Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
6 hours ago, UN Spacy said:

Fallout was superb...let’s see where this goes.

I remember thinking so, too, when I saw it. And yet I can't remember a single thing that happened in it... or the last one, for that matter... or the one before that...

A two-parter makes me immediately wary, but we'll see.

Posted

I thought Cruise looked really "stiff" in the last one, particularly jumping out of the truck and trying to run alongside Henry C.; the stunt double, lets film at the knees, running scene was unneeded filler as well.  All they can do at this point is either give Hunt a happy ending with the English chick or kill him off and pass the torch, preferably to Jeremy R.   

Posted (edited)

Man why the need for part 1 and 2? Following in Harry Potter and Hunger Games eh. Oh wells as long as they do not degrade into the ridiculous mess the Fast and Furious franchise have turned to.

Edited by eXis10z
Posted

I liked Henry Cavill in the last one and was hoping he would be in more of them up until the ending twist.  I’ll still check out MI 7.

  • 11 months later...
Posted

1, 2, and 3 are kinda standalone yes. I think the last 3 or so do tie together. I've seen them all but the last 3 or so only once.  1 and 3 are my favs.  The last one was very good IMHO. The one where Cruise actually flew the helicopter and Superman guy was in it. 

Posted

I admit to having a fondness for Ghost Protocol. It wasn't really great cinema, but I liked the premise of a spy movie where everything goes wrong and the gadgets are defective.

Posted

The last 3 have all been excellent and the original is a classic. 2 and 3 both kind of suck though with 3 being by far the worst. 2 would probably be decent if it wasn't so stereotypically John Woo, 3 is just a shitshow.

Posted (edited)
12 hours ago, Dynaman said:

You don't need to see any of the movies before any of the others.  Any plot points that are important are given enough detail to watch each of them individually.

That said, if you do watch them all, there are winks, nods, and other subtle references to the earlier movies in the latter three.  For example, I really enjoyed Ghost Protocol all that much more when I noticed the brief appearance in a non-speaking role of a certain minor character from the first movie. ;)

However, Dynaman is right.  The movies (especially the last few) were pretty much...

"But McQuarrie and Cruise are keenly aware that they can’t lean too heavily on the plot or people will lose interest. We don’t need speeches. And so the dramatic stakes of the set-up are pretty much enough. Nuclear bombs, a double agent or two, a homicidal mastermind—now go!"

https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/mission-impossible---fallout-2018

Edited by sketchley
Posted
13 hours ago, sketchley said:

That said, if you do watch them all, there are winks, nods, and other subtle references to the earlier movies in the latter three.  For example, I really enjoyed Ghost Protocol all that much more when I noticed the brief appearance in a non-speaking role of a certain minor character from the first movie. ;)

However, Dynaman is right.  The movies (especially the last few) were pretty much...

"But McQuarrie and Cruise are keenly aware that they can’t lean too heavily on the plot or people will lose interest. We don’t need speeches. And so the dramatic stakes of the set-up are pretty much enough. Nuclear bombs, a double agent or two, a homicidal mastermind—now go!"

https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/mission-impossible---fallout-2018

Agreed, and MI: Fallout was fantastic, if McQuarrie is in the for the next two then so am I.

-b.

Posted (edited)

I see the first 4 as stand alones. Rogue nation and Fallout are kinda linked since they touch on the same villain organization. I quite enjoyed the last 3.

Edited by eXis10z
Posted
11 minutes ago, eXis10z said:

I see the first 4 as stand alones. Rogue nation and Fallout are kinda linked since they touch on the same villain organization. I quite enjoyed the last 3.

While it's true that all 6 films are basically stand alones (in the sense that they provide enough detail within an individual movie to understand the greater context), I would say that 4, 5 and 6 are linked.  Such things as the disbanding of the IMF organization and the destruction of the Kremlin in 4 are relevant to the plot/in-universe world in 5, and 6.

And, as much as I totally dislike 3 and find it a redundant retread of 2, it kind of is essential if you want to fully understand Ethan Hunt's actions and character arc in 4 and 6.

Posted (edited)

If nothing else the last few have been better then the last few Bond movies.  I was not impressed with the (first) MI movie at all - well I was negatively impressed.

 

(edit - added in edit, forgot to write it first time around)

Edited by Dynaman
Posted
4 hours ago, Dynaman said:

If nothing else the last few have been better then the last few Bond movies.  I was not impressed with the MI movie at all - well I was negatively impressed.

With the exception of Skyfall which IMHO was quite good, I wholeheartedly agree that the recent MI movies have been infinitely more enjoyable than the most recent Bond movies.

-b.

  • 2 years later...
Posted

One thing is for sure and that’s the main actor playing the main character for so many big budget films for several decades. Most people stop at a trilogy 

  • 4 weeks later...
  • azrael changed the title to Mission: Impossible: Dead Rekoning Parts 1 (2022) and 2 (2023).
  • 3 months later...
  • 3 months later...
  • 4 months later...
  • 1 month later...
  • 3 months later...
  • 1 year later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...