Brad Bird all but confirmed as "Mission: Impossible IV" director

I agree with the flare thing and actually enjoyed Brant trying to make sense of it(for the viewer?).

We could make off screen excuses I suppose for the other stuff. High profile people like this work on reputation and paranoia so as Kaiser Sose says, "the devil only sticks his head out once"(or rarely). Email, texts, other drops work better because the fewer people you meet the fewer that could betray you? The Hallway trick? Benji already had control of the building. Perhaps he locked stairwell doors and elevators so no one could come to those floors AND locked any room doors to prevent access into the hallway. As for Benji getting into sensitive areas we just assume he's as good at his area of expertise as Hunt is at his.

Or we just suspend disbelief, whichever is easier.

 

There was a little spy film called The Saint that was released back in '97 that got a lot of critical drubbing for not being faithful to its original source material and the fact that the main character's elaborate disguises did not pass the mustard upon closer scruitny.

I say the same when it comes to M:I-4 and consider this film to be a bar below the film I mentioned above. Now the original M:I was intelligent and set a new bar for spy thrillers until The Bourne Series (In particular, The Bourne Ultimatum) came along and topped and blew away everything else that came before it in terms of execution and technique.

I rank the original film and the 3rd one above this one, but would rather catch this one on a rainy day than the 2nd one which has sat on my DVD shelf unwatched all these years. To tell you the truth, the entire Bourne Series and even Val Kilmer's The Saint blow this one out of the water -- Which is pretty sad, but what can you pretty much say about the lack of quality of your typical summer/winter popcorn flicks nowadays? The tower climb was inspiring, but all the "gadget glitches" pretty much felt "meh" at their failed attempts at comedy.

I do have a question, though:

Was there a stinger after the end credits or was Ethan vanishing into the darkness the final shot of this film?

 

Well yeah, I agree the Bourne movies are of a much higher quality, but they're also done in a very different style than the Mission: Impossible movies.

M:I is clearly supposed to be a bit more comic booky and tongue-in-cheek (much like the TV series it sprang from), and I think works perfectly well that way.

 

Actually the M:I movies are virtually nothing like the TV series. They have practically nothing in common beyond a few catchphrases. The series wasn't "comic booky and tongue-in-cheek" at all. There were other '60s spy shows that fit that description, notably The Man from U.N.C.L.E. and The Avengers, but M:I wasn't one of them. It was generally a very serious, matter-of-fact, procedural-style show about a group of very cool, dispassionate professionals carrying out complex, methodical schemes through carefully planned deceptions, methodical hard work, and clockwork timing. It wasn't a star vehicle for a single action hero, but an ensemble show where all the team members had their own roles to play and their own personalities were almost perpetually subsumed within the false identities they adopted. Its moments of humor were intermittent and generally quite understated, and it was frequently pretty dark for a '60s show, with the protagonists often callously arranging for the villains to kill each other off. And it was about as far as you can get from the frenetic, over-the-top action of the films. They did have occasional chase scenes, fight scenes, and the like, but it tended to focus more on the meticulous planning and step-by-step execution of the team's plots. It was a product of a time when audiences could tolerate a much slower pace to their storytelling. (Although I often think it has a lot in common with CSI, another show that depends heavily on long, dialogue-free sequences of characters doing meticulous, detailed work, with musical accompaniment to keep it from boring the audience. Except the musical style on M:I was very different.)

 

Hunt disappearing was the final shot. There was no scene after the credits.

 

So Hunt faked his wife's death so she can go on free living... without him?

I don't quite understand that aspect. Like real-life secret agents wouldn't Hunt have a mundane cover-identity, job and facade to present to the world while between missions or during his down time? If his cover has been compromised then he's no good or use as a secret agent anymore, right? Or is a "common" thing for IMF agents to pretty much put their entire life's goals and ambitions aside to gallivant across the globe from one mission to the next? Surely there isn't enough of a constant stream of missions to take on internationally? There must be times where Hunt and others have to spend time days or even weeks in an office in Langley filling out paperwork, planning and researching missions.

