380 replies to this topic

[Seannery]

I got to see Mission Impossible early and it was great. I loved it! And this is from someone who is no big Cruise fan, who was slightly disappointed with the first 2 MI's and who thinks Ethan Hunt isn't near Bond as a character.

MI3 really works because they humanize Hunt smartly with a true love and friends. They kept the big action set pieces and high octane style but the whole thing gets emotional resonance and an extra push from emotional investment. They make a character I never really cared for much more compelling and no longer callow.

They didn't reinvent Hunt or what the series did before--they just subtly and simply created more emotion and character. You care more now. I ALWAYS THOUGHT THIS IS WHAT TO DO WITH BOND--don't restart the whole series and go fully in a new risky direction BUT instead just smartly add depth and write the character better without changing him in basic personality or looks for that matter. STRONG CHANGE COULD HAVE BEEN DONE WITHOUT THE OVERLY RISKY MOVES OF CR. NO NEED FOR A REBOOT TO MAKE EFFECTIVE SMART CHANGE.

As the AICN guy who read the CR script said--"mammoth changes aren't necessary to bring a franchise a healthy shot of adreneline or freshness. MI3 shifts more to characters and doesn't start from scratch. It gives emotional resonance to the action, not mere spectacle. These differences are often simple and subtle YET PROFOUND--and falls in nicely with what Bond could have done." Seeing MI3 I see he was so right on here.

Hey CR can turn out fine but these big changes in rebooting the franchise and the character(along with an unconventional looking Bond) really were an unnecessary risk. We'll see if it pays off. It is fitting that this movie is set to a large degree in a casino since these changes are quite a large roll of the dice.

I'll tell you one thing--if CR is as good as MI3 then i'll be estatic. And this was done with high octane action and suspenseful set pieces. Here's a tip--the "secret" kidnapping inside the vatican itself is a knockout!! Can CR do it with it's roll of the dice--i'm not sure at all.

[luciusgore]

I agree. The huge reboot concept doesn't make sense to me either. It was unnecessary. But it's kinda cool in a way, seeing Bond get his stripes.

[Mister Asterix]

[mra]No reboot huh?

Funny, I don

[Problem Eliminator]

I also loved M:I:III, but comparisons to CR are unfair. The former is just the "next chapter" in a series tailored specifically for the big screen. The latter is based on the very first incarnation of a character that has been long established in books, movies and beyond. Continuing Bond w/o significant change -turning CR into another Broz OTT entry- would have wasted the great source material. I am no fan of the complete reboot, but some sense of "beginning again" is required in CR as it is based on the book that first establishes the character that some may argue has been "done to death" for 40+ years onscreen.

I am confident that CR will be enjoyable despite the radical changes the moviemakers have promised. M:I and Bond are two different animals.

[Seannery]

[quote name='Mister Asterix' post='552191' date='5 May 2006 - 20:23']
[mra]No reboot huh?

Funny, I don

[Tarl_Cabot]

It would be alot cooler if Judi Dench wasn't in it. I hate her attitude against Bond during the Brosnan years and the trailor suggests it will be even worse with Craig...she has no respect for Bond. Sees him as a "blunt instrument". The old school M(s) respected Bond's intellect and sophistication. I really think this could have been an A+ Bond film but with Dench I think it she'll be a liability. It will still be a cool Bond film and infinitely better than the last few but why not shoot for 100% excellence?

[Santa]

Clearly I must be having a blonde moment, but what are you lot on about? Radical changes? Massive reboot? As far as I can see, this is not what's happening in CR. They are updating a little and going back to basics, FRWL style as I understand it, and that can't be a bad thing. I don't see what's so radical about that and it's nothing that hasn't been done to Bond before over the last 40 years. Are you expecting CR to end up resembling Transformers: The Movie? That would be your radical reboot, what we have coming is not, IMVHO.

[WC]

[quote name='Mister Asterix' post='552191' date='5 May 2006 - 20:23']
[mra]No reboot huh?

