Mission: Impossible - films and tv series

14849515354306

Comments

  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    MI RN doesn't even come close in ticket sales numbers to Spectre in Europe and probably the whole world I guess.

    Everything is where it belongs >:)

    No, but seriously Mr Joker :-P. I mean, it fascinates me to see that so many like RN more than SP. Because I loved RN too, but SP for me felt slightly more satisfying. It had a way more convincing villain. It had a torture sequence that easily wins from that rather lackluster Bonedoctor-henchman. Hinx was terrific.

    Slightly more satisfying? :-O SLIGHTLY?? :-?

    :))

    I like Mission:Impossible of course, but it's no match whatsoever to Bond, especially to the best Bond movie ever SPECTRE.
  • Seven_Point_Six_FiveSeven_Point_Six_Five Southern California
    Posts: 1,257
    One area that Rogue Nation excels is its use of sound. I found the sound effects palette for both Skyfall and Spectre very flat, especially during the action scenes.

    Compare that to the Morocco chase scenes in MI:RN, where every vroom and roar of the engine was perfectly judged and super detailed. Genuinely had me on the edge of my seat.

    Absolutely! The sound effects added really added tension to that scene. I really cant wait to pick this one up on BluRay. Hell, I wonder if any of my local theaters are still playing it because I wouldn't mind seeing it again.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,216
    One area that Rogue Nation excels is its use of sound. I found the sound effects palette for both Skyfall and Spectre very flat, especially during the action scenes.

    Compare that to the Morocco chase scenes in MI:RN, where every vroom and roar of the engine was perfectly judged and super detailed. Genuinely had me on the edge of my seat.

    Absolutely! The sound effects added really added tension to that scene. I really cant wait to pick this one up on BluRay. Hell, I wonder if any of my local theaters are still playing it because I wouldn't mind seeing it again.

    Rogue Nation definitely deserves a Sound Mixing nomination this year. When I saw it in IMAX it felt like the vehicles were actually in the room.

    I didn't get that with the car chase or the snow plane sequence in SPECTRE, which is a shame.
  • edited November 2015 Posts: 5,767
    bondjames wrote: »
    Anyway, they obviously were going for a more 'playful' and 'retro' Bond effect with that scene and that's how it ended up.

    In fact, it could have done with a more playful score in way (a'la FYEO 2CV chase) because the score was sort of mismatched to the proceedings imho.
    The term retro doesn´t really fit, because literally every car chase in the old Bond movies was very aggressive, while SP´s Rome chase shows no signs of viscerality. I find it hard to name a reason, but it seems to me that one of the problems is that the camera work is too self-conscious.


    What do you think SP did better....way better....than RN :-)?
    Really not that much.



    bondjames wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Compare that to the Morocco chase scenes in MI:RN, where every vroom and roar of the engine was perfectly judged and super detailed. Genuinely had me on the edge of my seat.
    That is so what I wanted to see in the SP chase scene. I would have preferred no score and just the roar of the engines. Newman's amped up score suggested far more tension than what was actually taking place visually.

    Anyway, they obviously were going for a more 'playful' and 'retro' Bond effect with that scene and that's how it ended up.

    In fact, it could have done with a more playful score in way (a'la FYEO 2CV chase) because the score was sort of mismatched to the proceedings imho.

    What do you think SP did better....way better....than RN :-)?
    -Opening scene (pretitles). The 'coolness' factor was total Bond
    While SP´s opening scene had very cool elements, the audacity with which MI5 starts was hardly beatable.



    It had a way more convincing villain. It had a torture sequence that easily wins from that rather lackluster Bonedoctor-henchman. Hinx was terrific.
    While there may easily be more satisfying villains than the one in RN, the way the villain in SP is presented has much too much emphasis on his family issues to be in any way threatening or otherwise meaningful.
    I agree that the Bonedoctor was a bit dull, while Hinx was basically a lot more interesting. But again, RN knew much better to use the guy than did SP. The knife fight between the Bonedoctor and Ilsa was top notch. Hinx throwing Bond around like a toy, especially so shortly after Bond himself showed what a badass he is by knocking one guy out with one single punch and intimidating the other by just saying matter-of-factly, "No!" was fantastic. But then Hinx failing miserably at trying a Jaws hommage was characteristic of most of his use in the film: great potential, driven against the wall.
    As for the torture scene in SP, I found that totally misplaced. A throwback to early 00s torture porn á la MI3, or Tarantino. No tension, just sado maso pain. Not my thing at all.
  • boldfinger wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Anyway, they obviously were going for a more 'playful' and 'retro' Bond effect with that scene and that's how it ended up.

