Mission: Impossible - Fallout - Part 2

Rate the Movie


  • Total voters
    37
I don't follow the MI movies too much but I really enjoyed this! A really thrilling and expansive action movie.

I don't think Henry Cavill was meant to be the biggest badass or anything. He actually was a bit of a bonehead!

You can see that when

he had to be saved by Ethan during the HALO jump when he just jumped out into the storm.

He does seem the opposite of Ethan, who uses his smarts.
 
Thing is though, real life comes with it’s fair share of humour, even in the darkest times.

Removing all humour from a movie actually makes it less realistic, and more divorced from the real world. The inclusion of humour acts as a grounding mechanism that connects the audience better with the fiction they’re watching.

Why, why, why is this the stock answer to something that's never posited? No one ever says there should be nothing that causes a laugh in a film. However why is it now a "must" to some that films have to include a certain level of humor or the film is somehow failing in it's mission to entertain or engage?

This isn't about abolishing humor, but the overall level of comedic elements that essentially can rise to the point they start corroding the immersion in the film. Especially when it comes off as the result of focus testing and not the intentions of the creators.


As for the real world example... Of course people have humorous responses even in the darkest of moments. It's a coping mechanism. However... C'mon man, there are limits to that analogy. If I'm at a funereal and a person cracks a joke or two depending on the circumstances that's fine. Again, people cope in different ways. Now, imagine being at a funereal and someone is literally making jokes simply to make them, not to cheer anyone up not to cope, just throwing zingers EVERY FIVE TO TEN MINUTES. One could easily see that the mood of the event, a somber ritual of grieving and remembrance, is somewhat incompatible with someone acting like it's a Friar's Roast. Time and place etc. So to with movies. I didn't go to SKYFALL to see a comedy and the film delivered on it's concept as an action-drama/spy thriller. It had some "humor" but in a way that I found appropriate. It wasn't a gag every five to ten minutes kind of film nor did it NEED to have that done to make it a good to great film and a hit too boot.

I will repeat... If I want comedy I will go to see a comedy. If an action-drama is lacking in humor I don't get how that's a demerit since... It's not what the film in that genre is kinda supposed to be about. NOW OF COURSE THERE ARE EXCEPTIONS. There have been many films that have a wondrous alchemy in weaving the elements together in ways that work but once more... That those films exist doesn't mean that every other film has to be like that or even could be since even balancing those elements means taking some "juice" away from one element to another.

I also have to ask... Wouldn't this seem incredibly awkward if this "rule" were applied in reverse? Say you went to a comedy film starring Jack Black, expecting what Jack Black in his mad genius delivers. However starting in the first act in the middle of the set up to a joke suddenly Jack Black gets into a John Woo styled Mexican stand off action scene. And... It's legit all the way. It's a full on gun toting moment with tension and violence... And then it just goes back to Black's joke. OK... That's actually funny as a conceit but think about a whole comedy film like that. Every time they are going to get to the humorous material right before... BOOM, legit action/drama breaks out. Suddenly everything shifts from a comedic footing to it's like Michael Mann's HEAT... But then we are supposed to get right back to the fart jokes?

I'll add another wrinkle in... Imagine that it seems like the creators actually spend WAY more time and effort on these drama/action minisodes in the film than on the comedy. Like you come away going, "Yeah... I guess Jack Black was okay with the funny stuff... But did you see that car chase?! It was amazing! And that Kung Fu scene right before he did that fart joke was as good as anything in CROUCHING TIGER! I don't remember any of the jokes in this movie but the action scenes were so good."

I mean... Wouldn't that be odd? Off putting to the very idea of going to a comedy film in the first place? There of course have also been comedies that tackle serious subject with real dramatic arcs in them but let's be honest, not only are those few and far between we as audience members don't consider it a flaw if comedies DON'T have dramatic elements in them. Eddie Murphy's NUTTY PROFESSOR is a film that has a throwaway "arc" that is honestly, perfunctory in every way. The "drama" is by the numbers and uninspired. But that's okay. I didn't go to see the film expecting to see a serious exploration of body issues and identity. I came to see Eddie do his thing in a comedy.

