The W
Views: 101378904
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
17.12.14 2201
The W - Movies & TV - Mission Impossible 3
This thread has 7 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Thread rated: 4.83
Pages: 1
(4148 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (20 total)
puffdyw
Longanisa








Since: 21.4.05
From: California

Since last post: 2478 days
Last activity: 2478 days
AIM:  
#1 Posted on | Instant Rating: 1.68
This is by far the best Mission Impossible. It totally blew away my expectations. Go see it






Promote this thread!
The King of Keith
Lap cheong








Since: 4.11.02
From: Winchester, VA

Since last post: 5 days
Last activity: 5 days
AIM:  
#2 Posted on | Instant Rating: 2.81
Saw it last night, and color me impressed. Great acting + great script + killer action sequences + J. J. Abrams = Awesomeness. I cannot recommend this movie enough.



That's not Wolverine...
The Vile1
Lap cheong








Since: 4.9.02
From: California

Since last post: 2068 days
Last activity: 1800 days
#3 Posted on | Instant Rating: 2.08
It seemed more like a big budget, extended episode of Alias than Mission Impossible to me.

Cruise is so Xtr3me!
Matt Tracker
Scrapple








Since: 8.5.03
From: North Carolina

Since last post: 11 hours
Last activity: 42 min.
#4 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.90
Well, that's a heckuva movie. It starts hard, keeps a frenetic pace, and doesn't get dumb. It's a tight, tight film without the kind of breath-catching scenes one might expect. We understand the investments of the characters only as much as needed to work the plot and hook the audience. There is no fat to trim. Great action sequences, and, because his screen time is kept at a premium, Phillip Seymour Hoffman is a credible, spooky villain.

To be honest though, you could plug anyone into the Tom Cruie role, and the film would still work. He provides nothing except a determined glare and his standard agape expression that signifies he's thinking on his feet. The supporting cats is charming, but one wonders if the lead actress is supposed to look exactly like Katie Holmes. 'Cause she does, and that makes even the most casual of gossip consumers (hi there) wonder if we're supposed to cheer for the real-life couple as we watch these characters jump through hoops.

Before the film, we got to see the trailers for Superman Returns and Pirates of the Carribean 2, and they look even better on the giant screen. Nacho Libre looks like a scream.



"To be the man, you gotta beat demands." -- The Lovely Mrs. Tracker

My blog will amuse. (heygregory.blogspot.com)
Kevintripod
Boudin blanc








Since: 11.5.03
From: Mount Pleasant, Pa.

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 17 hours
AIM:  
#5 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.15
    Originally posted by Matt Tracker
    but one wonders if the lead actress is supposed to look exactly like Katie Holmes. 'Cause she does


Cruise was on The View this morning and Joy Behar asked him practically that exact same question. Tom told her that he met Katie Holmes after that actress had already been cast for MI3.



"Oh it's on like Donkey Kong." - Stifler, American Wedding
oldschoolhero
Knackwurst








Since: 2.1.02
From: nWo Country

Since last post: 2042 days
Last activity: 1976 days
#6 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.39
    Originally posted by The Vile1
    It seemed more like a big budget, extended episode of Alias than Mission Impossible to me.

    Cruise is so Xtr3me!


Of the three MI films this had the most resemblance to the former series, particularly in the team-based operations that were scattered throughout the movie.

Saying it was like a two-hour version of ALIAS is a really trite way of criticising the project just because of its director, and that's coming from someone who doesn't like Abrams' TV work. ALIAS is about a globe-trotting spy. The MISSION IMPOSSIBLE franchise is about a globe-trotting spy. When was there not going to be similarities in the subject matter?



To those who say people wouldn't look; they wouldn't be interested; they're too complacent, indifferent and insulated, I can only reply: There is, in one reporter's opinion, considerable evidence against that contention. But even if they are right, what have they got to lose? Because if they are right, and this instrument is good for nothing but to entertain, amuse and insulate, then the tube is flickering now and we will soon see that the whole struggle is lost. This instrument can teach, it can illuminate; yes, and it can even inspire. But it can do so only to the extent that humans are determined to use it to those ends. Otherwise it is merely wires, and lights, in a box.-Edward R. Murrow
Cerebus
Scrapple








Since: 17.11.02

Since last post: 9 days
Last activity: 1 day
#7 Posted on | Instant Rating: 0.97
    Originally posted by Kevintripod
    Cruise was on The View this morning and Joy Behar asked him practically that exact same question. Tom told her that he met Katie Holmes after that actress had already been cast for MI3.


...and he was lying like a motherfucker.

The original actress was fired/quit/'had to drop out', and the role was recast AFTER the fact.

