Brad Pitt to take over "Mission: Impossible" franchise?

Michael Allred

Screenwriter
Joined
Aug 13, 2000
Messages
1,720
Location
MI
Real Name
Michael
http://www.smh.com.au/news/film/brad...431755451.html


If true, it would actually make me wanna go see a M:I movie again. I grew tired of Tom Cruise's ego trip long ago and how he singlehandedly destroyed the very concept of the basic story with his "I am the star, we don't need a team" BS. Pitt's far more down to earth and has always shown a willingness to share the spotlight with his co-stars.

Still, $52 million? That has to be for a multi-picture deal.
 

Richard_D_Ramirez

Second Unit
Joined
May 21, 2001
Messages
439
Let me get this straight: Paramount renegotiated Cruise's MI:3 take to a lower amount than the previous MI films, then his contract go. All to save money. Then they offer 52 mil to Pitt.

Was this really for money, or just to get rid of Cruise?
 

Josh.C

Second Unit
Joined
Dec 20, 2005
Messages
469

I think we all know the answer to that one Richard.

I actually think Pitt will thrive w/ the character of Ethan Hunt. He may be a better fit than Cruise was.

We will see. I did enjoy Mi:3, which was nice after having to endure Mi:2 for a couple of hours.

JC
 

nickGreenwood

Second Unit
Joined
Dec 13, 2004
Messages
494
Real Name
Nick Greenwood
Until I hear it from Brad, I'm going to be skepitcal of this news.
That being said, if Brad takes over then that would be good, I like Brad, he's a good actor, not afraid to destroy the "pretty boy" looks he's notable for having.

Just bring JJ back to do another one with Brad that's all.
 

JediFonger

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2006
Messages
4,081
Real Name
YiFeng You
i'd pay $ to see this film... if it was done properly. unfortunately, cruise is such a control freak and seeing how he has been so intimately involved (producing) and how much $ (these films have kicked him into the 200mil club... before the divorce). he's one of THE richest actors (if not THE) in hollywood because of his deals. also, he is in almost every frame from 1-3. i hate actors that are like that. mi1 was more balanced... but mi2 and mi3 was toomuch tom cruise too many times. i'd like to see vince more.

i don't think it's going to happen. if it did, i wouldn't want a character to "replaced" with a diff. actor. that's so stupid. that'd validate the MI franchise as a Bond rip off. if he played a new character, i'd love to see that. i like seeing brad in action flicks (like mr+mrs smith). it's pretty interesting... he hasn't been in many action flicks.
 

Seth=L

Screenwriter
Joined
Jul 17, 2006
Messages
1,313
Real Name
Seth L
"I don't care about the man's allegiance, I care about his ability to win battles" Sean Bean as Odysseus, the King of Ithica.

I thing Brad can pull just about any role. He is very diverse, as we have seen him in chick flicks, to playing a mentally unstable terrorist in 12 monkeys, to Fight Club, and even epic films like Troy.

Just for fun I will twist a reference from Troy.

"Of all the actors loved by all the movie goers, I hate Brad the most" Tom Cruise, as his stuck up self.

Of course we can't prove that Tom said it, but he is probably thinking it.
 

todd s

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jul 8, 1999
Messages
7,132
The best thing about MI:III was that it went back to what MI was...A team effort. Instead of one person (Cruise) doing everything basically himself.

And going back to the first movie. Cruise should have played a younger Phelps and Jon Voight, who portrayed Phelps, should have been his predecesor who betrayed the team. Why do they need to villainize a tv good guy...similar to in SWAT when TJ betrayed the team/
 

MatthewLouwrens

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2003
Messages
3,034
Absolutely. Sure, it was still very clearly a Cruise-star-vehicle, and the other members of the team were definitely just supporting, but they all actually had their own parts to play in different points of the film. Hell, there were some parts in the film where Cruise could do notheing but wait while others fulfilled their part of the plan. Which was great.

Even if this news were true, and I didn't believe it when I heard it, and it sounds like it has been denied for what that's worth, I see no reason for Michael's confidence that hiring one major star to replace another major star would result in a fundamental change in the films towards a stronger team element.

And I agree with Todd about the first M:I film. I really enjoy the first film, despite its agent-alone plot, but do feel betrayed whenever I get to the end. When I heard that they were doing an M:I, I assumed that Cruise was playing Jim Phelps, but instead they created a new character for Cruise and then wrote out the character that connects to the TV series? It's not like it would be a big script hassle - just change the names - and they would have removed my one major problem with the first film.
 

Jerome Grate

Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 23, 1999
Messages
2,989

That would be worth the price of admission. Definetly should be a team as oppose to one person doing it all like in MI:2. Haven't seen MI:3 yet, but that's what I did really like about MI the movie showed a team effort with Cruise and Rhames.
 

JediFonger

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2006
Messages
4,081
Real Name
YiFeng You
umm... did you guys watch the same mi trilogy as me? someone should really clock how many minutes cruise was onscreen vs. everyone else. i'm not saying it should all be equal, cruise is the lead after all. what i'm saying is you take these films with cruise as the lead... and compare it against other similar films like 007 or agent-types. a great example is true lies. as big as arnold's ego is... he doesn't dominate 90+% of the picture. there's a delicate balance of the rest of the characters in the film. that's why i'd like to see rhames's character more fleshed out. ya'll think there's "chemistry" between cruise+rhames... i don't see it. mi1 was great because at the end you saw both of them sitting down together, a couple of secret agent buddies talking about retirement. you didn't get that at all in mi2. how many lines did vince have? how many seconds was he on? same with mi3. vince talked BRIEFLY with cruise about his personal life (which.. sounded like many dialogue lines lifted from alias
. i didn't get the same feeling/sense of connect-ness between cruise and rhames.

other than that, cruise didn't have any chemistry with any of the other characters in all 3 mi films.
 

TheLongshot

Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 12, 2000
Messages
4,118
Real Name
Jason
Unfortunately, none of the movies have much to do with the concept of the show, which is a highly organized TEAM of people performing missions.

While they have done some handwaving to the team concept, having someone like Cruise ruined any chance of that happening. Ocean's 11 is more like a M:I film than any of the M:I films.

I don't expect anything to change with Brad Pitt in the seat...

Jason
 

Jerome Grate

Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 23, 1999
Messages
2,989

If there's a time to get back to that concept this is the best time. Get a few solid actors and run with it.
 

todd s

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jul 8, 1999
Messages
7,132


Jason, You hit the nail on the head. Especially, with the Ocean's 11 line. Which is very similar to MI.
 

Paul_Sjordal

Supporting Actor
Joined
May 29, 2003
Messages
831
I'm supposed to care why?

I stopped watching after the first movie. Hollywood really needs to get off this sequel kick it's on.
 

Forum Sponsors

Forum statistics

Threads
344,864
Messages
4,722,737
Members
141,348
Latest member
kimlove