• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Mission: Impossible - Final Reckoning (2025)

Yeah I heard rumblings that Tom Cruise butted heads with John Woo a bit so maybe he want's to not really remember that one

That might explain it. I'd been assuming it was McQuarrie's choice, but it would make sense if it was Cruise's preference, since he's the producer.


Aside from Luther there isn't really much continuity or purpose to it.

And Luther is a minor presence in MI2, which is basically a solo movie for Ethan.


Part 3 is when they started to reference back

Luther-The Shanghai pendulum move is going to be more difficult to crack than Langley was..."

I never noticed that. The first three films all seem completely self-contained to me.


Part 5 I don't remember any callback to previous movies.

The entire movie picks up on the tease at the end of Ghost Protocol about "the Syndicate" being the IMF's next target. Also, Director Hunley references the Langley break-in from the first film and the Kremlin incident from the fourth as parts of his case that the IMF is a renegade organization that should be shut down. And Brandt returns and references his history with the team from the previous film.
 
In the TV series, "the syndicate" was just their term for organized crime in general, when they did episodes focused on stateside mob-busting instead of international espionage (occasionally in earlier seasons and as the near-exclusive focus in the final two seasons). So it struck me as weird when the movies made it the name of an international spy ring.
 
I wish they had called M:i:III something without a number. (And less lame!)

I skip the second movie anyway, but it'd be nice to pretend it never existed when I see my copies on the shelf. ;)
 
That might explain it. I'd been assuming it was McQuarrie's choice, but it would make sense if it was Cruise's preference, since he's the producer.


Apparently Cruise wanted to use less CGI



Cruise was "adamant" that he was going to carry out these stunts himself for the movie. He pointed out that it would look far more realistic in the final movie. He complained that it was "far too easy" to see when a body double was being used.

Cruise likened using these methods to "cheating" the audience.

But in the end they came to a midway. However "part 2" seems to be the black sheep of the franchise which found it's footing starting with JJ Abram's tone in part 3.
 
However "part 2" seems to be the black sheep of the franchise which found it's footing starting with JJ Abram's tone in part 3.

I still feel both of the first two movies were failures in different ways; I think of them as failed pilots for a series that didn't start working until the third try. But evidently Cruise and McQuarrie disagree, given how much the past several movies have embraced elements from the first film.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top