It's by far the weakest of the series though 2 is pretty daft for the most part and Dougray Scott is insufferable in everything
Cruise and Ving Rhames are the only 2 characters to appear in all of them. Interesting that Henry Czerny is back for the new one too, a throwback to the very first movie.
The M:I franchise doesn't have a habit of bringing back female characters, Rebecca Ferguson is the big exception. I feel Michelle Monaghan was only brought back to tie up that loose end seeing as there was potential romance with Ferguson's character. That said it looks like Vanessa Kirby is back here and who knows if Atwell will be in both.
I thought they were both pretty good in that instalment too.
I wonder why Maggie Q & Jonathan Rhys Meyers were never brought back after MI3.
Meyers personal issues probably played a part with him however Maggie Q was made for this series.
Mission Impossible 2 was just across the board bad; never learnt what John Woo himself thought of his work there, but can't imagine he thinks it his best. Though his American films have been generally not-great.
Now, across the overall series the first sequel stands better among the varying approaches of the 6 films, but at the time it must have been especially jarring to fans of the original's suped-up spin on the TV show. The paranoid euro-espionage tone swapped for the more muscular, douchie swagger of number 2. Watching it again, it's a very early-2000s film in all sorts of ways.
But surely we have to thank MI2 (and Tom Cruise) also then, as they spared us Scott as Wolverine.
Oh come on, we all know M.I:2 was dreadful mainly because the useless Dougray Scott was the villain in it.
The script for 2 was bad, yeah. But (Dare I say it) I just don't think 90's Hong Kong gun action suited a western movie. There are certain aesthetics/tropes that are used in Asian action movies of the area that perfectly suit their region but do not travel well.
The CRAZY OTT gun play, the flashback sequences (Often to something that JUST happened), the extensive Slo-Mo.
Don't get me wrong, I am a HUGE fan of old-school John Woo and late 80's/90's/early 2000's Hong Kong cinema (I remember having to travel 30 miles to Cork to see Infernal Affairs in a small screen of a small cinema but still delighted- INFINITELY superior to it's remake, The Departed).
So I love all those tropes. And accept them as a stylistic choice. But they just look a bit silly in a western movie. (Or maybe it's just that they looked a bit silly in MI:2)
For me the issue with MI2 was it just wasn't a good story by Ronald D Moore and Brandon Braga or screenplay by Robert Towne
It had great action and set peices a stellar cast and John Woo did a good job with all of that but was left with a terrible script to work from.
And as above the soundtrack is class.
It set up the franchise and how it would grow and the direction it would go with those set peices.
I still like No 2 , its a bit over the top but enjoyable.
Tom looks good with the long hair and the Soundtrack by Hans Zimmer is probably the best of the franchise.
Injection is a brilliant composition.
Mission Accomplished is nice too
Looks great, minimal CGI, the way it should be.
That is how to do a trailer for an action movie whatever about cruise being a bit of a nut job in scientology the man knows how to do action
Yeah that 2nd film is so so bad. I’ve seen it on TV a couple of times since and it’s aged so badly too. The slow-mo action sequences look incredibly cheesy now and Cruise seems to spend half the movie posing with a silly haircut.
Thankfully order was restored in MI-3. That’s definitely one of my favourite action movies of the last 10-15 years, elevated by a great supporting cast. I felt Philip Seymour Hoffman was one of the most memorable villains since Hans Gruber. That opening 3 minutes….
Watching Mission Impossible 3 with the weight of his subsequent career in the back of my head, we were forewarned early on about JJ Abrams love and obsession for the Mystery Box trope. It was right there from the start
Second film was awful. The last fight scene is fairly cringe. Especially the part when he kicked up the gun from the sand and get the perfect shot off whilst the bad guy just looked at him.
I also enjoyed the third one the best. The rabbits foot.
Oh good, Henry Czerny is in it, might go along to see it so. Simon Pegg looks well rattled from the trailer - wonder was he on the sauce during it's making?
Every Tom Cruise movie is contractually obliged to see him running headlong someplace.
Love the MI series, all of them have been cracking movies imo, apart from the much maligned 2nd one. That was terrible, but all others have been great.
I think the 3rd one is still my favourite. The late Philip Seymour Hoffman put in a superb villain performance in that outing and the supporting cast (I think it was Simon Pegg’s first appearance in the series) were all very good too.
I saw the thumbnail and I thought it makes Tom Cruise look like he's pushing on in years (and yeah I know he actually is) but by the end of the trailer I wanted to see this film!
Read that article a while ago, it's very good.
I'd have been happy enough for it to stop at the 'pick a side' line, as everything plus the kitchen sink seems to be shown here. Still, good trailer.
He's an absolute madman......fair play to him though. When you watch a Tom Cruise film at the very least you're guaranteed there'll be no clumsy stuntman edits.
Apparently, they only started seriously filming for part two in Feb/March! That's after spending seemingly a whole year on principal photography on part one (longer if you count the COVID disruptions and hiatuses) and the initial suggestion that they'd be shot back-to-back.
The budget for the two combined must be eye-watering (closing on $300m for part one alone). But then if ever the money was on-screen during a blockbuster series, it's definitely the MI films.
I watched that and thought "this has to be a trailer for both parts" but no, just part one. I have to say I agree the M:I series is one of the best action wise but I thought Fallout was overstuffed with action for the sake of it (did they really need to Halo jump to a party in Paris?). I'm slightly concerned this might suffer from the same problem and I also know McQuarrie likes to write on the fly, which again I think showed in Fallout. I still enjoyed it but Ghost Protocol is still the best for me.
Apparently, yes. Don't have the article but there was an interview that went into it, the logistics of performing it safely.
Did Cruise do the motorbike off a cliff stunt near the end of the trailer?
I'd agree with that. Number 2 was bad, really bad and has aged like milk, but the whole series has been the gold star for Hollywood action blockbusters. Fallout set the bar and would consider it on a par with Fury Road for best in class.
Now, much of that success' foundation is built on its star's willingness to risk life and limb for the pursuit of increasingly crazy stunts. Even when Cruise did injure himself during the shoot of Fallout, the accident made it into the final cut. But the end result are a set of movies whose action is just unparalleled in American cinema. Once Cruise retires from action cinema, you'd have to imagine that'll be it for the series.
I wonder what Christopher McQuarrie will do after cos you'd imagine he has opened a good number of doors for himself.
As for the trailer? Yes please. Looks absolutely stonking. Proper action cinema.
The only thing I want is for it to release this July 😄
Discuss: Mission Impossible is the only consistently great long-running Hollywood series, and the new one looks bloody fantastic.
Steam train set piece. Car chase in a little yellow car. I mean, what else do you want?
___
Title confirmed by Cruise. https://variety.com/2022/film/news/mission-impossible-7-official-title-tom-cruise-1235243504/
Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wc.vanillicon.com/v2/c1e0d38a819861b1a3d4283e673bb7e8.svg)