Funny, I don

[Dr. Noah]

[quote name='WC' post='552197' date='5 May 2006 - 19:44']
[quote name='Mister Asterix' post='552191' date='5 May 2006 - 20:23']
[mra]No reboot huh?

Funny, I don

[Seannery]

Clearly I must be having a blonde moment, but what are you lot on about? Radical changes? Massive reboot? As far as I can see, this is not what's happening in CR. They are updating a little and going back to basics, FRWL style as I understand it, and that can't be a bad thing. I don't see what's so radical about that and it's nothing that hasn't been done to Bond before over the last 40 years. Are you expecting CR to end up resembling Transformers: The Movie? That would be your radical reboot, what we have coming is not, IMVHO.

Well instead of simply doing a FRWL they got a new timeline, some say changed the character of Bond to a good degree, got a different looking Bond--not just tweaking there.

[Dr. Noah]

Clearly I must be having a blonde moment, but what are you lot on about? Radical changes? Massive reboot? As far as I can see, this is not what's happening in CR. They are updating a little and going back to basics, FRWL style as I understand it, and that can't be a bad thing. I don't see what's so radical about that and it's nothing that hasn't been done to Bond before over the last 40 years. Are you expecting CR to end up resembling Transformers: The Movie? That would be your radical reboot, what we have coming is not, IMVHO.

Well instead of simply doing a FRWL they got a new timeline, some say changed the character of Bond to a good degree, got a different looking Bond--not just tweaking there.

Maybe they should kill of MI6, make Bond the villain and have Tom Cruise star as Ethan Hunt. You know -- something that isn't so radical.

[Seannery]

[quote name='Dr. Noah' post='552198' date='5 May 2006 - 20:49']
[quote name='WC' post='552197' date='5 May 2006 - 19:44']
[quote name='Mister Asterix' post='552191' date='5 May 2006 - 20:23']
[mra]No reboot huh?

Funny, I don

[Dr. Noah]

You guys are missing the point. Adapting the TV show to Movies is one thing BUT the film series has been continious--MI1 to MI3 haven't rebooted. They just deepened the characters in MI3 to excellent effect. We are talking about the movies and NOT TV.

I gotta disagree. First, if you radically alter the source material -- whether it's from a film, TV show, book, comic, video game -- it's a reboot. Second, they went from Bond rip-off to John Woo action flick to this. All three movies are completely different.

Hopefully CR is RETURNING to the source material. Blonde hair does not constitute a radical reboot.

[Seannery]

You guys are missing the point. Adapting the TV show to Movies is one thing BUT the film series has been continious--MI1 to MI3 haven't rebooted. They just deepened the characters in MI3 to excellent effect. We are talking about the movies and NOT TV.

I gotta disagree. First, if you radically alter the source material -- whether it's from a film, TV show, book, comic, video game -- it's a reboot. Second, they went from Bond rip-off to John Woo action flick to this. All three movies are completely different.

Hopefully CR is RETURNING to the source material. Blonde hair does not constitute a radical reboot.

Well we go disagree then--the movies have changed stylistically some but that's about all. The TV series is irrelevent IMO. And it's clearly more than blonde hair. But CR may work anyway.

[marktmurphy]

I know. That post really had me scratching my head. Killing off all the series regulars and making Mr. Phelps the supervillain wasn't a reboot?

Heck, All THREE MI movies have been complete reboots.

True- reboot of original dull spy team concept to euro spy movie with tension set pieces to OTT superhero action film to touchy-feely team movie. Different concept to each. Same hideous star. Where's Anthony Hopkins in this one? How come he's not Hunt's boss? He hasn't been.. y'know... rebooted out of there has he?

[JimmyBond]

Who cares? Mission Impossible aint James Bond.

[Seannery]

Oh well i'll be in the minority then. Clearly to me Ethan Hunt is in the same timeline in all 3 movies--different bosses, big deal. Still played by Cruise and has same basic personality. That's OK i'm fine with being in the minority if that is what will be.

BUT I will say--go see MI3, it's excellent.

