Ain't It Cool News (
Movie News

David Fincher to direct MISSION IMPOSSIBLE 3!

Harry here with news which I can't necessarily classify as cool news. David Fincher is in final negotiations to helm the next MISSION IMPOSSIBLE movie... The third in the series. Now... call me suspicious, but Fincher doesn't have the best luck in doing 'third in a series' projects. coughALIEN3cough... Of course he was fucked pretty hard on that project coughaskjohnwooaboutmi2cough. coughstuartbairdcough. Of course I'm suuuuure things will be different this time out. Fincher knows more about the studio system. He's a more experienced director right now. The studio is a bit different now. And Fincher is at the top of his game, whereas the other two directors that have taken on the MISSION IMPOSSIBLE franchise haven't necessarily been at the best place in their careers when taking those reins.

The key things that I would like to see happen in MISSION IMPOSSIBLE 3 is that there is a real TEAM... That they all get the job done with Cruise as that leader. That they totally mind fuck their opponent in the end, as well as us. And that Tom Cruise look like Jared Leto at the end of FIGHT CLUB by the time all is said and done in the film. They do all of that, and I'll be a happy camper! heehehehehee, how about you?

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • April 17, 2002, 6:01 a.m. CST

    How about..

    by DannyOcean01

    we all just beat the crap out of Cruise ourselves, make him look like Leto at the end of Fight Club, film it and make that the next MI. Of course it would make a very short mission and it certainly wouldn't be impossible.

  • April 17, 2002, 6:11 a.m. CST

    Com'on Fincher! What about Rendezvous!

    by Professor_X

    FINCHER, MAN, DONT LET HOLLYWOOD TRICK YOU! COME BACK TO REAL AND TRUTHFUL MOVIES! Oh god... please, don't let Fincher become another Brian DePalma.

  • April 17, 2002, 6:15 a.m. CST

    Oh Dear

    by KID AB

    You do know that the other two M:I's were poor, even though they were directed by John Woo and Brian DePalma. The first one had no plot and it just confused me. The second one was just crap. It threw up the question how can something look so good, but be so crap. I can't see Fincher breaking this pattern. BTW anyone else heard that Fincher is in Full Frontal, the new Steven Soderburgh film? Go to Dark Horizons to get the full story. P.S, currently reading your book Harry, it's ok but not brilliant.

  • Answer is: "David Fincher directs Mission Impossible 3".......Wasnt Alien 3 a big enough F Up?

  • April 17, 2002, 6:20 a.m. CST

    I think this is cool...

    by Harlow

    MI-1 was uninspired but I didn't think it was too bad. MI-2 I loved, however. Yeah it's no A Better Tomorrow.'s not even A Better Tomorrow 2. But thank god it wasn't another Rush Hour or Lethal Weapon or any of the other Hollywood cookie cutter action movies. MI:2 had a style and action and humor. It had fun. The thought of Fincher taking on the MI series makes be giddy. Think of the suspense of The Game with Fight Club's violence. This is truly good news. Not to mention that Fincher needs to get back on his game after Panic Room, which I describe to my friends as an Ashley Judd movie starring Jodie Foster. The only thing that saved P.R. was Forest Whittaker...who is always terrific.

  • April 17, 2002, 6:24 a.m. CST

    Alien 3 was great.....

    by Splinter

    ...IN MY HUMBLE, INDIVIDUAL AND UTTERLY SUBJECTIVE OPINION - I ABSOLUTELY RESPECT ANYONE WHO DISLIKES IT, BUT MUST RESPECTFULLY STATE THAT I THINK ITS BLOODY GREAT..........Phew. Just has to pre-empt any stinking talkback bile thats thrown my way....As for MI3...well, 2 was frankly an embarssment for all concerned. Man...thge part where Cruise is walking down a tunnel, meets a henchman, and proceeds to do a full (physicallyimpossiblebutwhocares)backwards somersault kick. Ummm.....Ethan? Nobody was watching. You didn't impress anyone. Why the ludicrous kick?Why not club him on the back of the head and save your energy? ...sigh. To me the whole film was a self-indulgent wank-fest perpetrated by the impossibly handsome-dwarf himself. But again, THATS JUST MY OPINION. I ACCEPT THAT I COULD BE IN THE MINORITY HERE. IF YOU LIKED IT, THATS FINE. ;)