I really liked this movie but that point seemed like an odd one thrown in for the sake of some-sort-of impact. It would have been better had Hunt really lost his wife and simply forgave Jason Bateman's stronger twin for his part in her death. The ending just didn't make much sense to me.

And also, if I am recalling the other movies correctly, I believe this is the first MI movie where the target bad-guy isn't a former or corrupt IMF agent. This time it was a genuine terrorist.

On a nitpicky side of things, it makes some sense their espionage wall had to change its perspective to give the viewer the right image. It sort of reminded me of the Wii/Wiimote way of giving a glasses-less 3D image with head-tracking. (Essentially by reversing the position of the Wiimote and the sensor bar.)

[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jd3-eiid-Uw[/yt]

Like we see in MI3 this works only for one person at a time since the system wouldn't be able to show two images at once for multiple viewers. This seems like a bit of a flaw in this IMF device as it pretty much has to rely on the fact the place they need to infiltrate only has the One Inept Guard and no one else will walk through the room (causing the system to freak out.)

It would've made more sense if created a genuine 3D image using the current technology of doing it without glasses -what the newest generation of the Nintendo hand-helds have. And yes that's a technology with its own limitations and flaws but if we're going to accept this head-tracking holo-wall thing and the other IMF technology we're shown (the gloves make little sense on how they'd work) a genuine 3D wall that can support multiple viewers wouldn't be that much more of a stretch than what we were given anyway.

 

Well after all Hunt went through in the last movie to save her, they probably felt it would seem cruel just to kill her off in the next one.

And as a big fan of that movie, I kinda have to agree. She had a big role in that, and deserved a better fate than to be killed off screen and wind up in pieces somewhere.

 

The whole idea that an IMF agent has an on screen family was messed up to begin with.

 

For those getting back into all things MI, movie or tv, I just saw the short lived one season of the '88 reboot attempt at the store last night. It was branded with a sticker "Finally on DVD" just in time to tie into the newest movie no less. Coincidence I'm sure.

 

I don't expect the movies to be exactly like the show. But each of the previous three films had at least one sequence that payed lip service to the show. In the first one it was the mission at the Embassy that went tits up. In the second one it took place at a race track. And the third one was the sequence in the Vatican.

My question is does this film have at least one sequence like that?

 

When you say "lip service" do you mean an espionage scene?

In this one there's one at the beginning involving an attempt to extract information at the Kremlin. There's also a neat scene later in the movie where a ruse is played to try and get information from an informant.

I think this movie probably had the best espionage scenes of all of the movies.

 

I think "lip service" in this sense means homage given what Aldo's post was about.

 

Indeed, I quite liked the dual-deceptions in the hotel sequence.

 

Yeah the dual deception bit was neat and gave us our obligatory "Ethan Hunt performs a death-defying stunt using an apparatus allowing him to circumvent gravity" scene that all of these movies have had.

 

Obligatory, definitely, but also incredible in IMAX. I wonder if the blu-ray will switch aspect ratios like the 'Dark Knight' and 'Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen' for IMAX sequences.

 

i enjoyed it immensely. definitely one of the best in the series.

 

Just watched this today for the first time. As my post above shows, I've long given up the idea that the movies will play out like the show at all. But I was really surprised with this one, it felt the the most like the show, and it was nice seeing Cruise share the screen with an actual team this time. Unlike Ethan being the sole star of the previous 3.

Probably my favorite since the first, and I'm really kicking myself for not seeing it in theaters. I say bring on a fifth film!

 

As much as I hate this "remake" fad, I'd much rather see a new trilogy that only keeps some elements of the movies and instead tries to pay tribute to the original show (similar to how the 80's sequel treated the original with the respect it has earned).

 

Yes. As I said in my own review, Brian DePalma made a DePalma-style spy thriller, John Woo made a Woo-style spy thriller, J. J. Abrams made Alias: The Movie... but Brad Bird went and made an actual Mission: Impossible movie. (Although it's still an Ethan Hunt movie and includes the tropes of that series as well.)

 

I never really read through this thread when the movie was in theaters as I didn't want to spoil myself, so I must have missed your thoughts on the film.

You are right though. Do disagree with your assessment of the first film. It is a pretty good adaption of the show, until Ethan is set up and must go on his own.