[JimmyBond]

How faithful is it to the tv show?

[Mister Asterix]

The TV series is irrelevent IMO.

It seems you and Mr Cruise feel the same way.

[Seannery]

The TV series is irrelevent IMO.

It seems you and Mr Cruise feel the same way.

Where you a fan of the TV series, Mr*? I liked it and I do agree what they did to Jim Phelps in the first movie sucks.

How faithful is it to the tv show?

There's more team work in this one--so at least they got that closer to the TV show.

[luciusgore]

Who cares? Mission Impossible aint James Bond.

The two series are linked in a sense. GOLDENEYE resurrected the spy franchise. It was followed by the first MI. Now, more than 10 years later, the same actor and character are in the MI series, while the Bond series has decided to go for a "reboot."

[Mister Asterix]

It seems you and Mr Cruise feel the same way.

Where you a fan of the TV series, Mr*? I liked it and I do agree what they did to Jim Phelps in the first movie sucks.

[mra]I

[Seannery]

[quote name='Mister Asterix' post='552226' date='5 May 2006 - 22:13']
[quote name='Seannery' post='552219' date='5 May 2006 - 15:40']
[quote name='Mister Asterix' post='552216' date='5 May 2006 - 21:33']
It seems you and Mr Cruise feel the same way.
[/quote]


Where you a fan of the TV series, Mr*? I liked it and I do agree what they did to Jim Phelps in the first movie sucks.
[/quote]

[mra]I

[marktmurphy]

Well my main point was a reboot was an unnecessary risk--it wasn't needed to freshen and shake up Bond and the series. BUT IT CAN STILL WORK--WE'LL SEE. Yes this is Eon's vision for better or worse and we'll see soon if it was a good one.

Gosh yes, and who wants to actually watch art that takes risks, eh? I'd much rather they just got that Connery lookalike off HighLander, or perhaps that fella from the Scottish Oats ad, to play in an exact shot-for-shot remake of Goldfinger. We'd all be nice and safe then.

Note how the reviews for M:I3 mostly state how uninspiring, if workmanlike and not actually bad, the new film is. I hope they're striving for a little more than 'decent' and 'more of the same' with CR.

[Mister Asterix]

Well my main point was a reboot was an unnecessary risk--it wasn't needed to freshen and shake up Bond and the series. BUT IT CAN STILL WORK--WE'LL SEE. Yes this is Eon's vision for better or worse and we'll see soon if it was a good one.

[mra]But surely making a Bond film

[Harmsway]

I saw MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE III. One word: overrated.

[Seannery]

[quote name='Mister Asterix' post='552233' date='5 May 2006 - 22:29']
[quote name='Seannery' post='552231' date='5 May 2006 - 16:21']
Well my main point was a reboot was an unnecessary risk--it wasn't needed to freshen and shake up Bond and the series. BUT IT CAN STILL WORK--WE'LL SEE. Yes this is Eon's vision for better or worse and we'll see soon if it was a good one.
[/quote]


[mra]But surely making a Bond film

[kneelbeforezod]

Clearly I must be having a blonde moment, but what are you lot on about? Radical changes? Massive reboot? As far as I can see, this is not what's happening in CR. They are updating a little and going back to basics, FRWL style as I understand it, and that can't be a bad thing. I don't see what's so radical about that and it's nothing that hasn't been done to Bond before over the last 40 years. Are you expecting CR to end up resembling Transformers: The Movie? That would be your radical reboot, what we have coming is not, IMVHO.

Exactly, took the words out of my mouth. Seannery what are these "huge" changes to Bond's character you mention? Have I missed something?

[Seannery]

I saw MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE III. One word: overrated.

Not suprising that we disagree on movies, Harmsway. I thought it really good and it has gotten a lot of good reviews.

[Harmsway]

I saw MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE III. One word: overrated.

Not suprising that we disagree on movies, Harmsway. I thought it really good and it has gotten a lot of good reviews.

I enjoyed it, but it's not all some people have made it out to be.

Entertaining? Yes. Brilliant? Nope.