  • April 17, 2002, 6:25 a.m. CST

    panic room/black dahlia/finchers choices

    by BEARison Ford

    i think the fact that fincher did panic room after something like fight club shows exactly what kind of movies he goes after so M:I3 makes sense. i hope they include the "team" element that was what made the series so good, and was somewhat present in the first but completely omitted in the second (total cruise vanity vehicle [surprise])

  • April 17, 2002, 6:26 a.m. CST

    black dahlia. oops.

    by BEARison Ford

    oops, forgot to include that fincher still has got to make the black dahlia by james ellroy!

  • April 17, 2002, 6:28 a.m. CST

    A Non-Event!

    by SkurdJ

    This makes me about as excited as the huge zit I popped last night. MI2 was a steaming truckload of horse hooey. It took me two attempts to watch it. The first time I fell asleep, the second time I kept switching over to watch the Fashion TV channel which at times was way more interesting.

  • April 17, 2002, 6:29 a.m. CST

    It's all about the screenplay baby!

    by Ashen Shugar

    The major problem with both M-I films was the screenplay, big big shits. But the directors did their job well. If Fincher gets the good screenplay, it will rule. Or like the two other films it will suck because the story sucks....

  • April 17, 2002, 6:31 a.m. CST

    I would say that David Fincher sold out, but it's that good

    by Lenny Nero

    He's a director who might give a great name and resurgence to mainstream film. Here's hoping.

  • April 17, 2002, 6:36 a.m. CST

    I think Mission: Impossible 1 is the best action film of the 90s

    by Lenny Nero

    The plot may have been confusing, but I love a movie where I may need to watch it more than once to understand. It keeps me interested. M:I was a great international piece, much better than any of the recent Bond movies, and the supporting cast of Vanessa Redgrave and Ving Rhames amongst others made it near perfect. The direction is amazing and the action scenes work like a charm. DePalma attempted to bring his career back, and it worked. Then he made a couple flops. Mucho problemo. So...yeah. That's my rant.

  • April 17, 2002, 6:53 a.m. CST

    This is fucking GREAT news ! Panic Room was amazing, and leave A

    by SilenceofFreedom

    I think Fincher probably has enough clout anf respect from both studios and actors alike. This could be spectazular, but, as someone else said, it's all about the screenplay. Just don't get Charlie Kaufman to write it.

  • April 17, 2002, 7:09 a.m. CST

    Damn straight this is cool news

    by Jabbathenutt

    This is fantastic!!! Three MI movies by directors with entirely different styles, all great in their own right. I personally enjoyed MI 1 over 2, but you can't say MI2 wasn't enjoyable as hell to watch. Fincher makes movies that stay with you - I am sure this will be a dandy. I am damn sure if a movie trailer being put up on the internet is cool news then this is (c'mon don't ban me for that....)

  • April 17, 2002, 7:10 a.m. CST

    Fincher is the right man

    by Silver_Joo

    Each M:I movie has had a different feel because Cruise wanted it that way. He has made a great franchise, allowing his directors, good or bad to stamnp their creativity all over the movies. He wanted Fincher for M:I-3 and this news was out months ago. Fincher has not sold out anymore than someone like Soderbergh, and to be honest, Fincher is making the more interesting movies without the human shileds of Julia and George to hide behind.

  • April 17, 2002, 7:23 a.m. CST

    And now I'm confused...

    by moviemaniac-7

    I saw it on about a month ago that Fincher was attached to M:I 3 and I was shocked to say the least. Come on, Finch can get better projects! And then, about a week ago, I read an interview with the man himself and he told us that M:I 3 was total bullshit. Not his words, but the idea is the same. Interview can be found at What is going on here? I demand answers! Like others have said before me: WHAT IS HAPPENING WITH RENDEZ VOUS WITH RAMA?????

