Fincher to do M:I-3? (1 Viewer)

[TerryRL]

Variety reported that megastar Tom Cruise has his eye on the next director in the "Mission: Impossible" franchise and it's none other than "Se7en" director David Fincher.

Cruise, who has acting projects like "The Last Samurai" and "Ghost Soldiers" currently on his plate, said that he always intended to continue the M:I franchise with a different director in each outting.

Brian De Palma helmed the first film in 1996, while John Woo directed the even more successful follow-up in 2000. Cruise has apparently had his eye on working with Fincher for some time due to the director's unique style.

Personally, I would love to see Fincher do M:I-3. I can only imagine how distintive a look the movie would have. Apparently, Fincher is at the top of Cruise's wish list. Rumor has it that Oliver Stone was also being "considered".

Cruise's next film is expected to be "The Last Samurai" for director Edward Zwick. After that he may reuinite with "Minoirty Report" director Steven Spielberg on the WWII film "Ghost Soldiers". Depending on Cruise's schedule, M:I-3 probably won't go before cameras until early 2003.

 

[Chuck Mayer]

While a Fincher action/thriller would be something to see...this sounds like a bad rumor. You never know, but I don't think a Cruise vanity piece suits Fincher much. And I like Cruise, but I don't know if they'd mix. More power to Cruise, but it doesn't sound DF to me. I don't care what Dave directs...I'll be there.
Take care,
Chuck
P.S. - He hasn't had good luck on studio sequels that end in 3.

 

[John Berggren]

I'd watch any Fincher film, even this. I quite liked the first MI, and thought MI2 was alright. MI3 needs to be special to keep this franchise alive for me.

 

[Ron-P]

Well, anyone can do it better than Woo, so this, even if a rumor, is welcome news after the horrid MI:2.
Peace Out~

 

[Luc D]

If Fincher wants to be taken seriously as an artist then he should stay far away from projects like these. He has a great eye but he needs to understand that style is more than just calling attention to yourself. Ultimately that's what separates the good from the greats.

 

[Ross Williams]

De Palma's M:I was pretty good, Woo's sucked, Fincher's would probably be the best of the bunch. But I sure hope that Fincher doesn't waste his enormous talent on crap like this. Don't get me wrong, if he directed it, I'd be there in a second. But I'd much rather he spend his time on original works and not a sequel for an okay franchise. We all know how he feels about making a second sequel. But then again, money talks.

 

[TheoGB]

If Fincher wants to be taken seriously as an artist then he should stay far away from projects like these.

I dunno. It's hardly like he's listened to any Hollywood crap before. If it's a good film it won't matter. I'm guessing that if Cruise is reckoning on different directors he must already be thinking that they have a lot of control over the movie, otherwise there's not much point.

I for one would be impressed to see this...

 

[Paul_D]

Ultimately that's what separates the good from the greats.

He's already comfortably standing in the greats bracket.

 

[RobR]

At least Fincher won't repeat Woo's annoying style used in M:I-2. I came out of the theater after seeing M:I-2 with the same reaction as I did with Mission to Mars.

 

[Greg_C_T]

At least Fincher won't repeat Woo's annoying style used in M:I-2

It's a funny thing with Woo...people either really love his work (Hard Boiled, Face/Off) or love to bash it (MI:2).

I have yet to see anyone in the middle ground, though personally I love his style. I thought De Palma's M:I was awfully dry.

 

[Chuck Mayer]

I suppose I am in the HTF minority for liking Woo's MI2. Wasn't a huge fan of DePalma's. Both films were OK. That said, Cruise likes to have a lot of control over MI movies, which he apparently "owns." That's great, but it doesn't suit David, unless Cruise is willing to sublimate his ego, and let Fincher DIRECT the film. I would be very interested to see that. For that to happen, Cruise has to TRUST Fincher and give HIM the power. Possible? Of course. Cruise has done that with Eyes Wide Shut and probably Minority Report. But he wasn't exec. producer on those. Long story short, Fincher is already a great (right, Paul ). He doesn't need the studio money or cred. If Tom is willing to play ball, and step up with the right script...this could be incredible. If not, it will disappear and Tom can have McG
Take care,
Chuck

 

[Dan Brecher]

So did Ang Lee turn Cruise down? Originally Cruise wanted to attatch him to M:I3.

Dan

 

[RobR]

It's a funny thing with Woo...people either really love his work (Hard Boiled, Face/Off) or love to bash it (MI:2).

I actually liked Hard Boiled. But whereas it wasn't annoying in Hard Boiled, it was annoying in M:I-2. I haven't seen Face/Off though.

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

Man, I would love it if Ang Lee did a MI film! I look at these films as I do the James Bond films, they could easily go on with this series, and when Cruise decides to stop, they could pass the role of Ethan Hunt on to someone else.
I liked the original, I liked the second even more.

 

[Josh_Hill]

Sounds very cool. I like that they have a different director with a totally different style everytime. Fincher would be great!

 

[SteveGon]

So is Fincher still doing Rendezvous With Rama?

 

[TerryRL]

Ang Lee was offered both M:I-3 and "Terminator 3". Lee turned both down because he has no interest in doing sequels. If "The Hulk" is a huge hit, which it probably will be, Universal will more than likely have to hire someone else to do it because of Lee's ambivolence toward doing sequels.

Take the 'Crouching Tiger' prequel, he only plans to produce it and wants someone else to helm it as director. At this point in his career, he seems to only want to do original work.

"Rendevous With Rama" is a project coveted by Fincher. He'll get around to doing it sooner or later.

 

[Seth Paxton]

I loved DePalma's work on M:I despite the helicopter ending. It was drier and much more spy like in the style of the TV series.

Woo has struggled to make great films in America, despite being terrific in Hong Kong.

I see Fincher being much more likely to move closer to the DePalma story style, but with his own visual style. DePalma fit the work because he is such a Hitch jock and a spy thriller in line with a Hitch story was perfect for him (though ironcially it was M:I 2 that ripped off Notorious).

Fincher isn't quite that type of director, but he does have a solid somber tone and has succeeded very highly in previous mystery thrillers (Game, Se7en) and has the terrorist/action angle covered to with Fight Club. Plus just look at what Panic Room appears to be...

Makes it seem like M:I 3 and Fincher would be a perfect fit and give us a film more like Ronin or M:I than a modern Bond film or M:I 2.

 

[TheoGB]

I thought M:I-2 was pretty fine once Hopkins appeared with his "mission: difficult" speech. Prior to that it just made me squirm with embarrassment at the attempts to do Goldfinger really badly.

However, I would love to see more thoughtful sequel, especially if they could build up a 'team' thing again, adding the woman to Ving Rhames' character...

 

[Dharmesh C]

Autuers shouldn't touch Mission Impossible! John Woo's style over substance proves that an autuer with a reputation can ruin a film like Richard Lester and Superman 3 or Sam Riami *possibly* with Spiderman.

Cruise should realise what made MI the TV show! Cruise doesn't get it!

Fincher is better off producing his own original works, Mission Impossible doesn't deserve him.