Mission: Impossible Dead Reckoning - Part One (2023) (1 Viewer)

[Jake Lipson]

Outside of that, I think I prefer a new name for every movie.

Plus, I think the audience is smart enough to understand that we are watching a serialized story. It has already been reported that #7 ends on some kind of cliffhanger, which isn't a surprise.

People who see that film will realize that #8 continues on from that point without having to have Part 2 in the title of #8. So what purpose does it serve?

I think it'll be a quickie teaser

Right. I understand the appeal of announcing Mission: Impossible on the front of Top Gun, because this will make the general audience of people who don't hang out online reading movie news aware that another film is coming. But at the same time, it's a long time until July 2023, so how many people will even remember seeing the trailer on Top Gun by the time this film comes out?

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

Remember when this was a franchise that told exciting standalone stories with an exciting new voice in the director's chair for each new entry?

Christopher McQuarrie has basically turned it back into a TV series, except one you where have to pay $20 to see each new episode.

 

[Jake Lipson]

Christopher McQuarrie has basically turned it back into a TV series, except one you where have to pay $20 to see each new episode.

Why is this a problem? Christopher McQuarrie's two previous films were both well-received critically and commercially. I really don't understand the complaint that arose around Fallout for referencing events from Rogue Nation. Especially in this era where serialized storytelling from Marvel is so dominant, audiences seem to really like the connections.

 

[TravisR]

Much as I liked Abrams and Bird's M:I movies, I think the franchise got even better once McQuarrie came on board so I'm good with him continuing on with the series. Also, it's understandable that once he became 'the' writer/director of the franchise that he'd have some kind of running story between movies.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

Why is this a problem? Christopher McQuarrie's two previous films were both well-received critically and commercially. I really don't understand the complaint that arose around Fallout for referencing events from Rogue Nation. Especially in this era where serialized storytelling from Marvel is so dominant, audiences seem to really like the connections.

I get that McQuarrie's contributions to the franchise have plenty of fans, I just miss when each movie offered something really different and new. The Marvel model works good for Marvel, I don't need it to be the model for every franchise.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

My bigger issue, and I know I’ve said this before, is that every M:I film at some point goes back to the plot point of “Tom Cruise has to go rogue” and it’s just become so repetitive in that sense. Surely there are other ways to tell a spy story without having to return to that same plot each and every time. It doesn’t matter how often or infrequently they charge writers or directors; they all keep going down that same road.

Don’t get me wrong, I still enjoy these movies, but unlike many other film series, I find it difficult to watch these in a row because they start feeling way too similar.

 

[Jake Lipson]

The trailer leaked on social media this afternoon. It appears to have been taken down for now, but I assume this means Paramount will put out the authorized version soon. The only question is whether it goes online before or after the Top Gun sequel opening.

 

[Osato]

My bigger issue, and I know I’ve said this before, is that every M:I film at some point goes back to the plot point of “Tom Cruise has to go rogue” and it’s just become so repetitive in that sense. Surely there are other ways to tell a spy story without having to return to that same plot each and every time. It doesn’t matter how often or infrequently they charge writers or directors; they all keep going down that same road.

Don’t get me wrong, I still enjoy these movies, but unlike many other film series, I find it difficult to watch these in a row because they start feeling way too similar.

I rad an article on this a while back. It’s why 007 is always rogue too. I think it parallels our societies / human rejection of all authority.

I also would like to see missions in which the characters were not always rogue as well.

Maybe someday.

Is it confirmed that the new mission is another rogue storyline?

 

[Keith Cobby]

I liked Brad Bird's film best (Ghost Protocol) followed by Chris Mcquarrie's first (Rogue Nation) but his second (Fallout) didn't do it for me, so I would have preferred the series to continue with a new director. Cruise should end the series with him going into space on SpaceX Crew Dragon.

 

[Alex...]

 

[Chuck Mayer]

I mean, I'll definitely see it. But it looks almost identical to last few, in terms of story, consequences, idolatry, and action sequences. I agree that Bird had the best one (and perfected this formula). Still, very well shot, and I'm happy to see a non-superhero blockbuster.

 

[Keith Cobby]

The trailer looks good, a return to form - I'm in.

 

[SamT]

Why part 1? This is Mission Impossible 7 split into 2?

 

[TravisR]

Why part 1? This is Mission Impossible 7 split into 2?

I guess they want it to be one big story over two movies but so are the last two Avengers movies and they've got two different albeit similar names so I don't understand going with the Part 1 and Part 2 thing either.

 

[SamT]

It's just annoying when it is named Part 1 and 2. It means it is half a movie and not a complete movie and you don't get satisfaction by watching Part 1. So people might wait until both are released.

 

[Patrick Sun]

Hayley Atwell????

 

[SamT]

I was surprised that they showed naked women in the trailer and also on youtube.

 

[TravisR]

It's just annoying when it is named Part 1 and 2. It means it is half a movie and not a complete movie and you don't get satisfaction by watching Part 1. So people might wait until both are released.

I mean I'm sure they're the same movies as if they had different titles but when there's already a subtitle adding the "Part x" is just awkward.

 

[SamT]

I consider the naming important and Part 1 and 2 is different than having 2 names. It means the first movie can't stand on its own and doesn't have a satisfying ending.

 

[Patrick Sun]

Mission: Impossible - Dead Reckoning Part 2: Excitable Boogaloo.