Go look it up... I'm too lazy to find the shit, but I remember it well.
oldschoolhero
Knackwurst








Since: 2.1.02
From: nWo Country

Since last post: 2042 days
Last activity: 1976 days
#8 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.39
The "original actress" was Scarlett Johansson or Carrie-Anne Moss, and that was when Joe Carnahan was attached to direct a completely different script. That production fell apart at the start of 2005, and Abrams came onboard for directing and rewrite duties shortly afterwards. Monaghan, along with Jonathan Rhys-Meyers and Philip Seymour Hoffman, was cast in May of last year, when the Cruise/Holmes relationship was barely off the ground at best or non-existent at worst. Please check what you're saying has any basis in reality before posting it.

Also, Monaghan looks nothing like Katie Holmes, outside of being in her twenties and having dark hair. There are many aspects of Cruise's private life to pick on if you're so inclined, so inventing stuff out of thin air is entirely unnecessary.

(edited by oldschoolhero on 6.5.06 1221)


To those who say people wouldn't look; they wouldn't be interested; they're too complacent, indifferent and insulated, I can only reply: There is, in one reporter's opinion, considerable evidence against that contention. But even if they are right, what have they got to lose? Because if they are right, and this instrument is good for nothing but to entertain, amuse and insulate, then the tube is flickering now and we will soon see that the whole struggle is lost. This instrument can teach, it can illuminate; yes, and it can even inspire. But it can do so only to the extent that humans are determined to use it to those ends. Otherwise it is merely wires, and lights, in a box.-Edward R. Murrow
chill
Landjager








Since: 18.5.02

Since last post: 2742 days
Last activity: 2742 days
#9 Posted on | Instant Rating: 2.90
That's not really a fair way to criticize someone else. From the moment I first saw trailers for MI3, I also thought Katie Holmes was in the movie. A lot of people from my work did as well when we all saw the trailer one day.

Cleary, after seeing the movie, it would be obvious that KH is not in the movie. But it's an understandable misperception, based on several quick shots in the trailer.



Take the plunge. Step into liquid.
dvd shelf // game shelf // top 20 // laird // tv guide //

The Vile1
Lap cheong








Since: 4.9.02
From: California

Since last post: 2068 days
Last activity: 1800 days
#10 Posted on | Instant Rating: 2.08
    Originally posted by oldschoolhero
      Originally posted by The Vile1
      It seemed more like a big budget, extended episode of Alias than Mission Impossible to me.

      Cruise is so Xtr3me!


    Of the three MI films this had the most resemblance to the former series, particularly in the team-based operations that were scattered throughout the movie.


The team gets written out of the final act. It was still clearly Cruise's show, the other team characters like Maggie Q and John Rhys Meyers, while they were good were still one dimensional characters.


    Saying it was like a two-hour version of ALIAS is a really trite way of criticising the project just because of its director, and that's coming from someone who doesn't like Abrams' TV work. ALIAS is about a globe-trotting spy. The MISSION IMPOSSIBLE franchise is about a globe-trotting spy. When was there not going to be similarities in the subject matter?


It seemed pretty obvious to me when you had Ethan Hunt now showing how his professional life affects his private life. He's the spy that has to lie to his friends and loved ones about his true profession.

Also, Simon Pegg as Benji was basically Marshall from Alias, except he was Simon Pegg.
oldschoolhero
Knackwurst








Since: 2.1.02
From: nWo Country

Since last post: 2042 days
Last activity: 1976 days
#11 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.17
    Originally posted by chill
    That's not really a fair way to criticize someone else. From the moment I first saw trailers for MI3, I also thought Katie Holmes was in the movie. A lot of people from my work did as well when we all saw the trailer one day.

    Cleary, after seeing the movie, it would be obvious that KH is not in the movie. But it's an understandable misperception, based on several quick shots in the trailer.


But it's fair to pull stuff out of your ass to prove a half-baked theory that Cruise is out to hoodwink people into believing he's starring with his girlfriend? Come on.

To clarify, I have no problems with the idea that people may mistake Michelle Monaghan for Katie Holmes. I don't se it myself, but that's neither here nor there. I do have a problem with that misconception being extended to include "Cruise must've cast her because they look so alike" and "all this must be true-I think I read an article once that may have backed my theory up in some way, but I can't be bothered to look it up".

