The "Mission: Impossible" Trilogy

[Tommy]

I don't have much respect for Tom Cruise but he is really good in action movies and I have to say these movies are pretty clever. I find them much better than the series that aired in the 1960s.

Anyone else seen these? MI3 was SOOO good. I loved the 3rd one more than ever and the 2nd rocks as well. The 1st was eh...a decent action movie, but the 3rd and 2nd were REALLY good. What do you think?

[GrubbTheFragger]

I argee i loved mission impossible 3. It threw the cornyness of 2 out the window and actually made a serious plot that had suspense and lots and LOTS of action. Tom Cruise may be nuts but hey his movies are cool ^ ^

EDIT: Mission Impossible 2 was my least favirote. They made it way to Stylised (they used the slow down effect WAY to much. They tryed to make it another Transporter movie. Meanwhile mission impossible 1 had a good plot with alot of suspense (when you first watch it) and it had several decent plot twists. I remember the classic hanging form the ceiling part and my mom didn't make a noise during that part because of the suspense.

[Tommy]

Mission Impossible 2 was neither corny nor too stylized in my opinion.

[Stephen]

I loved 2. Really enjoyed 3, but hated 1.

[Arnobius]

I always enjoyed the TV series. Movie 1 I really disliked, so I skipped the rest of them, though I did hear John Woo directed 2, and I always liked his films like "The Killer" "Hard Boiled" "A Better Tomorrow" and "A Bullet in the Head"

[glitch1501]

i loved 3, i cant even remember what all happened in 2, and i didnt really like 1

[Warrior 4 Jesus]

I thought there was too much sex (references/activity) in MI:2 and not much storyline (some cool stunts and identity masks though). MI:1 was very good and very clever. I haven't seen MI:3 yet. But MI:2 was one of the most horrible jumbles I've ever seen.

[Warrior 4 Jesus]

sorry (computer)

[GrubbTheFragger]

But MI:2 was one of the most horrible jumbles I've ever seen.

finally someone who agrees with me I didn't like MI:2 much i won't go as far as saying it was horrible but it was to stylized in my oppion. I mean 2 cars drivng next to each girl rams on car the car does a 720 spin and then as soon as it gets to the edge the car that there hero is in stop and the other cars fall .0,o i like realism *sighs* then again alot of people like the transporter 2

[Tommy]

They tryed to make it another Transporter movie.

Dude, Transporter 1 came out AFTER Mission: Impossible 2.

If I'm wrong, I know for a fact they came out in the same year.

[Radical Dreamer]

I have yet to see MI3, but I loved the first one. If the third one is as good as I've heard, though, I can tell all of you why. J.J. Abrams directed it, that's why. *J.J. Abrams created Alias and Lost, for those who don't know.*

I'll have to go see this one sometime, though. *nodnod*

[Galant]

Here's my problem with the movies - and I say this as someone who enjoyed 1, loved 2 (saw it three times at the movies) but then on a recent review found it to be dis-tasteful, and then found 3....'meh' -

The whole mission impossible series and theme was to bring together a team of experts in their fields to come together to pull off some otherwise impossible job. It was intelligent, thrilling, and the different missions and team members made it interesting.

The first movie kind of had the same approach, though killing off the team and leaving the lone member to clear it up. It was clever. After the first movie though I guess they decided that they really didn't need the team, what they needed was a single hero and some supporting cast.

After seeing the third movie I reviewed my thoughts on the whole thing seeing as I felt a bit disappointed. I decided that what was missing was the intelligence. The cleverness of how the whole thing comes together just isn't there, and neither is the team aspect. Instead of a team fo individuals who rely on one another each an expert, we have Ethan, the uber-member, and then a few necessary extras who come across more as tools for Tom's use. I'd love to see it a little less hero centered and more team centered.

The other thing is the 'impossible' aspect of the movie. The only things impossible are some of Tom's stunts and all the bullet dodging that goes on. I found myself asking a question - if you to to try to write MI:3 as a book how would it come out? Boring I think, because so much of what catches you in the movie is extended action sequencing. You can't write that in a book...'Ethan dodges this and that, shoots here and there, chucks this, dives here', it just wouldn't work. Whereas a movei can rely upon visual and audio flash and bang, a book can't. Therefore, the writer has to grip the reader with the storyline, the characters, the dialogue.

I think what we see in MI:3 is movie makers using the cheap way out. They are using the high-tech solution to give people an eye-popping (no pun intended) ear-blowing experience, where they can suspend their brains.

I guess what I miss is something that really gets you thinking. That just wasn't there, and that's what I hope for in the Mission Impossible series. Wit and smarts rather than just flash and bang.

The movie wasn't awful, none of them were, I actually enjoyed the stylistic qualities of 2 for what they were, but this wasn't really mission impossible to me, it could have been any other action flick.

[mitsuki lover]

It is one of those movie series I will refuse to watch since as someone who grew up watching the original series I could not stomach what I understood they did to
the character of the IM team leader Jim Phelps in the first movie.They should have,IMO,stuck to the original intent of the series and not play around with the main character the way they did.

[Tommy]

According to my Dad, none of the characters in the movie trilogy were in the original series. (He has seen all three.)

[bbboy21]

You maybe right I've never seen the original series and to be honest, don't really care. I'm just glad that M:I III was a great movie, very tense; just the way I like it.

Besides, it had a bit more mysterious story in it. Though I do kind of wish it was really the best of both movies.

[fairyprincess90]

I thought there was too much sex (references/activity) in MI:2 and not much storyline (some cool stunts and identity masks though). MI:1 was very good and very clever. I haven't seen MI:3 yet. But MI:2 was one of the most horrible jumbles I've ever seen.

i so agree with this... mission impossible one had a good twist, and two had too much loveyy doveyy, tho other than that it was okay, but three was most kewlest! omgoodness! i luved that one! i think it was the best one!