    In fact, it could have done with a more playful score in way (a'la FYEO 2CV chase) because the score was sort of mismatched to the proceedings imho.
    The term retro doesn´t really fit, because literally every car chase in the old Bond movies was very aggressive, while SP´s Rome chase shows no signs of viscerality. I find it hard to name a reason, but it seems to me that one of the problems is that the camera work is too self-conscious.


    What do you think SP did better....way better....than RN :-)?
    Really not that much.



    bondjames wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Compare that to the Morocco chase scenes in MI:RN, where every vroom and roar of the engine was perfectly judged and super detailed. Genuinely had me on the edge of my seat.
    That is so what I wanted to see in the SP chase scene. I would have preferred no score and just the roar of the engines. Newman's amped up score suggested far more tension than what was actually taking place visually.

    Anyway, they obviously were going for a more 'playful' and 'retro' Bond effect with that scene and that's how it ended up.

    In fact, it could have done with a more playful score in way (a'la FYEO 2CV chase) because the score was sort of mismatched to the proceedings imho.

    What do you think SP did better....way better....than RN :-)?
    -Opening scene (pretitles). The 'coolness' factor was total Bond
    While SP´s opening scene had very cool elements, the audacity with which MI5 starts was hardly beatable.



    It had a way more convincing villain. It had a torture sequence that easily wins from that rather lackluster Bonedoctor-henchman. Hinx was terrific.
    While there may easily be more satisfying villains than the one in RN, the way the villain in SP is presented has much too much emphasis on his family issues to be in any way threatening or otherwise meaningful.
    I agree that the Bonedoctor was a bit dull, while Hinx was basically a lot more interesting. But again, RN knew much better to use the guy than did SP. The knife fight between the Bonedoctor and Ilsa was top notch. Hinx throwing Bond around like a toy, especially so shortly after Bond himself showed what a badass he is by knocking one guy out with one single punch and intimidating the other by just saying matter-of-factly, "No!" was fantastic. But then Hinx failing miserably at trying a Jaws hommage was characteristic of most of his use in the film: great potential, driven against the wall.
    As for the torture scene in SP, I found that totally misplaced. A throwback to early 00s torture porn á la MI3, or Tarantino. No tension, just sado maso pain. Not my thing at all.

    Let's try to be your devil's advocate then. In what ways did SP excell over RN? Especially concerning the latter half?
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    boldfinger wrote: »
    the way the villain in SP is presented has much too much emphasis on his family issues to be in any way threatening or otherwise meaningful.

    Too much emphasis?
    He explains to Madeleine in one passage of dialogue about Bond stoking the psychotic fire that burns inside and there's a single line about him realising his father had to die. Cold, calculated and unnerving. It's hardly hitting one over the head, it's purely rounding out an element of the character. The bluntness with which he toys with the lives of others is more threatening than any sense of physical strength or presence
  • edited November 2015 Posts: 11,119
    RC7 wrote: »
    boldfinger wrote: »
    the way the villain in SP is presented has much too much emphasis on his family issues to be in any way threatening or otherwise meaningful.

    Too much emphasis?
    He explains to Madeleine in one passage of dialogue about Bond stoking the psychotic fire that burns inside and there's a single line about him realising his father had to die. Cold, calculated and unnerving. It's hardly hitting one over the head, it's purely rounding out an element of the character. The bluntness with which he toys with the lives of others is more threatening than any sense of physical strength or presence

    =D>

    One last thing. Introducing a family background in the reasoning of the villain is by no means an error in writing or stupidity in screenplay/plot writing. It's more a fact of simply....disliking that aspect of family history. At first I was a bit sceptical about this, but I thought it was decently executed and with enough elaboration explained.