I think the "debate" on these issues is tone deaf online since I don't think anyone ever suggests that these action tent poles not have any humor or gags or funny lines or quips what so ever. What is being said and I think ignored is that if you are selling me an action drama there needs to be an understanding that going overboard with humor FOR THE SAKE OF IT, not as a natural outgrowth of the story or characters but shoved in there as a focus group strategy, that you end up if not puncturing the suspension of disbelief so many of these films rely on, you certainly corrode it.
 
Minor nitpicks

How did Hunt realize Walker was working with Lane?
He suspected based on process of elimination. SOMEONE gave director Sloan a fake phone "recovered" from their bathroom fight to frame him...there were very few people in a position to do that, and the only others involved in that event were people he already trusted. We're of course meant to assume that Hunt and Hunley had a conversation that we weren't privy to beforehand, where this info would have come to light. So basically, Hunley put his faith in Hunt that it wasn't true when director Sloan came to him with her accusations in the first place, contacted Hunt, and they worked it out.
Lane just standing on the porch felt like a waste. I know he had nowhere to run but he's just standing there.
He was guarding the bomb in the next room. And enjoying the view in what he thought were his last moments on Earth. Made sense to me.
 
I thought it was really good. Series is 5/6 to me. I think the critics are kinda jumping out of the window calling it one of the greatest action movies of the decade up there with Fury Road and Skyfall. I think Rogue Nation is better than this one. But I'd have to watch it again. IN fact, the only MI film I've seen multiple times is MI3. And I like most the movies but for some reason I don't rewatch.
I haven't seen this film yet but this caught my eye, Fury Road is a contender for greatest action movie ever without a doubt, but I wouldn't even call Skyfall a great action movie let alone one of the best of the decade, it's a very good film in other ways but bar the pre-credits sequence I thought the action was fairly standard stuff, the ending being particularly poor with the fast cutting and the fact you can barely see what is going on.
 
Last edited:
I don't think Henry Cavill was meant to be the biggest badass or anything. He actually was a bit of a bonehead!
Yeah he was meant to be a bull in a china shop, who had no patience or skill for the IMF's more intricate, precision tactics. He was, as Sloan described, a hammer. A ruthless killer who gets the jobs done, but can be very, VERY messy about it. One little touch that I liked was that if [blackout]the White Widow's goons hadn't shot that female cop, Walker was definitely about to.[/blackout]
 
Kinda stumbled into the movie a bit late, had a few questions:

1). Did they ever go into detail/explain who that shady dealer in the beginning was who originally stole the plutonium cores?

2). Why did Lark need the Apostles to purchase the cores for him? Couldn't a criminal mastermind of his stature/wealth simply have bought it directly? He already had the nuclear scientist in his camp to build them.

3). Why did the Apostles try to kill Lark and the White Widow during the planned meeting? At least I'm assuming it was the Apostles and I'm also assuming that was the plan from the beginning, not just because they realized it was Hunt and not the real Lark (Ilsa hinted as such, that there was a bounty on Lark and The Widow's heads).
 
The Apostles felt very superfluous. I hope Mcquarrie returns for the next one and finishes this "trilogy" so that The Apostles can return.

Overall the film was pretty good, but I think Rogue Nation is a lot more fun. I'd rank them:

Rogue Nation
Fallout
MI1
Ghost Protocol
MI2
MI3
 
Saw it a 2nd time yesterday! Liked it MUCH more on 2nd viewing (as we were a bit drunk on the first one). Followed the story and action better and WOW, this movie is an action masterpiece.
 
My views on Fallout, briefly:

- Faust is one of the best characters the series has come up with, but in Fallout there's really no place for her. [BLACKOUT]She spends half the movie as a wild card, sometime helping Hunt & co and sometimes hindering, which is okay...but eventually she joins the IMF, and all her mystery and allure is gone, and she becomes just another IMF member running around after Hunt and disbelieving the insane things he does.

[/BLACKOUT]

- The whole inclusion of [BLACKOUT]Ethan Hunt's ex-wife Julia could be an interesting subplot, but it's blatantly just clearing an old plot point from the third movie out of the way so Hunt can be with Faust instead. [/BLACKOUT]

- As much as the series likes to offer jaw-dropping stunts an action scenes, the finale is very stale cliches - [BLACKOUT]defusing a bomb, two men fighting on a cliff edge, pressing button at the last second...Ghost Protocol did all this so much better.[/BLACKOUT]

- It's needlessly long.

