad machine that they want the magic key to; there's not much else to tell apart from express to us the stakes involved (but then you'd hope the -slightly boring- submarine bit would have done that). But you can also feel McQ trying to slide in various drama options, Ethan's stance on Kitteridge etc., which makes it all drag and you can kind of feel he hasn't even made up his mind on whether he's going to follow them through or not, filling it with sort of empty drama (see that curious scene by the Seine in Fallout where the White Widow demands that Ethan gives him Elsa: goes absolutely nowhere). It just feels tatty and hollow to me. And we don't even get the punch-the-air 'we got it?' trick IMF moment that should lead into the titles, as even Fallout did. Ethan just puts a mask on. Hmm.
    Usually McQ's post-rationalised plotting is elegant and you can't see the joins, but he really tripped himself up with this one. There's so many exposition scenes where they're trying to drum up the 'these are the terribly important stakes' and for me it feels a bit like that technobabble you used to get in Star Trek: I kind of don't buy it and it feels like they're trying to force the film to feel more dramatic than it is.
  • M_BaljeM_Balje Amsterdam, Netherlands
    edited April 4 Posts: 4,521
    I make Mi8 with a bit of fantasy that was not the real Ethan on that picture..

    Mi8-05-April-2024.jpg
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    edited April 5 Posts: 18,281
    M_Balje wrote: »
    I make Mi8 with a bit of fantasy that was not the real Ethan on that picture..

    Mi8-05-April-2024.jpg

    I see you've studied at the @Christartos School of Art, @M_Balje. ;)
  • BennyBenny Shaken not stirredAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 15,138
    M_Balje is a master compared to the likes of @Christartos
    For a start, we like @M_Balje
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,281
    Benny wrote: »
    M_Balje is a master compared to the likes of @Christartos
    For a start, we like @M_Balje

    Yes, indeed. @M_Balje is an MI6 Community legend and due to his long service since the late 1990s the Honorary President of this community. :)
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,976
    I see @M_Balje is gracing us with an early look at the Criterion Collection cover art for this one. Splendid work.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,281
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    I see @M_Balje is gracing us with an early look at the Criterion Collection cover art for this one. Splendid work.

    @M_Balje is always well ahead of the times with his artwork and ideas.
  • mattjoesmattjoes Julie T. and the M.G.'s
    Posts: 7,021
    Mission: Impossible: Joker
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,184
    Whatever @M_Balje is selling there, I'm having it! Yes, please.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    Posts: 13,978
    M_Balje wrote: »
    I make Mi8 with a bit of fantasy that was not the real Ethan on that picture..

    Mi8-05-April-2024.jpg

    When your number is taken you take a new number.

    @M_Balje you are like a modern day Cicero. ^:)^
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    edited April 6 Posts: 4,638
    M_Balje wrote: »
    I make Mi8 with a bit of fantasy that was not the real Ethan on that picture..

    Mi8-05-April-2024.jpg
    mattjoes wrote: »
    Mission: Impossible: Joker

    Mission: Impossible: Joker: Madness for Tom. Awesome work @M_Balje and everyone, a good laugh for me.

    My favorite MI villains are Jim Phelps, Owen Davian and August Walker. They had some great performances.

    As for DR Part 1, it did seem a bit off. The number one thing that needs to change after DR Part 2, is that it's time for Christopher McQuarrie to stop writing and directing. If of course Tom Cruise is still in charge.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,423
    I would be amazed if he were up for directing another one. He’s been making these two latest ones for about five years straight now.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,217
    It'd be nice to see McQuarrie do a smaller project after these where he's not juggling so many elements. Then again, even if he doesn't do a screenplay solo, he'll always be hard at work as Hollywood's most popular script doctor.
  • slide_99slide_99 USA
    edited April 28 Posts: 693
    Just watched Dead Reckoning. I guess it was...okay? It came off as a workprint of a movie that hadn't been fully edited yet.

    We see that the two keys open the Entity-thing in the sub right in the opening sequence, so it was silly how the entire rest of the movie consisted of the characters being baffled by what the keys do. Movie characters shouldn't be playing catchup with the audience.

    There's a lot of seemingly random and unexplained stuff, like Ethan following mercenaries to get to Ilse who for some reason has a bounty on her by Kittridge (huh?), how Ilse even got the key to begin with when presumably the Russian government had possession of both, why there was a fake nuclear bomb in the airport, etc.

