She's the daughter of Vanessa Redgrave's arms-dealer Max from the first M:I movie (the one who was trying to buy the NOC List from Jon Voight's Jim Phelps), and an arms-dealer herself, but with the caveat that she's also an informant for the CIA (to stay out of prison, unlike her mother) and rather paradoxically —much like her mother, as mentioned in the film— likes to give much of her arms-dealing profits to charity. So she'll likely be an on-again, off-again ally and/or foe of Ethan's team in upcoming installments depending on how the situation challenges her flexible personal ethics and code of honor.
Just out of the cinema from seeing it. Absolutely loved it. I said earlier in the thread that for my money the series got better as it went along, apart from RN not quite being as good as GP. However, I think that this one topped either of them, even if it had a slightly slower start than most MI movies. The location card at the start provoked a giggle in my cinema. Well, mainly from me admittedly. Can we have a seventh movie please? Kaythanksbye.
Question is, how long can cruise keep this up for? He's 56 now, still doing amazing work on these films, but surely he's only got one, maybe two at a push left in him?
Well they have been making the movies quicker now. There used to be 5-6 years between the movies, now it's down to 3. So I can see at least 2-4 more depending on money they make. Two for sure with Cruise as the lead and then maybe introduce some new action star to be his sidekick and take over more of the crazy work if need be. I mean hell we are getting another Indiana Jones movie with Ford at like 80, so why not Cruise doing these movies until 70, end at 10 or do spinoffs.
I see what you're saying but part of the draw with these movies is cruise doing these ever more outrageous stunts himself, as far as I know Harrison Ford doesn't do this, and let's face it, him doing another indy film at his age is just ridiculous. It was pushing it last time and that was ten years ago. At least cruise still looks the part. I just think his body has got to start calling time on this sooner or later. He'll be almost 60 by the next one if it's made. I guess if it starts becoming difficult for tom he can always revert to a good old stunt double. I want to see more of these movies, bar number 2 I think they're all excellent.
I remember not really liking the first few and then loving the last few. So I'm otimpistic we will get at least 2 more. Maybe even a final trilogy and end it at 9.
I thought the first one was decent, and fresh for it's time, 2 I thought was just dumb, and was the wrong choice of director for that movie. 3 I thought was superb, and the best in the series at the time, ditto for 4, 5 I thought was excellent, but I think I still maybe preferred Ghost Protocol, but even then only slightly. 6 I think will be regarded as an all time action classic in years to come. I think it's that good.
I haven't seen it yet but the 2-3 reviews I have read said it was the best action movie in a generation, it's one of the best ever made, and one of the best in the last 25 years. (Which would be a generation.) My mom's birthday is coming up and maybe I'll take her to it. Thankfully it's an action movie and I don't need to hear it. (She will talk during it.)
I can see Cruise doing at least one more, maybe 2. I suppose he could do a couple more if they cut down on some of the stunts.
I think it's easily as good as any of the bourne films, if not better, and hands down better than any bond film in terms of pure thrills. The action sequences are all fantastic, inventive and most of all coherent whilst still managing to be visceral. The score though. My god it's good in this. Menacing, epic, and quite zimmer-esque in parts. Like I said in an earlier post, the whole thing comes across like a nolan film at times. I've only seen it once but I can't wait for the blu ray already. Always a sign of a class film.