- There's an emphasis on more plot and less action, but the plot is convoluted without being interesting, and really just amounts to the usual, 'Can you trust this person or not?' that has featured in every movie of the series. It's obvious who the real baddie is.

- As much as the movie tries to present a more realistic, gritty version of the world, it has an all-smiles happy ending where Hunt has won everybody round and the CIA loves him and so on...until the next movie when he's dis-avowed yet again by the latest hard-ass CIA boss who has little patience for his unorthodox methods.
 
Last edited:
Why, why, why is this the stock answer to something that's never posited? No one ever says there should be nothing that causes a laugh in a film. However why is it now a "must" to some that films have to include a certain level of humor or the film is somehow failing in it's mission to entertain or engage?

This isn't about abolishing humor, but the overall level of comedic elements that essentially can rise to the point they start corroding the immersion in the film. Especially when it comes off as the result of focus testing and not the intentions of the creators.


As for the real world example... Of course people have humorous responses even in the darkest of moments. It's a coping mechanism. However... C'mon man, there are limits to that analogy. If I'm at a funereal and a person cracks a joke or two depending on the circumstances that's fine. Again, people cope in different ways. Now, imagine being at a funereal and someone is literally making jokes simply to make them, not to cheer anyone up not to cope, just throwing zingers EVERY FIVE TO TEN MINUTES. One could easily see that the mood of the event, a somber ritual of grieving and remembrance, is somewhat incompatible with someone acting like it's a Friar's Roast. Time and place etc. So to with movies. I didn't go to SKYFALL to see a comedy and the film delivered on it's concept as an action-drama/spy thriller. It had some "humor" but in a way that I found appropriate. It wasn't a gag every five to ten minutes kind of film nor did it NEED to have that done to make it a good to great film and a hit too boot.

I will repeat... If I want comedy I will go to see a comedy. If an action-drama is lacking in humor I don't get how that's a demerit since... It's not what the film in that genre is kinda supposed to be about. NOW OF COURSE THERE ARE EXCEPTIONS. There have been many films that have a wondrous alchemy in weaving the elements together in ways that work but once more... That those films exist doesn't mean that every other film has to be like that or even could be since even balancing those elements means taking some "juice" away from one element to another.

I also have to ask... Wouldn't this seem incredibly awkward if this "rule" were applied in reverse? Say you went to a comedy film starring Jack Black, expecting what Jack Black in his mad genius delivers. However starting in the first act in the middle of the set up to a joke suddenly Jack Black gets into a John Woo styled Mexican stand off action scene. And... It's legit all the way. It's a full on gun toting moment with tension and violence... And then it just goes back to Black's joke. OK... That's actually funny as a conceit but think about a whole comedy film like that. Every time they are going to get to the humorous material right before... BOOM, legit action/drama breaks out. Suddenly everything shifts from a comedic footing to it's like Michael Mann's HEAT... But then we are supposed to get right back to the fart jokes?

I'll add another wrinkle in... Imagine that it seems like the creators actually spend WAY more time and effort on these drama/action minisodes in the film than on the comedy. Like you come away going, "Yeah... I guess Jack Black was okay with the funny stuff... But did you see that car chase?! It was amazing! And that Kung Fu scene right before he did that fart joke was as good as anything in CROUCHING TIGER! I don't remember any of the jokes in this movie but the action scenes were so good."

I mean... Wouldn't that be odd? Off putting to the very idea of going to a comedy film in the first place? There of course have also been comedies that tackle serious subject with real dramatic arcs in them but let's be honest, not only are those few and far between we as audience members don't consider it a flaw if comedies DON'T have dramatic elements in them. Eddie Murphy's NUTTY PROFESSOR is a film that has a throwaway "arc" that is honestly, perfunctory in every way. The "drama" is by the numbers and uninspired. But that's okay. I didn't go to see the film expecting to see a serious exploration of body issues and identity. I came to see Eddie do his thing in a comedy.

