Mission: Impossible FALLOUT (2018 Tom Cruise film)

I absolutely loved Skyfall and liked Spectre, but I can't really disagree with this statement.

 

I saw Mission: Impossible - Fallout last night and liked it a lot. It's slightly different in tone to the last two films. It's a bit of a slow burner to begin with and doesn't have as much humour. These are not necessarily bad things, just observations, but while I liked it, I don't think I quite got the same level of sheer enjoyment out of it as I did from Ghost Protocol or Rogue Nation. However, those films really were big dumb (brilliant) fun, and this is marginally darker, so it's not really a fair comparison.
It's probably a good idea to be familiar with the last film going in, but I'd expect the majority of people going would subscribe to the franchise anyway.

There are some very impressive set pieces and Cruise continues to impress with his commitment to the stunt work. The fact that safety nets might be just out of shot or having harnesses are digitally removed afterwards is irrelevant. He's still doing a lot of the physical work. In fact, one of the most impressive sequences includes him running flat out at what looks like Olympic 200 metre pace. Extraordinary.
The ensemble works well and the plot isn't as convoluted as lesser films can be. Characters' motives and shifting loyalties are explained logically. A second viewing may reveal gaping plotholes and inconsistencies, but I was never infuriated by the narrative, the way I have been with elements of some of the recent Bond films.
The Paris action sequences, in particular, are excellent, and - a minor but worthy observation - the film gains brownie points for not stating the relevant country every time a city's name is displayed on the screen.
Fans of the series shouldn't be disappointed in this latest instalment and casual observers should be impressed too.

Oh, and I'm very much in the Pro-Rebecca Ferguson camp.

 

The Rock, but Cruise is up there. Mission impossibles are like the early Bonds with Sean Connery.

 

I wonder if your take is the consensus of opinion because I think the first film is by far the best of the bunch. I really liked Ghost Protocol, but the first film has real drama to mix with action, and that is a rare combination these days. I thing MI I is uniquely great.

 

I can only chuckle when I read (or hear) that Cruise does "most" of his own stunts.

Like the one where he throws a chair through a window of a high-rise office building, and then jumps to the next building? So I guess that stunt is excluded, since it would be impossible? But this is Mission Impossible?

What I think the statement means is that Cruise does as many of his stunts before a green screen as he can. They take out an insurance policy in case he stubs his toe running and jumping onto mats in the studio. Or if the safety harness he is wearing rubs his skin too much and produces a friction burn.

AFAIK, David Belle, parkour extraordinaire, , did all his stunts in District B-13 and its sequel. Yes, they were choreographed and rehearsed, but there is a real element of danger or injury.
Here is rehearsal from his jump from building to building:

That particular jump appears at 3:20 on this fine compilation of David Belle's work, set to music: David Belle - Still Alive
(I think this combines footage from both movies, plus additional material not in the movies -- I just discovered this footage.)

Edit: on second thought, sliding down two descending cables with a metal rod is not a parkour activity, so I would qualify my earlier comment on David doing all his stunts. That probably needs to be excepted.

And early Jackie Chan movies were notorious for Jackie's performance of stunts, and I think some even have outtakes of stunts that deviated from their expected outcome.

That aside, yes, Tom stars in fun and entertaining movies. I rewatched some of Collateral last night. Thoroughly entertaining . . .

 

He does the stuff a stunt man would do, what more do you want?

 

So far, M:I 6 is on track to break the franchise box office record for opening weekend.

 

Just saw it. As the person wrote who said the MI films are better than the Bond film lately, I agree. His operative word was "thrilling" and that's just what MI Fallout is: thrilling! Honestly, how in the world can you go wrong with a ticking bomb finale!!! Haha. I liked this film because it made my 16-year old son elated. I watched him walk out of the theatre and he was doing that happy skip you do when you've seen a really exhilarating movie that peps you up, and this film obviously passes this test! (I don't skip much myself, but I walked out really satisfied and buoyed by the great action of this film. Now here is a "popcorn" movie that didn't offend my brain!

Of course, there's not much too offend as far plausibility, because, like all these films it's completely non-plausible. But this film doesn't weigh you down with mythology or baloney. There's barely any plot. There can't be more than five scenes of exposition (story) in the whole film. They pop up. Deliver their plot point and disappear quickly (sometimes a little to quickly and awkwardly, like the producers were having to have their arms twisted to inject "story" instead of another rooftop race)) and then it's quickly back to car chases, stunning fights, and some good humor (gotta love Everyman Simon Pegg).

The action stays, as someone said, in old school Bond territory, with pseudo-realistic action. I'm so tried of watching SUPERHEROES FLY THROUGH (OR GET PUNCHED) though buildings I want to throw up. I don't really need to see another Tie-Fighter battle, I don't need to see another "Neo" running on walls. I liked this action because it reminded me of Indiana Jones choreographed stuff (the last time I walked out of a theater skipping). Car chases felt real. Even the usually sucky helicopter action was great for a change (boosted by some phenomenal scenery in Kashmir.)

The music really helps. Great rousing score and I was very happy to hear Mr. Cruise asked the composer to add a few tinkles of my favorite Michael Small discordant piano! Yep, I heard it. A nice throwback to the 60s and 70s suspense film. A little musical homage to vintage suspense!

