• 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 TV series.

Gingerbread Demon

Yelling at the Vorlons
Premium Member
Not the 1988 remake but the original 60s show.

I'm debating getting this so can anyone tell me what your thoughts are after watching it? I've watched the odd episode here and there growing up but now that I'm an old fart I want to watch the whole thing. I'm just not sure what the experience will be like and have no real expectations.
 
I reviewed the whole series on my blog a few years back (link in my signature), though they're spoiler-laden. In sum, it's inconsistent, but largely worthwhile. It was really more of a heist/caper series than a spy series; it was inspired in part by the heist sequence in the movie Topkapi, but since broadcast standards of the era would never have allowed presenting criminals as heroes, they made it a spy show so that the crimes and frauds were being committed against enemies of the US in the name of peace and security.

For the most part, it was all about showing the mechanics of how the capers unfolded step by step; in a way, it was similar to CSI in that so much of it focused on wordless sequences of characters doing meticulous work, with prominent musical accompaniment. The music was a huge part of the show for most of its run, though the last two seasons rely mostly on stock music. And one thing that was not a huge part of the show was character development. The main characters were deliberately kept as ciphers, always subsumed beneath the roles they played each week, with at most one or two special episodes per season breaking with that pattern. The exceptions to that were the early first season, which did focus more on the characters before the decision to downplay them, and the fifth season, which was in many ways a deconstruction of the show's formula and delved much more into the characters, as well as doing more format-breaking episodes, e.g. capers that go wrong or crises that crop up after an offscreen caper ends.

For the most part, though, the series was relentlessly formulaic and had little suspense, since the plans usually went off like clockwork exactly as the team arranged them. Most of the suspense came from the fact that we didn't know every detail of the plan in advance -- they'd set up various tactics and gadgets they planned to use in the opening, but we wouldn't find out how they'd be used or why until later. I like to say M:I was more of a spy procedural than a spy thriller. Basically, it was completely unlike the movie series of the same name. The first movie started out recreating the standard formula, then completely blew it up and replaced it with a fast-paced conspiracy-thriller formula that pretty much all the sequels have followed. The only movie in the Ethan Hunt series that comes at all close to the spirit of the show is Ghost Protocol.

Although in the last two seasons, it abandoned the spy stuff (which was falling out of fashion) and became almost exclusively about battling organized crime in the US, something that they'd only done occasionally in earlier seasons. Which made it strange and illogical that they kept using the trope of secret message drops and self-destructing tapes to deliver instructions. That made sense when they were an off-book black-ops team doing extralegal dirty tricks that would require them to be disavowed if caught, but not when they were working openly and regularly with conventional law enforcement to pull stings on the mob. Although even the earlier seasons often glossed over the off-book/deniability angle and had the team cooperating with the police or other agencies.

So for the most part, it's not a particularly dramatically complex or challenging series, and it's slower-paced than modern TV. But it has a charismatic cast, often very clever capers, and terrific music.
 
I did a full rewatch a few years ago, an thoroughly enjoyed it all over again. If it was something you enjoyed in your youth like me, I imagine you'll enjoy seeing it again. Christopher's analysis is accurate, but for me there was also a huge nostalgia factor.
 
I think for me it's nostagia in part because the episodes that I did watch I really did enjoy. So I may give this a chance.

Will bookmark Christopher's page but avoid it so I don't get spoilt, but might just look in at the end of my first season or so.
 
I got into a Mission: Impossible rewatch session a few years back only because I wanted more of the Mad Men aesthetic. Everyone looked so cool pulling off those capers. So a lot of the stylistic choices for Mission: Impossible was meant specifically to make the spy business exciting and slick, maybe just a couple shades under Bond.

For the most part, the show is pretty solid for the most of its run, but a little garbled in the later seasons. but I do appreciate it outside of a nostalgia factor only because, obviously, I wasn't alive during that era. At the end of the day, it's a bunch of people trying to do their job and how any little thing can complicate the best laid plans. But it's also a lesson in project management and execution, too.

Additionally, if you start with season 1 and you're a fan of Agents of SHIELD, I keep drawing similarities between Dan Briggs and Phil Coulson, at least in terms of deadpan, near-monotone, professional leadership. I'd like to think that Clark Gregg looked at Briggs/Steven Hill for a little bit of inspiration, as Gregg is a bit be more dynamic in other roles. But of course, I have absolutely nothing to base that theory on.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Kor
I got into a Mission: Impossible rewatch session a few years back only because I wanted more of the Mad Men aesthetic. Everyone looked so cool pulling off those capers. So a lot of the stylistic choices for Mission: Impossible was meant specifically to make the spy business exciting and slick, maybe just a couple shades under Bond.
...

That's the main reason why I watch the original MI and other shows and movies of that time, more than any other era.

Kor
 
Additionally, if you start with season 1 and you're a fan of Agents of SHIELD, I keep drawing similarities between Dan Briggs and Phil Coulson, at least in terms of deadpan, near-monotone, professional leadership. I'd like to think that Clark Gregg looked at Briggs/Steven Hill for a little bit of inspiration, as Gregg is a bit be more dynamic in other roles. But of course, I have absolutely nothing to base that theory on.

That's an interesting observation, I hadn't thought of that!
 
I got into a Mission: Impossible rewatch session a few years back only because I wanted more of the Mad Men aesthetic. Everyone looked so cool pulling off those capers. So a lot of the stylistic choices for Mission: Impossible was meant specifically to make the spy business exciting and slick, maybe just a couple shades under Bond.

I find M:I to be very unlike James Bond. It's less about the glamour and action and sex appeal and more about careful procedure and competence porn.


At the end of the day, it's a bunch of people trying to do their job and how any little thing can complicate the best laid plans. But it's also a lesson in project management and execution, too.

I think one of its greatest weaknesses was that it rarely showed any major complications to the plans. In seasons 1 and 5 and in the second revival season, it was fairly common to show the plans going awry and the team having to improvise backup plans, and of course that's routine in the movies too, but for most of the series, the "complications" were limited to something like, say, Barney noticing a guard coming his way 15 seconds before the commercial break, then the guard just moving on without spotting Barney 15 seconds after the commercial break. Totally fake suspense that was barely a blip in the plan. Often, the bad guys were so totally outmatched and entrapped from the get-go that I almost felt sorry for them.


Additionally, if you start with season 1 and you're a fan of Agents of SHIELD, I keep drawing similarities between Dan Briggs and Phil Coulson, at least in terms of deadpan, near-monotone, professional leadership. I'd like to think that Clark Gregg looked at Briggs/Steven Hill for a little bit of inspiration, as Gregg is a bit be more dynamic in other roles. But of course, I have absolutely nothing to base that theory on.

I'm surprised, because I found Hill rather hard-edged and aloof as Briggs, while Clark Gregg has more of the avuncular warmth and charm of Peter Graves.
 
So for the most part, it's not a particularly dramatically complex or challenging series
I find that it's challenging in the sense that I actually have to watch with attention to keep up with what's going on...which is more than I can say for some of the current shows that I half-watch while doing other things.
 
I got the DVD box set a while ago, haven't gotten around to watching it yet, but like others I remember watching it when I was younger during the re-runs on the Beeb ont Wednesday or Thursdays (I think) at 18:00 after school.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top