(edited by oldschoolhero on 6.5.06 1349)


To those who say people wouldn't look; they wouldn't be interested; they're too complacent, indifferent and insulated, I can only reply: There is, in one reporter's opinion, considerable evidence against that contention. But even if they are right, what have they got to lose? Because if they are right, and this instrument is good for nothing but to entertain, amuse and insulate, then the tube is flickering now and we will soon see that the whole struggle is lost. This instrument can teach, it can illuminate; yes, and it can even inspire. But it can do so only to the extent that humans are determined to use it to those ends. Otherwise it is merely wires, and lights, in a box.-Edward R. Murrow
The Vile1
Lap cheong








Since: 4.9.02
From: California

Since last post: 2068 days
Last activity: 1800 days
#12 Posted on | Instant Rating: 2.08
That said, I really like Michelle Monaghan. Especially from Kiss Kiss Bang Bang, where she was great in. She wasn't quite as strong in MI:3, but I was very happy to see her in the movie. I hope she gets tons more work now.
Teapot
Kishke








Since: 1.8.02
From: Louisville KY

Since last post: 220 days
Last activity: 3 days
#13 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.40
I really liked this one, certainly more than the first two installments.

Best part, though? If you stay till the end of the credits, one of the "Special Thanks" messages goes out to the Hanso Foundation. I marked out for that.



Kevintripod
Boudin blanc








Since: 11.5.03
From: Mount Pleasant, Pa.

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 17 hours
AIM:  
#14 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.15
'M:I3' Earnings Disappoint on 1st Weekend

By DAVID GERMAIN
AP Movie Writer

LOS ANGELES (AP) -- Fewer people chose to accept Tom Cruise's latest mission, a possible sign that the odd behavior of Hollywood's biggest star may have taken a toll on his box-office charm.

Paramount's "Mission: Impossible III" debuted with $48.025 million, a solid opening yet well below industry expectations and almost $10 million lower than the franchise's previous installment, according to studio estimates Sunday.

Industry analysts had expected the movie to open in the range of "Mission: Impossible II," which debuted with $57.8 million from Friday to Sunday over Memorial Day weekend in 2000, and Cruise's "War of the Worlds," which premiered with $64.9 million from Friday to Sunday over Fourth of July weekend last year.

Rob Moore, Paramount's head of worldwide marketing and distribution, said he did not believe Cruise's private life had any impact on "Mission: Impossible III," directed by "Lost" creator J.J. Abrams.

"I don't think so. There's no question it concerns us if the press is writing about things other than the movie," Moore said. "If people are writing about his personal life, then by definition, they're not writing about the movie."

Cruise's antics in the past year or so, publicity over his romance with Katie Holmes and the tabloid blitz regarding their daughter's birth in April may have left some movie-goers burned out or disenchanted with the actor.

Traditionally reserved about his private life, Cruise abruptly became an open book, jumping up and down on a couch while professing his love for Holmes in an interview with Oprah Winfrey and spouting his Scientology beliefs, including rants against psychiatry.

"Expectations were really high for this film. I think it's a good number, but people were obviously expecting better numbers," said Paul Dergarabedian, president of box-office tracker Exhibitor Relations. "There's a lot to be said for how a star's public persona can affect a movie's box office."

"Mission: Impossible III" earned generally favorable reviews, some critics calling it the best in the franchise and many offering high praise for Academy Award winner Philip Seymour Hoffman, who plays Cruise's nemesis.

Along with potential Cruise backlash, the long six-year interval since "Mission: Impossible II" may have dulled audience appetites.

Head-to-head comparisons are difficult, since the previous "Mission: Impossible" movies and "War of the Worlds" opened over long holiday weekends, when Sunday grosses typically are much stronger than during a regular weekend.

Debuting in about 55 other countries, "Mission: Impossible III" took in $70 million, for a worldwide total of $118 million. Paramount noted that the new movie beat the $115 million worldwide debut of "Mission: Impossible II" in those same countries.

Factoring in higher ticket prices, the debut for "Mission: Impossible III" looks worse. About 7.3 million people saw the new movie, compared with 10.7 million over the opening weekend for "Mission: Impossible II" and 10.3 million for "Mission: Impossible," which opened with $45.4 million over Memorial Day weekend in 1996.


(edited by Kevintripod on 8.5.06 0123)


"Oh it's on like Donkey Kong." - Stifler, American Wedding
Mr. Boffo
Scrapple








Since: 24.3.02
From: Oshkosh, WI

Since last post: 507 days
Last activity: 468 days
#15 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.12
    Originally posted by Kevintripod
    "I don't think so. There's no question it concerns us if the press is writing about things other than the movie," Moore said. "If people are writing about his personal life, then by definition, they're not writing about the movie."

I don't know what dictionary he's using. Couldn't they be writing about his personal life and the movie? Is there a finite amount of words that they allow to be written about a certain person?

That said, I won't see this (easy for me to say since I haven't seen either of the first two, but still), especially with Cruise being a producer on the film, and I believe he gets a good cut of the profits. And I doubt I'll see any movie he's ever in again as well.