  • April 17, 2002, 7:40 a.m. CST

    Ya Ya Ya...

    by mEloN jAvEliN

    ...David Fincher cheets on his wife, has a beer and kills 15 fox executives who fucked him over and re-shot and edited alien 3 into the big pile of steaming poo we have come to know and love... You americans...the originators of the dream have lost all your faith and know only the your instincts, cos its gonna be one helluva film that could potentially take this safe hollywood franchise and twist it into a violent darkcore(tm) style exersise in flashy techno gadgetry and snarling bloody cut-up fist fights...WITH explosions, cars, big guns and pert breasts...FINCHER RULEZ!!!

  • April 17, 2002, 7:41 a.m. CST

    M-I:2 was shit, Alien3 was great.

    by prince kamal


  • April 17, 2002, 7:45 a.m. CST

    What a shame.

    by Frank Black

    Fincher is one of the few directors making ORIGINAL movies, why waste his talent on this? Tom Cruise should direct it with a digital video camera pointed into a big mirror so he can pop his goofy smile out at us and toss out one liners. Who needs another "Mission Impossible" movie?

  • April 17, 2002, 7:45 a.m. CST

    Mission Impossible 2 was fucking abysmal

    by Charlie & Tex

    How can a movie that loud be so fantastically dull? Crap, overbearing music, combined with tedious stunt sequences & Woo's annoying slow-slow-quick-quick-slow cutting made for a movie that really got on our fucking nerves. We hope that Fincher is now the kind of director who will not allow the star of the movie to walk all over him. It may be just an action movie, but it still requires some substance & characterisation. MI:2 was the very definition of "all skirt, no knickers".

  • April 17, 2002, 7:54 a.m. CST

    i can't believe .....

    by Jesus Q Einstein

    ....that there is going to be another of these shitty SHITTY movies. Not sure what David Fincher would bring to the table here. I like his previous stuff, but can't see how his style could fit with a big franchise like this. I predict the usual routine spy bollox peppered with a lot of CGI zooms.

  • April 17, 2002, 7:55 a.m. CST

    i can't believe .....

    by Jesus Q Einstein

    ....that there is going to be another of these shitty SHITTY movies. Not sure what David Fincher would bring to the table here. I like his previous stuff, but can't see how his style could fit with a big franchise like this. I predict the usual routine spy bollox peppered with a lot of CGI zooms.

  • April 17, 2002, 7:55 a.m. CST

    Come on!! You don't know yet!!

    by laguna_loire

    Who'd have thought that Bryan Singer could've dealt "X-Men" such respect? Or Sam Raimi would go from Cheap Classic Horror to Spiderman? There are a million of these examples, I'm picking-out a common few. I'll hold my opinions until the film comes-out. "Alien 3" was flawed heavily (Fox, are you ever going to release a version with all the cut plot parts put back in? PLEASE!!), granted, but he was a newcomer then, and he has some actual POWER now. Still want him to make Rendezvous with Rama happen and up there - do you read Fincher?

  • April 17, 2002, 7:59 a.m. CST

    Last remnants of credibility flapping miserably in the wind

    by jazzuk

    Alien 3 was a _good_ movie. Ok, it didn't have the genre-ground-breaking impact that Alien did (which I might add is an incredibly tedious film - what seemed like "tension" at the time was just lack of pace, we just didn't know it then). Similarly Alien3 didn't have the utterly brainless gung-ho energy of Aliens. But what Alien3 did have was some intelligence. It certainly had a style. And it was generously endowed with class performances from stage and screen heavyweights. Of all the Alien movies, 3 is probably the only one that stands alone as a piece of film-making that doesn't need to rely on it's symbolic place in movie history (Alien: genre maker, Aliens: action apogee, Resurrection: well, I guess the TV-soap style return of Ripley gained it some notoriety).

  • April 17, 2002, 8:04 a.m. CST

    actually, what fincher said...

    by ClancyWiggum

    ...was that it (him doing m:i3) was NOT horseshit. I must say that it could be interesting if made right. About the level of violence, though: both m:is are PG-13 and the third one would probably be PG-13 too. I don't know, I would much rather see Fincher's Black Dahlia.