    Saying that "Bond should not have a family background in a Bond film" is merely the voice in someone's mind screaming for conservative familiarity. Similar to how critics slammed the ending of "OHMSS" when it premiered in 1969/1970. As if James Bond marrying a girl, and then being killed off at the very end "is not Bond".

    With such notions people are limiting themselves. And it doesn't let the franchise move forward in new territories. I agree that Bond is more realistic than, let's say "Batman Begins" and "The Dark Knight Rises". But there is also a similarity: Both Fleming's novels and DC Comics are firmly grounded in fantasy. Sometimes larger-than-life, bordering sci-fi, but most of the time they have a cinematic reality to them.

    Having said that: the entire personal background histories of Bond, of Silva, of 'M', and Blofeld -when re-reading the novels "You Only Live Twice" and "Octopussy"- that Sam Mendes, Marc Forster and Martin Campbell brought to us, feel entirely satisfying to me. And they are mostly properly explained to us as well........if you like it or not.


    Sadly, the "Mission: Impossible"-franchise isn't daring enough to do this. But for the reasons I just explained I actually really liked "Mission: Impossible III". It takes some guts to make a character vulnerable, to make him more 'rounded' with personal backgrounds and therefore deep emotional reasoning. Instead, Ethan Hunt plays the 'Bond of the past', that perhaps many conservative Bond fans miss so much. But not me. I've seen that with Bond already. Done that, been there in the past. Not with Bond. And this is one of the reasons why perhaps individually "Rogue Nation" is a very good film, but it also makes the actual franchise less appealing to me.
  • DrShatterhandDrShatterhand Garden of Death, near Belfast
    Posts: 805
    Rebecca Ferguson would make an amazing Gala Brand. Discuss lol
  • Rebecca Ferguson would make an amazing Gala Brand. Discuss lol

    I would make a perfect little brother of Ersnt Blofeld :-).
  • Posts: 6,396
    I watched this last night. I couldn't believe the amount of similarities between it and Spectre.
  • I watched this last night. I couldn't believe the amount of similarities between it and Spectre.

    And when I watched "Rogue Nation" in Juli, I couldn't believe the similarities it had with "Skyfall":
    https://hmssweblog.wordpress.com/2015/08/02/the-hunt-for-bond-mi-connections-to-007/
  • Posts: 9,846
    Rebecca Ferguson would make an amazing Gala Brand. Discuss lol

    A character I would love in Bond 25
    An interesting way to utilize the character in my opinion is for her to be the "new" 007 for a part of the film of course by the end Bond would get back his 00 number but having someone besides James Bond be 007 I think would really be amazing and finally put a nail in the code name theory bull shit coffin again just a theory and because the writers actors producers directors love character driven studies a monologue that encompasses a bit of what Mathis said in Royale (the novel) about how Bond needs to be Bond so normal people can live.


    As for Spectre verse MI:RN
    I loved both I honestly did I felt Rogue Nation was better and I pray eon would get Mcquarrie to at least WRITE Bond 25 if not write and direct. Again the last 2 bond films have been so unusal for me because they are not my favorite film either Year Bourne Legacy was my favorite of 12 and Rogue nation wins 2015... Actually if they got Tony Gilroy and Chris Mcquarrie to write the next Bond film I swear we would have a film that might even beat out Casino Royale.

  • Posts: 6,396
    I watched this last night. I couldn't believe the amount of similarities between it and Spectre.

    And when I watched "Rogue Nation" in Juli, I couldn't believe the similarities it had with "Skyfall":
    https://hmssweblog.wordpress.com/2015/08/02/the-hunt-for-bond-mi-connections-to-007/

    Very true. It does seem like a mish mash of previous Bond films too. I still enjoyed it though. Really good fun.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Very true. It does seem like a mish mash of previous Bond films too. I still enjoyed it though. Really good fun.
    And this is the key word imho. Damn good fun!
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,968
    Picked up a few new games from Best Buy lately, so I received $20 in giftcards total. Going to put this towards that 'Rogue Nation' steelbook! Looks lovely.
  • Posts: 5,767
    Let's try to be your devil's advocate then. In what ways did SP excell over RN? Especially concerning the latter half?
    Given that the second half of SP gave me a sinking feeling the first time around, and made me want to leave the cinema the second time around, while RN, while for sure not a perfect film, all three times had me happily guard my seat, I say in no way.