The only weak point for me was when this good looking hunk showed up as a CIA agent, and I thought: "Who cast this loser? Horrible actor." It took me a couple minutes (all these pretty boys start looking alike) before I realized it was Superman Henry Cavill. Now, I know why those films always suck, out of his cape it's a lot easier to recognize this guy isn't even the Clark Kent of acting, he's the Jimmy Olson. He sucks. What a block of wood. He couldn't even pull off the least interesting, stock character in the film. About as threatening as a Chippendale dancer.

Otherwise, I had a lot of fun with this film. And, yep, maybe I did skip a little out of the theater...

 

If I keep reading this thread I might actually go to see this. I remember in the 1990's when they started turning old TV series into movies I said, "They should take the old Mission Impossible series turn it into a theatrical film. That would have potential."

I hated the first MI movie with a passion. Instead of a MI team it was just a starring vehicle for Tom Cruise. I walked out of the theater not even sure of what I'd seen. IMO opinion it was a pure cash grab based on a name on the marquee. I don't think I've seen a Tom Cruise movie since.

 

So it's between most and many.

 

This doesn't look like green screen and I think he did more than stub his toe when he broke his ankle.



Raw Footage: Tom Cruise Stunt Injury on 'Mission: Impossible 6' Set in London

 

That's one hell of a nasty stunt. I can't believe they let him do that. Wow. That hurts to look at. Jumping into a cement wall at full tilt is not a pleasant thought.

 

Please tell me how you can tell it isn't partially or totally green screen. I couldn't clearly see the safety wires in some of the footage.

I do not deny that he injured his ankle/foot in shooting this stunt, which he was performing. Does this mean he performs all his stunts? That's another question.

I do not deny that this injury "hurt like hell" (yes, it looks ugly). But until I see an imaging study (e.g., usually an x-ray is suffice), I am skeptical that he broke his ankle. But Tom said "it was broken." Tom is not a trained orthopedist. I worked with several orthopedists, and they told me that one cannot diagnose a fracture based on pain. The only definitive diagnosis is an x-ray (or, if an x-ray is inconclusive, another kind of imaging study).

Orthopedists have a specific protocol for treating fractures. I searched online and I can't find even a mention of any element of this protocol of treatment. I can't find a picture of the x-ray, or even a mention of an imaging study. I can't find even the mention of an orthopedist anywhere. I don't trust Tom's diagnostic skills. We need to try to separate the spin from what really happened.

My conclusion: In this particular stunt, Tom definitely sustained an injury to his ankle/foot, and hats off to him for attempting this stunt. Since there is no evidence of a "broken" ankle (AKA fracture), he probably sustained a severe sprain (and his ankle probably became swollen, etc.), and in such a situation, it really hurts to bear weight. If you really have a fracture, no respectable orthopedist would send him to physical therapy/rehab immediately. Physical therapy doesn't heal fractures -- if the bone is properly aligned (non-displaced), Tom would be placed in at least a soft boot, if not a hard cast, to protect it from going "out of alignment."

 

Not sure anybody has said ALL, just most.

 

Seems a lot easier just to say, Yup, he broke it.

John K

 

Where's the green screen in this raw footage shot from below?

 

They shut down production for nine weeks and Cruise was back on set in seven weeks.

Paramount Keeping ‘M:I 6 – Mission Impossible’ Date Despite Broken Ankle For Tom Cruise

Tom Cruise Gets Back to Work on 'Mission: Impossible 6’ After Set Injury




If you don't like Cruise, just say it so we know your agenda for the heightened skepticism. Is it your belief that all of this press and EPK making-of videos are hyperbolic spin just to get people to see the movie?

People can dislike him for a variety of reasons (I happen to think the Scientology stuff is wackadoodle), but one thing you can't dog on him about is his commitment and dedication to the craft of filmmaking by performing as much as can be done in camera without a green screen or CGI to make it authentic as possible for the audience. Sure, he's an egomaniac, but he's very good at what he does and that is making exciting action films the old fashioned way.

 

Thanks for the raw footage re green screen. Good catch.

Being out seven weeks to recover is perfectly consistent with a severe strain. Still no evidence of a "broken" ankle. I'm going to drop it . . . you ignore the conclusion of my previous post, no reason to repeat it again.

 

I serious doubt they shut down a $250M movie for six weeks for a sprained ankle.

Doctors told Tom Cruise he might never run again after he broke his ankle filming 'Mission: Impossible — Fallout,' but he was back on set sprinting 6 weeks later

 

...what makes you think he diagnosed himself? I’m sure he went straight to the hospital.

Why are you expecting all this information would be freely available online? Maybe I’m misunderstanding you.

 

Funny discussion - I guess Tom does that; a polarizing individual.

 

Really enjoyed it.

Pro Rebecca Ferguson.

Jeremy Renner was missed.

Big yes to the Broker.

Theater was quite crowded and I went in the afternoon.

I plan to see it again.

 

i left the theater dizzy from the adrenalin coursing through me. incredible movie. mission impossible might be the first franchise that just keeps getting better (although unlike a lot of people i loved the second one).

 

Maybe that's the "buzz" I'm talking about. A sufficiently well made film is like an adrenalin shot!!