  • April 17, 2002, 8:17 a.m. CST

    D.Fincher making a good movie? Yes, "Mission Impossible" about

    by binarybaby

    I will never forgive him for killing the superb Alien franchise with the awful Alien3. Oh and by the way I think the first MI was far superior to MI2.

  • April 17, 2002, 8:21 a.m. CST

    Alien 3

    by Explody

    Using Alien 3 as an example of Fincher's ability as a director is akin to citing Pirahna 2 as an estimation of James Cameron's talent. "Fincher couldn't possibly make a good movie because he made a mediocre one ten years ago." Absurd.

  • April 17, 2002, 8:23 a.m. CST

    M:I movies rule, dammit!

    by Northerner82

    Seems like loads of people round here have some kind of vendetta against Cruise, refusing to like his movies before they even see them. Just give the Tom bashing a rest guys, its getting boring. The first M:I was a superb, intelligent action flick with memorable lines and sequences ("Kitteridge, you've never seen me very upset", the computer room, the copter in the tunnel). Intelligent doesn't really apply to the second movie but it was still a blast, in a different way. Well executed over the top stunts in cool jacket, shades and scar...ok, forget the plot, leave your brain at the door and enjoy! Here's hoping the third installment will kick another different way! I want them to keep Ving Rhames and Hopkins but lets have a bigger TEAM this time round. I'd like to see the orginal score back tho, and for God's sake cut yer hair Tom!

  • April 17, 2002, 8:23 a.m. CST

    I like Finchers Alien!!

    by cird

    I like Alien3 and I am really looking forward to a Fincher directed MI:3 !!!!

  • April 17, 2002, 8:32 a.m. CST

    And another thing

    by Northerner82

    Can we please have more than one actors face on the poster please? (Vanilla Sky, M:I, M:I 2, Minority Report, Jerry Maguire etc)

  • April 17, 2002, 8:36 a.m. CST

    Amazing Larry

    by Albumen

    You know, it's not very often that I read Talkback and see something that makes me think "Oh yeah... of course never thought of that!" but Amazing Larry's point about Fincher playing the game and lying down with the dog a bit so he can gain their trust with the big money projects. Can you imagine David Fincher with the power that Final Cut would give him. Brilliant as Fight Club was, imagine what it would be if he really let rip. Kubrick did a very similar thing around the same place in his career. Making Spartacus as a director for hire allowed him to then go on and make films with virtually no interference. Smart man Mr Fincher. Whether MI3 is good or not he's a smart man

  • April 17, 2002, 8:45 a.m. CST

    HOLY SHIT! The Mission Impossible franchise has ABSOLUTELY SUCKE

    by chuckrussel


  • April 17, 2002, 8:51 a.m. CST

    Here's A Bet.........

    by FanHalen

    Anybody wanna bet that Fincher leaves sooner or later due to creative differences with Cruise? I kinda hate to see Fincher selling out with a big name franchise.

  • April 17, 2002, 8:58 a.m. CST

    MI2, big pile of poo

    by MonkeySpazmaster

    Why don't they just leave this tired and mundane franchise alone. MI2 was the biggest pile of bollocks (I'm English) I've seen in a long time. Tom Cruise has the kind of smug face you want to smash in with a big hammer. And John Woo's direction is so overly stylised that it makes me want to vomit my internal organs up. Is there really any need for that much slow motion or is he just trying to increase the running time cost effectively. No director could save this lame franchise, not even the mighty Fincher.

  • April 17, 2002, 9 a.m. CST

    What happened to Frank Miller's HARD BOILED?


    Fincher could direct the shit out of Miller's HARD BOILED.Why would he subject himself to the Hell of working on the M.I. series? HARD BOILED like a mother fucker,yo.