    RC7 wrote: »
    boldfinger wrote: »
    the way the villain in SP is presented has much too much emphasis on his family issues to be in any way threatening or otherwise meaningful.

    Too much emphasis?
    He explains to Madeleine in one passage of dialogue about Bond stoking the psychotic fire that burns inside and there's a single line about him realising his father had to die. Cold, calculated and unnerving. It's hardly hitting one over the head, it's purely rounding out an element of the character. The bluntness with which he toys with the lives of others is more threatening than any sense of physical strength or presence
    He´s slowly, savoringly explaining to Bond how he was the author of all Bond´s pain during the last nine years. Nine f***ing years. Hardly rounding out an element.





    Saying that "Bond should not have a family background in a Bond film" is merely the voice in someone's mind screaming for conservative familiarity. Similar to how critics slammed the ending of "OHMSS" when it premiered in 1969/1970. As if James Bond marrying a girl, and then being killed off at the very end "is not Bond".
    ...

    Sadly, the "Mission: Impossible"-franchise isn't daring enough to do this. But for the reasons I just explained I actually really liked "Mission: Impossible III". It takes some guts to make a character vulnerable, to make him more 'rounded' with personal backgrounds and therefore deep emotional reasoning. Instead, Ethan Hunt plays the 'Bond of the past', that perhaps many conservative Bond fans miss so much. But not me. I've seen that with Bond already. Done that, been there in the past. Not with Bond. And this is one of the reasons why perhaps individually "Rogue Nation" is a very good film, but it also makes the actual franchise less appealing to me.
    You´re wrongly generalising. Bond having a family background is not necessarily the end of the world, but a) one key element of film Bond from the beginning was that he was basically a hard boiled detective, right out of Hammett or Chandler novels, with an unshakeable stubbornness when he´s on the job. The very idea of this extrovert who never loses track of his aim is in a very direct and uncomplicated way inspiring to just get things done. A protagonist struggling with his personal affairs, or his employer struggling with his internal affairs is the opposite, getting things not done, being one´s own obstacle. Everyone may like what he or she likes, but those are two very different ideas. The first one doesn´t get stale.
    b) Bond has always been vulnerable, but the films knew much better than in recent days to build suspense from it.
    c) The family stuff in MI3 is basically made into a seperate story that has nothing to do with the actual story, and thus steals time from the film. We don´t need to see all those things to understand that Ethan Hunt has a wife. We knew before that he didn´t have a wife without any exposition to that effect, and we don´t need it to know that he has one now.
    d) The biggest problem with those newer character facettes is that they are badly executed. Bond falling in love and marrying in OHMSS is told clumsily, but through some magic it somehow works. Recent films by comparison make OHMSS an emotional ballet.

  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,216
    boldfinger wrote: »
    Let's try to be your devil's advocate then. In what ways did SP excell over RN? Especially concerning the latter half?
    Given that the second half of SP gave me a sinking feeling the first time around, and made me want to leave the cinema the second time around, while RN, while for sure not a perfect film, all three times had me happily guard my seat, I say in no way.




    RC7 wrote: »
    boldfinger wrote: »
    the way the villain in SP is presented has much too much emphasis on his family issues to be in any way threatening or otherwise meaningful.

    Too much emphasis?
    He explains to Madeleine in one passage of dialogue about Bond stoking the psychotic fire that burns inside and there's a single line about him realising his father had to die. Cold, calculated and unnerving. It's hardly hitting one over the head, it's purely rounding out an element of the character. The bluntness with which he toys with the lives of others is more threatening than any sense of physical strength or presence
    He´s slowly, savoringly explaining to Bond how he was the author of all Bond´s pain during the last nine years. Nine f***ing years. Hardly rounding out an element.





    Saying that "Bond should not have a family background in a Bond film" is merely the voice in someone's mind screaming for conservative familiarity. Similar to how critics slammed the ending of "OHMSS" when it premiered in 1969/1970. As if James Bond marrying a girl, and then being killed off at the very end "is not Bond".
    ...

