It’s outdoing modern Bond I would say. The last few of those movies haven’t been as interesting as these movies.It looks great but I don't want people saying it's outdoing Bond when I count at least three, if not more, things Bond's already done (some of them decades ago)
I was thinking the same thing, from the trailer it looks like she's an actual member of the IMF team.I hope Rebecca Ferguson's Ilsa is just straight on their side the whole time instead of having to play both sides or having conflicting motives again.
Man, movie posters are just not the same these days. Just feel lazy.
Character posters for Dead Reckoning: Part I:
https://twitter.com/MissionFilm/status/1668604331359342593
They include Pom Klementieff as a character named Paris and Shea Whigham as a character named Briggs. This seems to confirm what Rogue Nation implied in 2015 when it said the IMF was only 40 years old: The movie series is a reboot of the 1966-73 TV series, not a sequel. Which means that the much-reviled version of "Jim Phelps" in the original movie was not "our" Jim Phelps, just another character of the same name, like Paris and Briggs here. (Well, unless it turns out that these are the children/grandchildren of the original characters. Although I kinda figure "The Great Paris" was a stage name.)
I remember hearing an early rumor a couple of years back that there would be characters in the 2-part film named Rollin Hand and Lambert. Did they change that, or are they going to be in Part 2?
Well, we die already get an Agent Carter in Ghost Protocol.
Well, Jane Carter, so it's not quite the same. Still, it may have been an homage. Ghost Protocol is the M:I movie that most strongly homages the series, with its strong focus on the caper mechanics rather than just intrigue and huge stunts, and with a number of the team's gambits resembling ones used in the show. It's the only M:I movie that feels like the series to me.
Yes, which is why Ghost Protocol is my favourite MI film outside of the first one (and even then I love the first for it's style as much as it's MI'ness)
Since MI's not based on an original novel, why not call the last two movies differently?
Because they're telling a single two-part story, presumably, with the two films shot back to back with the same cast. I suspect they wanted to get the most out of Tom Cruise before he aged out of the role.
There have been plenty of 2-part movies over the decades, not all of them based on novels -- for instance, Kill Bill Part 1 & 2 and the Spider-Verse sequels. Sometimes a story is just too long to fit into one movie.
Except the Spider-Verse sequels had different titles on release, the same for Endgame/Infinity War, its entirely possible the same could happen with Dead Reckoning Part 2
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.