Mission: Impossible - Rogue Nation (Cruise, Renner, Pegg, Rhames)
- Thread starter Aragorn
- Start date
Hm. "Disbanding." I still like the original concept of the TV series, where the IMF seemed to be basically one nominally retired agent running an off-book, garage-band intelligence operation out of his apartment using amateur operatives, with no direct contact with the government except through secret message drops. The more closely integrated the IMF is with the government, the more pointless the iconic "Your mission, should you choose to accept it" recordings become. (Heck, that alone implies it's a volunteer operation, in direct contradiction to the movies where Ethan never seems to have a choice but to follow orders.)
Then again, maybe that's where the plot of this movie is heading. Maybe if the IMF is disbanded as an integrated subdivision of the CIA, it could then go back to being the kind of unofficial, underground operation implied by the original TV premise. I doubt that's what will happen, but it might be cool.
Then again, maybe that's where the plot of this movie is heading. Maybe if the IMF is disbanded as an integrated subdivision of the CIA, it could then go back to being the kind of unofficial, underground operation implied by the original TV premise. I doubt that's what will happen, but it might be cool.
Yes, needless to say, but that's essentially my point. Three times now, he's been falsely accused of treason and then cleared. So the CIA would have to be pretty stupid to see Ethan Hunt accused of treason again and not go, "Hey, wait a minute, is this another frame job? Which one of us is the designated traitor this time?" I mean, it's a Boy Who Cried Wolf situation by this point. Nobody should be gullible enough to fall for it again.
Though on the other hand, I could kind of see Ethan Hunt getting fed up with the CIA's constant ingratitude and mistrust and deciding to betray them for real. After all, what have they ever done for him?
I dunno, just because you're found innocent of the same crime twice, the 'stigma' of having been accused of treason might actually make it MORE plausible that people will accept that you're capable of the crime. Like, if someone said to me that Christopher had been twice accused of murder, but was acquitted both times, I'd STILL think: "Maybe he did murder someone..."- particularly if someone said: "Christopher just killed someone!"
We can debate the in-universe logic all we want, but what I'm really trying to say is that I'm sick of the filmmakers constantly falling back on the same trope. Granted, aside from Ghost Protocol and the first 20 minutes of the first film, the M:I film series has never had very much at all in common with the M:I TV series, but the TV series was never about the heroes being on the run from their own government. But that's pretty much the only trick the movies have in their bag, M:I:II being the sole exception. Just once, I'd like to see a decent movie where Ethan Hunt is in his government's good graces for the entire film.
You just described, basically, the thin pretense of ISIS during the first five seasons of Archer.
As it's pointed out in this movie, in the first movie they broke into CIA headquarters and took the NOC list, in Ghost Protocol they neclear launch codes to a known terrorist. The IMF have been known for skirting the law, but both of those actions are treasonable.
Maybe that's why they decided to make that always be the case.
Well, that's the whole point, isn't it? To be unofficial and disavowable, in order to conduct missions too sensitive, dangerous, or illegal for the US to be caught doing. Except the problem there is that M:I:III in particular treated them like a fully integrated part of the CIA, operating out of Langley and sitting in on meetings with the director.
That's exactly the problem. When the makers of a film series deliberately decide to do the same thing every time, that's called unoriginality. Lots of film series just try to repeat themselves over and over, but that is hardly a good thing.
That was the point of view of Hunley, Alec Baldwin's character it's doubtful teh entire CIA thought that way. But then the bottom fell out of his theory after he learned the Syndicate really existed. But then the Syndicate existed without the knowledge of the CIA and the IMF, so really unless he had some faith in Hunt there was no reason to believe him.
Thought the movie was good, but nowhere near the level of the last one (or even MI3 frankly). It's entertaining and has some really well-executed sequences (especially with the plane and opera scenes), but there was still this vague feeling of "been there, done that" that seemed to kind of permeate the entire thing.
And somehow I was really expecting them to have more fun with the evil, "anti-IMF" idea, with one group pitted against the other. But there was nothing particularly memorable or unique about any of the Syndicate villains, and they might as well have been the usual random henchmen we see in every MI movie. Which just seems like a huge wasted opportunity.
And somehow I was really expecting them to have more fun with the evil, "anti-IMF" idea, with one group pitted against the other. But there was nothing particularly memorable or unique about any of the Syndicate villains, and they might as well have been the usual random henchmen we see in every MI movie. Which just seems like a huge wasted opportunity.
Yeah I know it'll never happen now, but more and more I wish we could see MI return to television with the format and style of the original series, and the great ensemble feel that show had-- and with everyone on the team having a pretty equal and important role in each week's mission (and where everything doesn't hinge mostly on just one guy).
Even if the movies have been pretty fun and entertaining for the most part... it's still just not the Mission:Impossible I really grew up loving and think works the absolute best.
Actually I'm pretty they were only accused of treason in Ghost Protocol so the US could avoid a war with Russia after the villains of the movie framed the IMF for a terrorist attack, and the plan was for them to "escape" US custody get some "overlooked" equipment and track down the guys who actually did it.
So really it was only 2 films out of 4 before now that they did it.
That's disappointing to hear. I've always liked the idea of the team encountering enemies who are basically an evil version of themselves. That would've been a terrific idea for recurring villains. But the only time it was done on the show, really, was in the fifth-season episode "My Friend, My Enemy," where a team consisting basically of evil counterparts of the IMF crew kidnapped Paris (Leonard Nimoy) and brainwashed him to turn on his own team (so that he was pretty much his own evil counterpart). And there was an earlier 2-parter, I think it was "The Bunker," where they faced off against a solo villain who was a master of disguise like Rollin Hand.
Then, of course, there was the second movie, where the villain was a rogue IMF agent, and where he and his allies basically made more use of IMF-style methods than Ethan Hunt (and his barely-there partners) did.
It already has happened, except it was called Leverage. That show basically was a modern Mission: Impossible. Sure, it was about a team of Robin Hood-style con artists rather than spies, but the fact is that M:I was always basically a heist/caper show at heart; the spy thing was just because '60s network censors wouldn't have approved of a show where the heroes were criminals, so they needed a patriotic justification for their dirty tricks and con games.
Ghost Protocol was the first movie in the series that actually felt like a Mission: Impossible movie to me. The first three were just The Adventures of Ethan Hunt. Well, the first act of the original movie felt pretty much like M:I, but that movie was basically about tearing down the M:I formula altogether.
Truthfully only Solomon Lane was the villain although I really though Rebecca Ferguson really stole the movie. And Hunt brought Lane down in a smart way not a shootout or a fight scene. The car/motocycle chase scene was very well filmed.
Really though this was a plotline that might've gone for more than one movie, kind like the IM version of Spectre. But I thought it was much better than the first three movies where all we got were disgruntled former IMFers with some masterplan to get rich.
Yeah I tried watching a few episodes of Leverage, but it was just a little too cutesy and lightweight for my taste.
The updated Mission:Impossible series worked pretty well, but it ddin't catch on having only two seasons.