    Sadly, the "Mission: Impossible"-franchise isn't daring enough to do this. But for the reasons I just explained I actually really liked "Mission: Impossible III". It takes some guts to make a character vulnerable, to make him more 'rounded' with personal backgrounds and therefore deep emotional reasoning. Instead, Ethan Hunt plays the 'Bond of the past', that perhaps many conservative Bond fans miss so much. But not me. I've seen that with Bond already. Done that, been there in the past. Not with Bond. And this is one of the reasons why perhaps individually "Rogue Nation" is a very good film, but it also makes the actual franchise less appealing to me.
    You´re wrongly generalising. Bond having a family background is not necessarily the end of the world, but a) one key element of film Bond from the beginning was that he was basically a hard boiled detective, right out of Hammett or Chandler novels, with an unshakeable stubbornness when he´s on the job. The very idea of this extrovert who never loses track of his aim is in a very direct and uncomplicated way inspiring to just get things done. A protagonist struggling with his personal affairs, or his employer struggling with his internal affairs is the opposite, getting things not done, being one´s own obstacle. Everyone may like what he or she likes, but those are two very different ideas. The first one doesn´t get stale.
    b) Bond has always been vulnerable, but the films knew much better than in recent days to build suspense from it.
    c) The family stuff in MI3 is basically made into a seperate story that has nothing to do with the actual story, and thus steals time from the film. We don´t need to see all those things to understand that Ethan Hunt has a wife. We knew before that he didn´t have a wife without any exposition to that effect, and we don´t need it to know that he has one now.
    d) The biggest problem with those newer character facettes is that they are badly executed. Bond falling in love and marrying in OHMSS is told clumsily, but through some magic it somehow works. Recent films by comparison make OHMSS an emotional ballet.

    Agreed with a lot of what is said there. I am not against the idea of what SPECTRE did. It was just clumsily done.

    Although I do disagree with the MI:3 statements. The whole drama from that worked quite well in relation to the rest of the plot. Skyfall had similar strengths.
  • Posts: 7,653
    And I liked what they did with Cruise starting of in jail for killing the murders of his wife and Brand feeling like shit the whole movie because he felt responsible for the dead of Hunts wife. And when we see her at the end you feel his pain as he has to leave his great love alone but are also surprised by the lengths they went to get Hunt undercover at the beginning. MI GP actually was quite personal without it stopping the story and yet enhancing some of the characters in their stance to Hunt.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,216
    SaintMark wrote: »
    And I liked what they did with Cruise starting of in jail for killing the murders of his wife and Brand feeling like shit the whole movie because he felt responsible for the dead of Hunts wife. And when we see her at the end you feel his pain as he has to leave his great love alone but are also surprised by the lengths they went to get Hunt undercover at the beginning. MI GP actually was quite personal without it stopping the story and yet enhancing some of the characters in their stance to Hunt.

    I'm actually watching it at the moment. Say what you will about Cruise - he is a bona fide movie star. The Burj climbing sequence is a work of art. I'm sure the Life Insurance guys at Cruise Wagner have suffered multiple heart attacks in the last 15 years.
  • SarkSark Guangdong, PRC
    Posts: 1,138
    I haven't read all of this thread, but I just rewatched Rouge Nation today, and even on my laptop it was amazing.
    I'm pretty sure I'm the only one who loves M:I-2 as much as I do. It's probably my favorite in the series. The last time I watched it, though, the problems with it really did stand out, but still, it's very good.

    I've always liked MI2, partially because it takes its plot from one of my favorite films ever, Notorious.

    People saying MI is copying Bond adrift I think. Sure, some plot points and action sequences are similar, but for it to really be copying Bond Ethan Hunt would have to become an entirely different character. I'd say MI is copying Burn Notice more than Bond. In spite of being elite spies/assassins (although Hunt is less of the later than Bond) their personalities are very different. Ethan Hunt isn't a clothes or food aficionado, nor is he a gambler (in spite of what Lane said in RN), nor is he a womanizer. He's fallen in love with a couple girls, but he's certainly not the 'love and leave em' type like Bond is. I'd have to imagine he'd be pretty broken up about the deaths of Solange and Severgine in a way that Bond never was.
  • DrShatterhandDrShatterhand Garden of Death, near Belfast
    Posts: 805
    People, it's ROGUE not ROUGE!