    Grace's character was too dominant. So dominant in fact that Ethan felt like a secondary character in his own movie. Far too much screen time was devoted to her, and it didn't add much to the movie.

    Gabriel and Paris were decent villains but the backstory of Gabriel killing Ethan's first love was totally unnecessary. If they reveal in part 2 that Kittridge had Marie killed so that Ethan would become his agent, I'll be really annoyed. They did the same thing with Jason Bourne in the 4th one they did, and quite frankly Craig's Bond as well ("It was me, James!"). These types of retcons never work yet Hollywood keeps doing them.

    There's way too much expository dialogue; lots of scenes were people explain what just happened in the previous scene. Gives the movie a somewhat aimless and meandering feel, like it's trying to figure out what exactly it's doing.

    I assume it was shot digitally. It has an odd, washed-out look that's not very cinematic.

    The action sequences were a mixed bag. The desert shootout was overly digital and the fights weren't convincing at all.

    And finally there were too many familiar elements. We saw a Russian sub accidentally torpedo itself in The Hunt for Red October. The whole plot of the Entity being stolen from its creators seemed like it was lifted from NTTD. In fact there was a whole slew of stuff taken from Bond- Ethan and Grace being handcuffed together was a bit too shameless. And Grace seemed like a rehash of Nya from MI2; actually much of the movie felt like a mishmash of previous MI movies, right down to a climactic train sequence featuring Ethan and Kittridge, a wire transfer, and Ethan fighting the villain on the roof like in MI1.

    On the other hand, there were parts that I enjoyed. Cruise can still pull off the character despite his age. It was great seeing Kittridge make a return. The music was good. The Rome car chase was great and the finale was pretty spectacular. The humor mostly worked, particularly with Biggs (the agent going around pinching everyone's face).

    So overall, a mixed bag. Hopefully part 2 clears things up, is shorter, and more focused.
    My ranking:
    1
    2
    3
    DR
    GP
    Haven't seen RN or FO yet.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    edited April 21 Posts: 40,976
    @slide_99, while I really loved DR, I can totally understand most of those complaints and issues. Looking forward to hearing your thoughts on RN and FO particularly. And as always, I'm happy when I see anybody ranking 2 that high.
  • Posts: 1,632
    slide_99 wrote: »
    Just watched Dead Reckoning. I guess it was...okay? It came off as a workprint of a movie that hadn't been fully edited yet.
    We see that the two keys open the Entity-thing in the sub right in the opening sequence, so it was silly how the entire rest of the movie consisted of the characters being baffled by what the keys do. Movie characters shouldn't be playing catchup with the audience.
    There's a lot of seemingly random and unexplained stuff, like Ethan following mercenaries to get to Ilse who for some reason has a bounty on her by Kittridge (huh?), how Ilse even got the key to begin with when presumably the Russian government had possession of both, why there was a fake nuclear bomb in the airport, etc.
    Grace's character was too dominant. So dominant in fact that Ethan felt like a secondary character in his own movie. Far too much screen time was devoted to her, and it didn't add much to the movie.
    Gabriel and Paris were decent villains but the backstory of Gabriel killing Ethan's first love was totally unnecessary. If they reveal in part 2 that Kittridge had Marie killed so that Ethan would become his agent, I'll be really annoyed. They did the same thing with Jason Bourne in the 4th one they did, and quite frankly Craig's Bond as well ("It was me, James!"). These types of retcons never work yet Hollywood keeps doing them.
    There's way too much expository dialogue; lots of scenes were people explain what just happened in the previous scene. Gives the movie a somewhat aimless and meandering feel, like it's trying to figure out what exactly it's doing.
    I assume it was shot digitally. It has an odd, washed-out look that's not very cinematic.
    The action sequences were a mixed bag. The desert shootout was overly digital and the fights weren't convincing at all.
    And finally there were too many familiar elements. We saw a Russian sub accidentally torpedo itself in The Hunt for Red October. The whole plot of the Entity being stolen from its creators seemed like it was lifted from NTTD. In fact there was a whole slew of stuff taken from Bond- Ethan and Grace being handcuffed together was a bit too shameless. And Grace seemed like a rehash of Nya from MI2; actually much of the movie felt like a mishmash of previous MI movies, right down to a climactic train sequence featuring Ethan and Kittridge, a wire transfer, and Ethan fighting the villain on the roof like in MI1.
    On the other hand, there were parts that I enjoyed. Cruise can still pull off the character despite his age. It was great seeing Kittridge make a return. The music was good. The Rome car chase was great and the finale was pretty spectacular. The humor mostly worked, particularly with Biggs (the agent going around pinching everyone's face).
    So overall, a mixed bag. Hopefully part 2 clears things up, is shorter, and more focused.
    My ranking:
    1
    2
    3
    DR
    GP
    Haven't seen RN or FO yet.