In the real world, WWE believes that no matter what our race, religious creed or ethnic background in America, we all share the common bond of being Americans. American-Arabs are a part of the fabric of America, and they should be embraced by all of us.
oldschoolhero
Knackwurst








Since: 2.1.02
From: nWo Country

Since last post: 2042 days
Last activity: 1976 days
#16 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.17
Whoa, a wee bit harsh. Putting cash in Cruise's pocket may rankle with you, but this movie-and all his future ones too, I'd wager-carries a laundry list of people who DO deserve your support and/or money.



To those who say people wouldn't look; they wouldn't be interested; they're too complacent, indifferent and insulated, I can only reply: There is, in one reporter's opinion, considerable evidence against that contention. But even if they are right, what have they got to lose? Because if they are right, and this instrument is good for nothing but to entertain, amuse and insulate, then the tube is flickering now and we will soon see that the whole struggle is lost. This instrument can teach, it can illuminate; yes, and it can even inspire. But it can do so only to the extent that humans are determined to use it to those ends. Otherwise it is merely wires, and lights, in a box.-Edward R. Murrow
MonteCarl
Potato korv








Since: 21.1.02
From: Saginaw, MI

Since last post: 50 days
Last activity: 5 hours
AIM:  
#17 Posted on | Instant Rating: 8.26
I had nothing to do last night, so I went to see this movie by myself. I wasn't expecting to like it at all. But I really did. It was quite good. I remember absolutely nothing about the first two movies, other than that ridiculous motorcycle fight in II, but this one kept me entertained through the whole movie. Phillip Seymore Hoffman was great.

I'm not a movie critic or anything, but I know when I'm entertained by a movie and this movie entertained me. Yeah, it's the first summer "blockbuster" popcorn flick, but it was a GOOD popcorn flick.



--Monte N
http://www.thebananaconvention.com
JST
Toulouse








Since: 20.1.02
From: Quebec City, CAN

Since last post: 9 days
Last activity: 11 hours
#18 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.98
I think we can all agree by now that Tom Cruise is probably insane, but he can still make a damn good action movie. I went in expecting the usual Cruise overacting. I don't think I noticed his trademark "running towards the camera" shot, either. And I was expecting "goody-two shoes" Keri Russell to bore me (still had Felicity in mind), but came out very much satisfied and Keri Russell kicked lots of ass in her role.

Regarding Cruise's antics, I say I leave all that shit outside the theater and when I sit down I just want to be entertained. And I was.

(edited for spell-checking and cleaning up)

(edited by JST on 11.5.06 1422)


generated by sloganizer.net
EddieBurkett
Boudin blanc








Since: 3.1.02
From: GA in person, NJ in heart

Since last post: 14 days
Last activity: 7 min.
#19 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.05
Hoffman was good but seemed rather under-used. I liked the parts where he got to play Ethan, but with the Cruise voice-over it was funny.

Maybe it was just me, but Cruise kept doing this thing when he was thinking/reacting, where he'd bite his lip and shake his head. It looked like something Jack does on Lost. I'm wondering if that's something that Cruise and Fox have in common, or if that's just an Abrams-ism.

I enjoyed the movie, and I say that admitting I wasn't in the mood for an action movie when I got dragged out to see it.



Found at Insert Credit, citing Something Awful: "Nintendo is so intent on becoming number one, that they named their console after it."
dwaters
Lap cheong








Since: 16.10.02
From: Connecticut

Since last post: 12 days
Last activity: 13 hours
#20 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.39
    Originally posted by JST
    I don't think I noticed his trademark "running towards the camera" shot, either.

    (edited for spell-checking and cleaning up)

    (edited by JST on 11.5.06 1422)


I don't know if he ran towards the camera, but there was the Tom-is-running-down-a-street-as-fast-as-he-possibly-can shot.
Look, Tom is running.

This is the first MI film I've seen and was quite entertained.
I thought the Chesapeake Bay bridge scene was incredibly well done. I still don't get how a laytex mask can fool people if the person wearing it doesn't have the same body shape and size, but it's just a detail....



So here's my question: In a million years, did you ever think this would happen? One decade ago, I didn't even have an e-mail address or know what the Internet was ... now I can watch Piper slam a coconut against Snuka's head whenever I want? What will the world be like 10 years from now? Is it possible to procrastinate for 24 hours a day? Are we headed that way? -Bill Simmons on YouTube.
Thread rated: 4.83
Pages: 1
Thread ahead: The Price is Right double showcase winner rule?
Next thread: Destroyer (spoilers ahoy)
Previous thread: Original "Star Wars" to DVD
(4148 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
...like the Fox thread, I'm a little late with these too... Returning Shows Real Time with Bill Maher (HBO - 8.31.8 - Sixth Season) The Shield (FX - 9.2.8 - Seventh Season) America's Next Top Model (CW - 9.3.8 - Eleventh Season) Entourage (HBO - 9.7.
The W - Movies & TV - Mission Impossible 3Register and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.368 seconds.