Mission: Impossible - Fallout (2018) (1 Viewer)

[Jake Lipson]

You could tweet the question to Christopher McQuarrie if you want. He's currently engaging with fans who are complaining to him (!) about the Movie Pass app locking them out of the movie, so I would imagine he might welcome a question that's actually about the movie instead of that crap.

Edit: Now he's off for vacation, which he very much deserves, but who knows? He might take more questions when he gets back.

 

[Johnny Angell]

You could tweet the question to Christopher McQuarrie if you want. He's currently engaging with fans who are complaining to him (!) about the Movie Pass app locking them out of the movie, so I would imagine he might welcome a question that's actually about the movie instead of that crap.

Edit: Now he's off for vacation, which he very much deserves, but who knows? He might take more questions when he gets back.

I’m not on “The Twitter.”

 

[Jake Lipson]

I’m not on “The Twitter.”

Fair enough.

I actually wanted to ask him about the rationale for the first issue in my spoiler tag from post #90, but didn't want to tweet it because I didn't want to spoil for people reading his feed who hadn't seen the movie yet. So I tweeted telling him I had a spoiler question if he wouldn't mind answring it. If he responds and lets me, then I could ask him via direct message -- which is a long shot, and I won't be mad if h doesn't. But I've gotten lucky a few times before, so who knows?

 

[Edwin-S]

Spoiler

I think yes. The impression I got is that the Apostiles had infiltrated the CIA and were acting in their own interests at that point.

Spoiler

My impression was that the CIA crew charged with bringing them in were infiltrated by guys loyal to Lark. Of course, it kind of creates a plot hole if that is the case.

 

[Osato]

Exactly. I've always been a big Bond fan, but these movies are far superior to anything we've seen in Bond since at least the 70s. Danny Boyle, please take note.

Agreed!!!!

 

[hanshotfirst1138]

I throughly enjoyed this. Like pretty much all blockbusters these days, it’s a little too long (Why must everything be two-and-a-half hours now?), but McQuarrie shoots everything cleanly, uses no shaky cam, and the set pieces are all a blast. Say what you will about Cruise, there’s no doubt that he commits himself totally to what he does, and there’s some Jackie Chan daredevil stuff going on here. It doesn’t measure up to the almost musical cutting and gorgeous camera work of Bird or DePalma’s slick, hyper-precise beauty, but it definitely beats Abrams’ gloried TV pilot. Sadly, as I’m a big fan of John Woo, I must admit that like far too much of his American work, the second film is the franchise is a low point. I do kind of hope that they keep with the ethos of the series and pick a new director for the inevitable next film, but if they don’t, I can’t blame them; McQuarrie’s done a terrific job twice. Good on Cruise for taking the leap of faith on him, there wasn’t anything in his smaller scale previous films that indicated that he’d be able to handle something like this. Oh, and this is one of the last big franchises that still shoots on 35mm, so credit to all involved for that. Go down swinging, Kodak. Go down swinging.

 

[Mark Booth]

Loved it!

Spoiler

One nitpick. Not a real fan of Henry Cavill. Yes, he's very handsome and all that. BUT a bit wooden in his delivery...Normally a film with the baddie not great it goes south but there were a plethora of baddies.

Tim, I've seen the film but I'm sure others haven't. Shouldn't the comment I quoted above (and put in spoiler tags) have been in spoiler tags in your post? You do reveal a plot direction.

Mark

 

[Tim Glover]

Tim, I've seen the film but I'm sure others haven't. Shouldn't the comment I quoted above (and put in spoiler tags) have been in spoiler tags in your post? You do reveal a plot direction.

Mark

Yes, good idea. I can't seem to find a way to edit the post though. There's no edit icon ..

 

[Jake Lipson]

Yes, good idea. I can't seem to find a way to edit the post though. There's no edit icon ..

That's because edit capability is only active for a short time after you post. However, a moderator might be able to edit it for you.

 

[Robert Crawford]

That's because edit capability is only active for a short time after you post. However, a moderator might be able to edit it for you.

Yes, you only have a limited time to edit your post. I've added a spoiler to that post.

 

[YanMan]

If you do IMAX, you get two major sequences that open up from 2.40:1 to 1.90:1, and you get the “First Man” trailer which opens up to 1.44:1 at the end.

Dolby Cinema is 2.40:1 from start to finish.

Trying to decide on format as well for this weekend... I saw Last Jedi in Dolby Cinema and was quite impressed with the image and sound. So I am leaning towards seeing MI6 in that as well, but I always prefer to see films in the intended presentation.

Does anyone know if the 1.90:1 sequences were shot specifically with the intent to open them up for IMAX presentations, or is this just a case where the studio created a DCP specifically for IMAX by arbitrarily opening up a couple of sequences that were actually composed for 2.39:1?

 

[Worth]

Can't speak to Dolby Cinema as there are none in my area, but this looked fabulous in IMAX.

 

[DavidJ]

Trying to decide on format as well for this weekend... I saw Last Jedi in Dolby Cinema and was quite impressed with the image and sound. So I am leaning towards seeing MI6 in that as well, but I always prefer to see films in the intended presentation.

Does anyone know if the 1.90:1 sequences were shot specifically with the intent to open them up for IMAX presentations, or is this just a case where the studio created a DCP specifically for IMAX by arbitrarily opening up a couple of sequences that were actually composed for 2.39:1?

They didn’t shoot on IMAX cameras but they used Panavision DXL cameras shooting at 8K for those sequences and they were always intended to be shown in 1.9:1 as well.

 

[Tim Glover]

Yes, you only have a limited time to edit your post. I've added a spoiler to that post.

Thank you Robert.

 

[Richard M S]

I saw the film yesterday at the AMC 42nd Street and loved it. What a great comeback for Tom Cruise! The action sequences are indeed beyond spectacular, but there is also welcome moments of levity.

No spoilers here, but 10 minutes into Henry Cavill's appearance, I turned to my buddy and whispered "Henry Cavill's acting makes Tom Cruise seem like Daniel Day Lewis."

 

[Colin Jacobson]

I saw the film yesterday at the AMC 42nd Street and loved it. What a great comeback for Tom Cruise! The action sequences are indeed beyond spectacular, but there is also welcome moments of levity.

Comeback? It's only been 3 years since the last "M:I" movie!

I saw this today IMAX - thanks, A-List - and liked it but didn't love it. Really enjoyed "Rogue Nation" but this one complicated its plot so much that it became a meandering mess at times.

That's especially problematic because the basic story is so simple: get the plutonium. However, McQuarrie sends the narrative down various unnecessary rabbit holes that just end up creating confusion.

Maybe I'll like it more when I see it at home. Right now I think it's good due to the action but the messy plot knocks it down a notch...

 

[George_W_K]

Comeback?

Probably referring to The Mummy.

 

[Malcolm R]

And the Jack Reacher sequel. Those have been his two major films since the last M:I and both underperformed.

 

[Jake Lipson]

Cruise is reliable if he is in this role. His recent non-Mission Impossible films have struggled. It will be interesting to see how Top Gun does next year.

 

[holtge]

I would argue that the Mission: Impossible films aren't completely Tom Cruise solo vehicles though. While he is heavily featured and billed as the top star, they also feature characters and recognizable actors from past adventures in more of an ensemble type of way. Heck, Ving Rhames has made appearances in all six. Cruise was expected to carry The Mummy and Jack Reacher on his own, and I just don't think he's that kind of star anymore. My guess is that if Top Gun is featured as a solo Cruise vehicle it won't do as well as the Mission: Impossible films either.