    I am surprised by the love for MI:2. But for Ms. Newton and Sir Anthony, meh. Woo was ridiculous. The flying motorcycle battle, the pigeons, the slow mo were at Woo-Spoof level. 1 excellent. 2 awful. 3 and since, better and better and better. They somehow step it up each time.
  • slide_99slide_99 USA
    edited April 22 Posts: 693
    I guess it's a matter of taste. MI2 is unique in what it does. I like Woo's style and his mythic approach to the story was unusual for the spy genre. The straightforward storyline allows the characters to breathe a bit more. Nyah is my favorite "Hunt girl" (if that's a thing) and Ambrose my favorite villain, basically a dark version of Ethan. The movie also looks and sounds phenomenal to this day.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,423
    I think it's an enjoyable 90s-style action movie: turn the brain off and kick back. It does at least get MI enough to know that you need a scene where Ethan has played a clever trick on the baddie (which we didn't know about) and to give us a big reveal while the theme plays - DR lost track of that feel a bit.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,184
    I choose M:I2 over M:I.
  • Fire_and_Ice_ReturnsFire_and_Ice_Returns I am trying to get away from this mountan!
    Posts: 25,160
    M:I 2 gets so ridiculous at times it feels as though Woo is parodying himself. The film has many hilarious moments that are likely not intentional, M:I 2 is a bad rip off of Hitchcocks Notorious.

    M:I 2 by far the worst film in the series for me.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,217
    M:I 2 gets so ridiculous at times it feels as though Woo is parodying himself. The film has many hilarious moments that are likely not intentional, M:I 2 is a bad rip off of Hitchcocks Notorious.

    M:I 2 by far the worst film in the series for me.

    Same here, it doesn’t ever feel like a MI film.
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,641
    The great thing with the first 5 mission films is because of the different directors, they all have a unique vibe
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,184
    M:I 2 gets so ridiculous at times it feels as though Woo is parodying himself. The film has many hilarious moments that are likely not intentional, M:I 2 is a bad rip off of Hitchcocks Notorious.

    M:I 2 by far the worst film in the series for me.

    I almost agree with everything. The problem is that M:I just doesn't do it for me. The lack of tension, some cringeworthy moments, and Elfman's extremely underwhelming score make me enjoy M:I2 far more as an overstylized failure on steroids.
  • Fire_and_Ice_ReturnsFire_and_Ice_Returns I am trying to get away from this mountan!
    edited April 26 Posts: 25,160
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    M:I 2 gets so ridiculous at times it feels as though Woo is parodying himself. The film has many hilarious moments that are likely not intentional, M:I 2 is a bad rip off of Hitchcocks Notorious.

    M:I 2 by far the worst film in the series for me.

    I almost agree with everything. The problem is that M:I just doesn't do it for me. The lack of tension, some cringeworthy moments, and Elfman's extremely underwhelming score make me enjoy M:I2 far more as an overstylized failure on steroids.

    You can have fun with the second film, I still have 3 or 4 versions of the film on different formats, i just can't take it seriously.

    I love the first film, especially the way it is shot, I think it is one of DePalma's best films, admittedly it is a slower burn than future installments though I like the intrigue, characters and set pieces.

    In M:I when Ethan is recruiting his next team on the train and Krieger leans forward, its one of the best shots and scenes I have ever seen in cinema.

    I like that in DR the early conference scenes are trying evoke DePalma, i know some are not fans of that scene.
  • Fire_and_Ice_ReturnsFire_and_Ice_Returns I am trying to get away from this mountan!
    edited April 28 Posts: 25,160
    Tom looks ridiculously good for his age, I can't believe he is 61.

    I hope Tom decides to continue making these films after part 8. I really hope Ethan does not get killed off like DC's Bond.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,184
    Tom looks ridiculously good for his age, I can't believe he is 61.

    I hope Tom decides to continue making these films after part 8. I really hope Ethan does not get killed off like DC's Bond.

    I think they'll pull a 'Bourne Ultimatum' on Hunt.
    We think he's dead... and right before the end titles start playing, we see him walk away.
Sign In or Register to comment.