Sixth verse, same as the fifth, more or less. Fallout is, in some ways, a lot like Spectre is to Skyfall - it's a rare consecutive returning director making a direct sequel that's even longer, even vaguer about the baddies' motivations, and largely swaps the glamour and glitz of its predecessor for a barren, stripped-down look.* Yes, the technical direction, stunts, and editing are all first-rate, and I certainly got my $5 AMC Tuesday ticket's worth on a big-ass screen, but I'm so very tired of all these bland, generic, overwhelming white "arms dealer" antagonists. To be clear, I have zero problem with evil white villains: make them neo-Nazis, Thanos-style Malthusians, classical paganists, fanatical anti-Islamists, aspiring global rulers, US Presidents, whatever; but the specific angle of apolitical white arms dealers has been done to death way too many times over. In M:I-III, the villain was an apolitical American arms dealer. In Ghost Protocol, the villain was a European white dude who wanted to set off a bunch of nukes to "cleanse the planet," or some sh*t. In Rogue Nation (which did not, in fact, feature a rogue nation, because that might have been political), the villain was a white British (I think) baddie who... dealt arms, or something. What's more, all four Craig 007 films to date have centered around white arms dealers of various kinds; not one has had any discernible ideology; and the same goes for the last few Fast & Furious villains, though at least Furious 7 dared to give us an arms dealer of color as well as Statham's arms dealer. And now, in Fallout, the villains are largely white baddies who want to set off a trio of nukes because "suffering causes peace." They don't even bother speechifying about why that might be true; they just repeat it a few times with no elaboration whatsoever, and I am so very bored. And, to be clear: we aren't getting all these apolitical, motivation-free white arms dealer baddies because the filmmakers have any kind of point to make; we're getting them because that's the easiest way to offend nobody, including the international and Chinese markets. So, given that nobody has anything to say, we get yanked around with double-crosses, hidden identities, and all that crap for nearly 2.5 hours, and in the end, it all means exactly as much as it did when it began, which is Nothing at All. What's the point of repeatedly saving the (fictional) world if no one in it ever has an opinion about anything? Compare this to Fury Road, which I didn't love as much as many, but at least it had something to express, and did so boldly. Grade: B. It's all very expertly staged, but I really can't see ever watching it again; the characters and plot are just too hopelessly dull. At least Rogue Nation had considerably more Ferguson and Baldwin to liven up the scenes. And, I'm still waiting for the return of Nyah Nordoff-Hall. Yep, unrepentant fan of M:I-2 here. At least it had actual characters. * (Just to clarify, not that anyone cares: I much prefer Spectre to Skyfall, but prefer Rogue Nation to Fallout.)
That's a fair analysis. I think fallout is just so damn exciting though. I can see the need for a different antagonist however. By the way, I also much prefer spectre over skyfall also.
^ Speaking of Skyfall, no wonder I was so lukewarm on Fallout: as Cracked notes, it's a virtual plagia - erm, was clearly inspired by that highly overrated Bond picture. Anyhow, two great M:I vids:
Ha, I enjoyed that Cracked review, though I like both films. I must admit, when I saw stills of Cruise & co standing on snowy wastes, I thought they were on the Scottish highlands rather than Kashmir and I immediately thought of Skyfall. Of course, MI2 did the disgruntled ex-spy before Bond. Then again, as he was Scottish and called Sean, it’s hard to resist the inference that he too owed a debt to 007...
I think the MI films from 3 onwards whether inspired by bond or not are just so much more entertaining and stylish than the craig bonds which I find almost dour in comparison.
Mission Impossible: Fallout Spoiler The sixth movie in the Mission Impossible series, where Ethan Hunt and his Impossible Missions Force team find their past catching up with them, especially regarding the events surrounding the Syndicate. A new group of foes calling themselves the Apostles have arisen, phoenix-like from the ruins of the Syndicate, and Hunt chooses to go after them. However something goes wrong when they are to obtain some stolen Plutonium. Hunt chooses to save a member of his team, rather than grab it and run. As a result of this, the CIA wants their own man in on Hunt's next mission to infiltrate a weapons trade deal. Hunt (and the Secretary) doesn't like this. The skydiving scene above Paris is quite effective. So are the events in the art gallery. The fight in the bathroom is very effectively choreographed. The twist of Ilsa's involvement in the events is revealed in a very efficient way. The scenes that follow show that Hunt hadn't lost his improvisational smarts, as it were. The following scenes with the 'Widow' are rather good also. The chasing around Paris involving Solomon Lane is done rather well (showing effective initial planning and improvisation in Hunt's part). The scene with the police officer shows Hunt's compassion in an effective manner. The scenes involving the twists and double crossing in London are done rather well (including the lack of trust the CIA director shows). As are the rooftop chase scenes (even a particular one), even Benji's confusion. Thus the movie then goes to Kashmir, a clue set up in the initial scene. Julia's appearance effectively closes those stages in Ethan's life. The helicopter chase scenes were done very well, although the drama around the nukes may have been drawn out. 8.75/10.
Out of all the MI movies so far 4, 5, and 6 are my favourites. I just didn't care for the first 3 all that much.