I think the "debate" on these issues is tone deaf online since I don't think anyone ever suggests that these action tent poles not have any humor or gags or funny lines or quips what so ever. What is being said and I think ignored is that if you are selling me an action drama there needs to be an understanding that going overboard with humor FOR THE SAKE OF IT, not as a natural outgrowth of the story or characters but shoved in there as a focus group strategy, that you end up if not puncturing the suspension of disbelief so many of these films rely on, you certainly corrode it.

Why on Earth are you complaining about Mission Impossible going overboard with humour for the sake of it when it clearly doesn’t?
 
Favorite scenes anyone?
I thought the scene right before the opening credits really set the stage for what the movie was going to be.
 
Favorite scenes anyone?
I thought the scene right before the opening credits really set the stage for what the movie was going to be.

The whole climax. Expertly handled, multiple perspective ending. Beautifully done.
 
It’s a hard choice between the entire Paris chase or the foot chase in London.
 
I read an interview with McQuarrie in which he says this one is more character/emotionally driven that the other ones-- Does that ring true to those who have seen it?

I want to check it out because of the reviews/I liked the trailer/Henry Cavill's first well-received movie... But honestly, this series hasn't done much for me outside the first one. So I'm on the fence.
 
Yes I absolutely think it dives quite a bit deeper into who Ethan Hunt is as a person, and what sets him apart from other agents.

And my favorite action scene would have to be that finale. So intense
 
Just got out of my first viewing. Such a thrilling experience.

My only complaint is that it was so good that I couldn’t help but daydream about a McQuarrie-directed GL movie, with Cruise as Hal, Rhames as Luthor and Harris as Sinestro

Rebecca-Ferguson.jpg

Also, just like in Rogue Nation, Ilsa Faust is everything Black Widow should have been. Mysterious, dangerous, tough, and classy.
 
Last edited:
I read an interview with McQuarrie in which he says this one is more character/emotionally driven that the other ones-- Does that ring true to those who have seen it?

I want to check it out because of the reviews/I liked the trailer/Henry Cavill's first well-received movie... But honestly, this series hasn't done much for me outside the first one. So I'm on the fence.

There’s no deep dive into Hunt’s psychology, but they do deal with what motivates him, and how those motivations can be manipulated by his enemies.

It’s a fantastic film. Go see it.
 
Favorite scenes anyone?
I thought the scene right before the opening credits really set the stage for what the movie was going to be.

My favorite scenes in order were [BLACKOUT]the Paris extraction sequence, the bathroom fight, the helicopter chase in the finale and the Halo jump[/BLACKOUT].
 
According to Deadline,
MI:Fallout will end its first weekend with an estimated 61.5 million dollars.
A record for the franchise.
 
Favorite scenes anyone?
I thought the scene right before the opening credits really set the stage for what the movie was going to be.

Bathroom fight and Paris car chase

Just got out of my first viewing. Such a thrilling experience.

My only complaint is that it was so good that I couldn’t help but daydream about a McQuarrie-directed GL movie, with Cruise as Hal, Rhames as Luthor and Harris as Sinestro



Also, just like in Rogue Nation, Ilsa Faust is everything Black Widow should have been. Mysterious, dangerous, tough, and classy.

Really? I was thinking McQuarrie with Uncharted. He has a knack for practical and at least practical looking stunts. He can balance humor, tension, and action well unlike 99% of action directors today.

Youre right about Faust/BW. I think Faust/Ferguson is a little overrated but she wouldve been 100% better as Black Widow and the character would've been way more interesting than what we have
 
According to Deadline,
MI:Fallout will end its first weekend with an estimated 61.5 million dollars.
A record for the franchise.

It deserves so much more IMO. Obviously, it will make a killing OS and WW, but domestically these movies just can't seem to breakout past $50-$60M OW not taking into account inflation. Those first two movies were BIG back in the day too, but so much has changed since then as far as the landscape of movies and you can definitely see it with the newer movies in this franchise
 
Also, just like in Rogue Nation, Ilsa Faust is everything Black Widow should have been. Mysterious, dangerous, tough, and classy.

After rewatching Rouge Nation last week I said to myself that Rebecca Ferguson should have been Black Widow. She'd nail it.
 
Cast her as Yelena Belova (Black Widow's more morally shady counterpart/rival) in the upcoming movie?
 
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"