  • April 17, 2002, 9:05 a.m. CST

    King Kong33

    by Albumen

    Sorry, you may have misinterpreted what I was saying. I wasn't blaming anybody for screwing anything up. To be honest I've enjoyed all of Finchers movies to the extreme. Although there are some huge faults with Alien 3 (you're right about the script. William Gibson had some great ideas in his draft) and Fight Club is probably my favourite movie of all time. BUT I would love to see a movie from Fincher where he is unencumbered by Test screenings and re-cuts on behalf of the studios. Even if he screwed up the "Auteur" thing, I'm sure his mistakes would be far more interesting than a lot of directors successes. And if playing the game a little while allows him that freedom then all well & good. Obviously it could fly in my face. I mean we all know the reason Phantom Menace was such a screw-up was because there was no-on sat on Big Georges shoulder saying "er... George... sorry mate but that Sucks!"

  • April 17, 2002, 9:06 a.m. CST

    FOX should let FINCHER re-cut ALIEN 3.


    I would love to see the film that he intended before they fucked him.In my opinion,when left alone he can do no wrong.At least he hasn't yet.How many directors can yuo say that about?

  • April 17, 2002, 9:12 a.m. CST

    The Mission Impossible Series...Fincher...NO GOD NO!!!!!!!!

    by The Colonel

    The first MI was shite. SHITE. It had a few moments, like all DePalma films, but overall it was overdone, nonsensical, and craptastic, like MOST DePalma films. MI:2 was somehow EVEN WORSE. John Woo took every trick in his filmmaking book, ramped them up 100 nothces, turned on the slo-mo, threw in spinning cars, a warmed-over retread of a classic plot, and shit the bed in every way. MI:2 is HORRID. HORRID! Now, that said, David Fincher is amazing. This development makes me VERY nervous. Why doesn't he just do The Black Dahlia? That would be incredible. But, if he gets total control (Cruise should be smart enough to step back with him), and the script is good, and dark, and more realistic than the last 2, there's a chance. One thing's for sure, I'm definitely gonna see it. But I hope he bows out and moves on. Fincher and Cruise? Wow. This will either explode or implode. What's the difference? Who knows. BRING IT AND GUESS WHAT?

  • April 17, 2002, 9:16 a.m. CST

    Reality Check...

    by DoShutUp

    Fincher's the most overrated director in Hollywood. Panic Room was a piece of shit, The Game was a jumble of crap, Alien 3 speaks for itself, and Fight Club and Seven were cool because of the STORY, not the direction.

  • April 17, 2002, 9:18 a.m. CST

    Fincher the Visionary

    by FanHalen

    How can somebody slag him?!? I think his style is the most ripped off directing since Spielberg!

  • April 17, 2002, 9:21 a.m. CST

    You couldnt cut Alien 3 with footage of God Himself....

    by BLADE

    And make that movie any good...give up

  • April 17, 2002, 9:23 a.m. CST

    a lesson in economics...

    by tommy5tone

    just watched a very interesting episode of frontline called 'the monster that ate hollywood' - its message can be summed up as this: IT'S NOW MORE BUSINESS THAN SHOW. the multinationals that have bought the studios don't give a fuck about quality, they care only about the bottom line. if churning out lowest common denominator crap will guarantee they end up in the black, they will churn out lowest common denominator crap until we scream for mercy. intelligent, provocative, challenging movies are apparently not welcome because they don't bring in the big bucks. but you've got a few directors who are playing it smart, bringing their skills to highly commercial projects to (a) build a good reputation with the bean counters, and (b) maybe use the success of the commercial project as leverage to get a more personal project made. soderbergh's the man when it comes to this game: 'erin brockovich', 'traffic' and 'ocean's 11' made some bank, now steve's got enough clout to get 'solaris' made with a real budget and a shot of decent distribution. fincher's doing likewise - it's the smart play. besides, who wouldn't want to see a cool-ass fincher version of 'mission: impossible'?

  • April 17, 2002, 9:30 a.m. CST

    Whats with all the Alien 3 Hating?

    by Fearsme

    I still don't get the massive hatred for Alien 3. I loved Alien 3. I thought it was a quieter, darker, more surreal vision, and it covered new ground. I realize it's hard to love an Alien movie after hearing Bill Paxton yelling "GAME OVER, MAN!" and having a million rounds of ammunition fired off every eight seconds, but Alien 3 is a well thought out, sick little film. Plus it has no Paul Reiser. Fincher is the bomb, yo.

