Is Mission Impossible the equivalent of the Bond franchise?

[Tg11]

Do you think that the Mission Impossible franchise is basically the equivalent of the Bond franchise? Basically for the Bond franchise what makes it so iconic is that for the great characters they have; they actually have great villains in that franchise or femme fatale characters. Does the Mission Impossible franchise even have that? The only memorable villains that come to mind to me anyway are Solomon Lane of Rogue Nation and Fallout and August Walker Cavill's character in Fallout and Ambrose in Mission Impossible 2. The other villains who come to mind I don't even rate because they are just forgettable to me which are Jim Phelps, Owen Davian and Hendricks.

For the MI franchise does Ethan even get love interests who are even on his level or who he actually has chemistry with? I mean the only love interests that remotely he has chemistry with are Julia who is now his ex-wife and Ilsa.

But definitely Ethan could use a femme fatale...someone who is sultry and sexy but turns out to be a villain.

But what I will give the Mission Impossible franchise credit for are their action sequences most definitely.

 

[TheVileOne]

Eh not quite. Mission: Impossible originated as a TV spy show. It was more about the team though Jim Phelps was the leader.

Mission: Impossible from the movies first started have always ALWAYS been a star vehicle for Tom Cruise. Ethan Hunt has only been Tom Cruise.

Yeah it's a big event spy franchise like James Bond. But Bond has been around onscreen over 50 years and he's been played a ton of different actors. Mission Impossible has had 22 years and it's only starred Tom Cruise as Ethan Hunt in every film. Comparisons are more limited IMHO.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Nothing is quite the equivalent of Bond, and I can't really think of anything equivalent to M:I.

 

[Tg11]

But with Cruise as Ethan he is definitely getting older that's for sure so it may just be time to pass the torch just like how each Bond actor has passed the torch

 

[Doug_Moore]

Tom Cruise is becoming Roger Moore at this point.

 

[Mysteryman]

Tom Cruise looks a lot better than Roger Moore did when he shot A View To A Kill.

 

[DACrowe]

We'll see. Bond survived the loss of Connery, I doubt the Mission: Impossible franchise survives the loss of Cruise. Also while Spectre was disappointing, the relatively recent Casino Royale and Skyfall are two of the best spy movies of all time.

With that said, I overall have enjoyed the last three Mission: Impossible movies more than the Craig era. While I love two of Craig's movies, the other two are too dour for the character, and part of it I think is that Craig's heart wasn't even in Spectre. But I know it will be reinvented after Craig's final Bond next year.

Another way to say this is I think we may look back on the McQuarrie years of Mission: Impossible as almost the equivalent of Harrison Ford as Indiana Jones. But the Bond movies outlasted those as well.

With that said, Mission: Impossible's best movies are WAY better to me than the Jason Bourne films.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Tom Cruise looks a lot better than Roger Moore did when he shot A View To A Kill.

Tom Cruise looks a lot better then Roger Moore in "Live and Let Die".

 

[DACrowe]

P.S.

Regarding villains and "love interests." Lane is fine and well played, but Mission: Impossible's one great villain is Phillip Seymour Hoffman in MI:3. It's unfortunate that movie's script was rather bland and didn't do more with him, but that is a HELLUVA performance. Jim Phelps is also a memorable villain. With that said, none of them are on par with Bond's great villains, which are too many to even begin listing.

However, love interests are a different ballpark. Other than M:I2, which was more of a reworking of the plot to Notorious (1944), the M:I films have steered clear from the traditional love interests in Hollywood or Bond jargon. Claire in the first M:I is actually closer to a femme fatale from real noir than most Bond movies, because Ethan nor the viewer is sure what to make of her as she lures Ethan to his doom, as opposed to being an out-and-out villain.

But after the first two movies, the M:I franchise has actually broken away from the standard "love interest" formula in Hollywood movies. Hence Ethan actually having a wife who doesn't die (see Tracy Bond and Vesper Lynd), and who might haunt Ethan, but who can come back and grow and change. He also has an ongoing relationship with Ilsa that is as much borne from mutual admiration as it is infatuation, and is not just about a one-and-done affair. That makes the Mission: Impossible franchise fairly unique in the realm of Hollywood blockbusters, and it should continue going its own way.

Besides, they did introduce a new classical fatale with the White Widow. But Ethan isn't going to be seduced by that, because he isn't that kind of guy (like Bond), plus Cruise is a little too old to be playing the womanizer.

 

[TheVileOne]

Tom Cruise is becoming Roger Moore at this point.

Yup.

[YT]2BnOebsDtAQ[/YT]

 

[Jekecy]

But with Cruise as Ethan he is definitely getting older that's for sure so it may just be time to pass the torch just like how each Bond actor has passed the torch

The daredevil stunt work is unique to Cruise though. Would a reboot forego that established series trademark? I doubt audiences would accept that.

 

[TheVileOne]

Honestly, I'd be fine if he did a lot less for the next movie. I love the stunts and action, but I don't want the guy like getting paralyzed for his art.

 

[Drizzle]

We'll see. Bond survived the loss of Connery, I doubt the Mission: Impossible franchise survives the loss of Cruise.

Agreed. The Bourne franchise didn't do so hot when Jeremy Renner briefly took the reins so I doubt a Mission: Impossible without Cruise would be successful. Ethan Hunt and Jason Bourne are more or less synonymous with the actors who portray them. James Bond as a character transcends that.