    (and yes, the good Doctor is a member of the Grammar Police!)
  • JohnHammond73JohnHammond73 Lancashire, UK
    Posts: 4,151
    466084-rouge_powder.jpg Nation :D
  • SarkSark Guangdong, PRC
    Posts: 1,138
    I know the difference, it was a simple typo.
  • Posts: 7,653
    Sark wrote: »
    I know the difference, it was a simple typo.

    It was more Freudian than you would care to admit. >:)

  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,968
    Christopher McQuarrie is returning to write, likely direct 'Mission: Impossible 6':

    http://www.slashfilm.com/christopher-mcquarrie-back-as-mission-impossible-6-director/
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited November 2015 Posts: 23,883
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Christopher McQuarrie is returning to write, likely direct 'Mission: Impossible 6':

    http://www.slashfilm.com/christopher-mcquarrie-back-as-mission-impossible-6-director/
    Great news!

    Hopefully we get more background on 'The Syndicate' and a return by Faust. If this is Cruise's swansong, I'd be very happy if the two of them are able to finish it all off and ride off into the sunset at the end of MI6..
  • DrShatterhandDrShatterhand Garden of Death, near Belfast
    Posts: 805
    bondjames wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Christopher McQuarrie is returning to write, likely direct 'Mission: Impossible 6':

    http://www.slashfilm.com/christopher-mcquarrie-back-as-mission-impossible-6-director/
    Great news!

    Hopefully we get more background on 'The Syndicate' and a return by Faust. If this is Cruise's swansong, I'd be very happy if the two of them are able to finish it all off and ride off into the sunset at the end of MI6..

    Anyone have any more details on how the ending was originally meant to go down before the re-shoots?

    They would be mad not to use Ilsa Faust again in the next one, a great character and a mesmerising performance from Rebecca Ferguson. So mesmerising in fact I may have to stick it on again tonight :P
  • Posts: 2,491
    bondjames wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Compare that to the Morocco chase scenes in MI:RN, where every vroom and roar of the engine was perfectly judged and super detailed. Genuinely had me on the edge of my seat.
    That is so what I wanted to see in the SP chase scene. I would have preferred no score and just the roar of the engines. Newman's amped up score suggested far more tension than what was actually taking place visually.

    Anyway, they obviously were going for a more 'playful' and 'retro' Bond effect with that scene and that's how it ended up.

    In fact, it could have done with a more playful score in way (a'la FYEO 2CV chase) because the score was sort of mismatched to the proceedings imho.

    What do you think SP did better....way better....than RN :-)?
    -Opening scene (pretitles). The 'coolness' factor was total Bond
    -seduction of Lucia - again 'total Bond'
    -funeral scene - same reason
    -time to slow down at L'Americain - it wasn't laid on thick, but one learnt a bit about the characters
    -Daniel Craig did a fantastic job as Bond, but so did Cruise as Hunt. About equal here. They brought new layers to their portrayals (humour/lightness with Craig and weariness/age with Cruise)
    -score was a wash. I liked Newman's work (unlike some) but also liked Kraemer
    -cinematography was excellent (but not the colour palette)

    That's really about it.

    MI was better in the following
    -action was just breathtaking and so inventively done
    -QoS homage was a work of art. I preferred the inventiveness of the 'rafters' fight to Hinx (which was derivative of better Bond efforts imho)
    -Ilsa Faust is my babe of the year (maybe the decade....running Vesper very close)
    -pacing was much tighter and tauter
    -subplot about spy agency was done better
    -it was just a more 'fun' night at the movies all round, like GE
    -colours were more vibrant and differentiable, even at night. Everything had a 'Bond' look in MI
    Bold- What ?
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited November 2015 Posts: 23,883
    dragonsky wrote: »
    Bold- What ?
    I'm referring to the Austria Vienna State Opera Turandot sequence in the film, which recalls the Breganz Austria Tosca sequence in QoS. I liked it in QoS but preferred the similar style sequence (including rafters fight) in MI-RN.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,216


    How bloody cool was Kraemer's music though?
Sign In or Register to comment.