  • April 17, 2002, 9:39 a.m. CST

    First rule of Mission Impossible is: you do not follow the laws

    by CoolDan989

    David Fincher + Mission Impossible = BIG MISTAKE. That's an equation anyone can figure out. Mission Impossible is all about suspending reality, but when David Fincher brings Mission Impossible down to earth, this movie will be a laughingstock. Ethan Hunt will probably be dead and/or captured within the first five minutes. Just watch.

  • April 17, 2002, 9:44 a.m. CST

    What a waste

    by NFLRefugee

    This franchise is beneath Fincher. Maybe he is doing it to curry favor with Cruise so Cruise will star in one of Fincher's other films. Fincher has a hit with Panic Room (which is pretty entertaining IMO) so he should have some clout to do another studio project. I don't know, I guess I would be curious to see what he brings to the franchise but it seems that this is Cruise's project and Tommy will eat Fincher up. Regarding Alien 3, it's a stunning looking film but the story (and ending) are horrible. If you can, check out the May 1992 issue of Premiere. It's a detailed account of the making of Alien 3. Contrary to what people believe, according to the article Fox let Fincher film his movie while running over the franchise producers (Walter Hill and David Giler). Granted they had no script and Fincher was on the spot budget wise. Hell of an article. Really shows what it's like to make a big budget studio film.

  • April 17, 2002, 9:45 a.m. CST


    by Damer1

    erotic... How can Fincher homoeroticize Tom Cruise?

  • April 17, 2002, 9:56 a.m. CST

    How about a VILLAIN this time?

    by The Mad Man

    Geez, in both I and II the bad guy was an IMF agent. The world would be a safer place if they just shut the damn agency down.

  • April 17, 2002, 9:56 a.m. CST

    This does depend on script (or: How to Make Ocean's 11 on Sp

    by Chilli Kramer

    If it was like a version of Ocean's 11, i.e stage elaborate plot, screw the bad guy with a twist, then it'd be good. Because: Ocean's 11 was about resourceful people, con artists. An M:I team would have the best of the best resourceful types, the best con artists ever- as well as some hugely impressive technology to back them up. And then I give you: Ocean's 11 on speed. Be damn hard to script though.

  • April 17, 2002, 10:10 a.m. CST

    Rendezvous with Rama?

    by sin13

    What happened to Rendezvous with Rama?

  • April 17, 2002, 10:22 a.m. CST

    The problem with the MI films is Cruise!!!

    by BigTuna

    I don't buy the guy as an action star. He's just too small. I actually thought it was funny seeing him doing karate in MI:2. I think both have been pretty damn stupid and boring.

  • April 17, 2002, 10:44 a.m. CST

    I like the idea

    by MindaMike

    I think it's great Fincher is doing MI3. I don't really like the first two all that much. But Fincher is stretching his limits, he's challenging himself. I hope goes like Scorsese does every time out and risks his talent and puts himself and his reputation on the line. And plus, it's Fincher, he's done enough for me to make me trust him. I'm also wondering about rendevouz with rama...

  • April 17, 2002, 10:46 a.m. CST

    Rendezvous with Rama

    by TheDrunkenJedi

    THIS is what Fincher should be doing, and not flogging along the tired MI franchise. RwR really does have the potential to be an epic sci-fi in a much more serious vein to where the genre is wallowing at the moment. The interior of Rama would really suit Fincher's love of CGI zooms and pull-outs. AND Morgan Freemans involved!!! Need I say more? Make this movie now!!!

  • April 17, 2002, 11:14 a.m. CST

    sith_lord7 - word to Alien 3

    by twan_deeth_ree

    I still stand by my opinion that it's the best of the series. The most atmospheric, the coolest Alien, the chase scenes, the lack of weaponry, the prison colony, the shaved heads, all of it. And I will repeat this post on every thread concerning Alien from now until eternity until you all wake up and give it another try.

