After first watching the almighty Mission Impossible: Fallout in 2018 with my granddad, one of my first thoughts was that for the sequel to be bigger and better, 'they are going to have to head to space'. A few weeks ago there were articles circulating that star Tom Cruise was talking to NASA about making a film in actual space, but not Mission Impossible related. This could just be me writing a few hundred words on why I think Fallout is the absolute pinnacle of 12 rated action cinema, but I do have some expressed concerns for the next two sequels, installments 7 and 8 (which are being shot back to back).
The Mission Impossible franchise started in in 1996 with a Brian De Palma picture that was very much in the vein of the old tv show. In 2000, Cruise returned but with Hong Kong action director John Woo behind the camera, delivering a crazy, blissfully unaware action film that made big bucks. After a hiatus, JJ Abrams directed the third film in 2006 before the franchise really found its footing in 2011 when Brad Bird helmed Ghost Protocol, more designed around riveting stunts and action set pieces. The famous Burj Khalifa scene is the series' magnum opus and epitomises what the franchise, and indeed Tom Cruise, stand for. Then in 2015, Christopher McQuarrie upped the spectacle even more with Rogue Nation, before returning to direct Fallout. You will have noticed the anomaly here: McQuarrie is the only director to return. The franchise was originally intended to have different creative voices for each film, but the Cruise / McQuarrie bromance was too much and they knew they could do better. Fallout is a sensational piece of escapism, containing one of the greatest vehicle chases, one of the greatest fist fights, one of the greatest foot-chases, the greatest skydive sequence and the greatest helicopter chase in cinematic history. It ticks nearly every action scene box and the editing, camera work and choreography just seem so perfect as to be unsurpassable.
The recycling of McQuarrie was respectable in that he went out of his way to make the film different; his composer and cinematographer for Rogue Nation were replaced for Fallout, and the process of making the film was vastly different, with McQuarrie and Cruise finding locations for action scenes before a script was even in place. As such, the script does feel convoluted in trying to get to each action location, but it does work. But how are the two going to make these next two features not just look and feel different, but also to be better?
There are a couple of ways in which they could start. Firstly, if there is one type of action sequence that the Mission Impossible films haven't left a stamp on is the shootout. There have been a couple and protagonist Ethan Hunt is more than happy to shoot to kill, but Fallout's shootout was shot in darkness. If McQuarrie and Cruise can pull off something to rival Heat or The Magnificent Seven then that would feel like a justified sequel. There is also a gap for snowmobile chases or other Arctic set action scenes, although that may feel like tapping into James Bond territory. Or take a note from the new Top Gun film and try and make an impressive dogfight with jets (not the most environmentally set piece however). The next option is to really investigate the characters. Cruise's Hunt did get some neat developments in Fallout, but Benji (Simon Pegg), Luther (Ving Rhames) and Ilsa (Rebecca Ferguson) could have some welcome arcs and backstory that could catch up with them.
If McQuarrie and Cruise still feel they can one up their set pieces from Fallout then they must have some insanely inventive ideas because right now I struggle to imagine sequences as concisely edited and thrilling as the helicopter chase or skydive in their 2018 action class. But, even if it these sequels do not live up to Fallout, the chances are I would just be as riveted by a Rogue Nation level film on the action front.
No comments:
Post a Comment