  • April 17, 2002, 11:17 a.m. CST

    Something that is pissing me off

    by Fearsme

    OK, i know the negative talkback thing is a cliche at this point, but i am tired of seeing stories here with no sources attributed. The Fincher negotiation thing was printed in The Guardian, Dark Horizons ran the same story this morning with proper credits added. Then Dark Horizons runs a story of the Daredevil pic and thanks People and AICN. Why thank AICN, all they did was take the pic from People and post it. THats not journalism. Everything here is worded and phrased as if these great discoveries were made by the staff when in fact they are doing little more than waht Garth does at Dark Horizons and just not crediting any of the people who actually got the scoop. Shady, very shady...

  • April 17, 2002, 11:21 a.m. CST

    I was still hoping for Oliver Stone.

    by Wino-Forever

    THAT crazy fucker could have made a great M:I flick. Fincher's involvement says less about Fincher than it does about Cruise's knack for marketing. M:I2 may have been total bullshit, but he sold the hell out of it. What we'll end up with is watered-down, PG-13 Fincher that borders on self parody, just like we did with Woo. But at least they're trying to treat the series as a directors' showcase. The closest the Bond camp has come to experimentation recently has been changing up merchandising tie-ins.

  • April 17, 2002, 11:23 a.m. CST

    No director can compensate for the fact that the star is Tom Cru

    by Tarl_Cabot

    The concept of Mission Impossible was all about a TEAM inwhich the players all had a role-not a one Man army with a tolkien black sidekick. Cruise turned this property into a self serving vanity project (just like Days of Thunder) and money making machine. The 2 movies are aren't like MI but instead like pathetic James Bond Wanna be wish fullfillments for the star-and it kills me that people have made this little pussy so much money! I hate Tom Cruise!*** Have a nice day

  • April 17, 2002, 11:30 a.m. CST

    Mission: Implausible

    by rev_skarekroe

    Maybe Fincher can craft a Mission Impossible movie that isn't just silly nonsense and explosions. We shall see. sk

  • April 17, 2002, 11:35 a.m. CST

    Another mission impossible movie would be as poor and hollow as

    by AcidJokers

  • April 17, 2002, 11:50 a.m. CST

    Fincher's background in Gay Porn good for effeminate Cruise

    by gladiatrroxx20

    I'm sure he'll put that to good use. Oh! Sorry, that was someone else.

  • April 17, 2002, 11:52 a.m. CST

    "a tolkien black sidekick"

    by Wino-Forever

    The sort of Freudian slip that only terminal geeks are capable of.

  • April 17, 2002, 11:53 a.m. CST

    Fincher's background in Gay Porn good for effeminate Cruise

    by gladiatrroxx20

    I'm sure he'll put that to good use. Oh! Sorry, that was someone else.

  • April 17, 2002, 12:04 p.m. CST


    by Norm3

    Don't waste your time Fincher with this or the Bond series. Rama is the way to go!

  • April 17, 2002, 12:04 p.m. CST

    I am Jack's Complete Lack of a Good Subject Line

    by Samurai Jim

    now, i enjoyed mission impossible for the simple fact of John Woo's action scenes. the plot sucked, the acting was pretty lame too. But when one car is spinning out of control and an oncoming car misses the other two cars by mere inches, that's action for you. As for M:I3, i don't think it's the right film for Fincher. It could work if it was a dark gritty mystery, but then you'd have just Cruise again, and Mission: Impossible was never a one man show. There is no I in team, but Cruise wad definitely able to rearrange the letters to make a big "ME" in M:I2....okay, i'll stop rambling now

  • April 17, 2002, 12:05 p.m. CST

    This "franchise" is putting some major blemishes on otherwise am

    by IAmLegolas

    First DePalma, then Woo now Fincher? WTF! They must all be doing it for the money and to climb a few more steps in Hollywood to get their own stuff greenlighted. DePalma disappeared and pretty much disowned the first one when it opened, Woo had problems getting his vision made with the second one... all thanks to Cruise's ego and "star power" and I'm sure the studios had some hand in it. DAMN THEM. DAMN THEM ALL TO HELL!!!! (Sponsered by clich

  • April 17, 2002, 12:32 p.m. CST

    No way in hell Cruise is going to allow this to become the great

    by AggregateScore

    This is his own James Bond and he's going to milk it till its teats are dry, Fincher or no Fincher.

  • April 17, 2002, 12:46 p.m. CST

    Gladitroxx: Nice! Tom Cruise is a joke as an action star

    by Tarl_Cabot

    My sister saw MI2 and told me she thought Tom Cruise was "Flameing". I laughed when I heard that because she's pretty opene minded and has no particular hatred of TC. He is a terrible action star for one major reason: he's just so fucking unthreatening! If I was in a bar and went to the jon and he was sitting next to my girl when I came back should I be scared? Except for his wallet, would anyone be scared of him??? Most of us would tear his head off and shit down his neck! He has no danger to him whatsoever and that's why he sucks in action movies.

  • April 17, 2002, 12:46 p.m. CST

    Mission Impossible

    by Shara

    "The first one had no plot and it just confused me". Good God stop now, I'm laughing so hard my coworkers are wondering what's wrong with me. How can you even make that statement? Here's a hint- the whole reason the movie "confused" you is because it DID have a PLOT. In fact, one of the best plots in any movie since it was released. Pay attention for crying out loud... The first Mission Impossible was a great movie. Unfortunatley, too many people without a clue saw it, and badmouthed it because they couldn't make sense of it. That's their own fault for lacking the brain cells to comprehend the movie. As for MI2... well, I think the consensus is clear: MI2 exposed John Woo for the one-dimensional, shitty filmaker that he really is. He has no ability to develop anything other than a very thin plotline, and his claim-to-fame of being an "action" director is completely unwarrented given the fact that his "action" scends are totally anti-climactic. WAY too much slow motion, bad camera angles, and poor pacing. Woo needs to take a few lessons from the Wachowski brothers, especially if he wants to continue using slow motion. As for MI3- if it has the plot depth of the first movie, with Fincher's directing ability, I think it would easily be the best of the MI series, and well worth the movie to watch it. Oh yeah, and as for Alien 3, it was a good movie. I've generally found it to be true that people who rag on Alien 3 only do so because they were upset that Alien 3 didn't rehash the Alien 2 script. Get over it already. Aliens was a fun film, but replicating that film would have been pointless. Alien 3 took the material in a different direction, and I thought it was a breath of fresh air. Dutton rocked in the movie, and there were some actual scary (and memorable) moments in that film (the cafeteria-snatch scene was awesome). Could the film have been better? Sure. Most films can be. But was it crap? Nah. Battlefield Earth was crap.

  • April 17, 2002, 12:47 p.m. CST

    What's with all this Alien3 defending?!

    by Drath

    Okay, I'm not used to people liking Alien 3, but I am amazed that people are SUPRISED by others' the hatred of the film! Fincher is a great filmmaker, that doesn't mean he didn't make a bad movie. Hitchcock was a great filmmaker, but he still made tedious psychobabble shit like Marnie and Spellbound. Alien 3 was bad because it 1--started by killing off the other characters of the previous film in the openning credits-thus disrespecting fans of those characters and the previous film. The act also made it clear that caring about anybody was futile as EVERYBODY was essentially meat for the grinder--even Ripley! The movie's Motto: Life is Shit and then you die. or in this case, the movie was shit and so it dies. 2--the premise was horribly pedestrian. Ripley crash lands on an all male prison planet where she's unwelcomed and no one believes her. If this was an episode of a TV show and the premise only has to work for an hour, it might have been tolerable, but as an entire installment of film franchise? Hmm, yes, its just so much cooler than the squadron of marines taking on the alien infested colony to try and destroy the monsters once and for all. Its so much cooler than learning more about where the beasts came from. Scaring us? Excuse me, that's not enough, we have the original film for that, give us something MORE. Perhaps if we'd learned something interesting about the Aliens themselves, but all we got was that the alien physiology mirrors the host it was born from--still not better than the Queen from Aliens or the concept from the original. 3--By the time Ripley dies in the end, dramatic as it was, the audience is sick and mad. You don't want to see your heroes go down. And if they do, you want it to be FOR something, yet at that point in that movie there's nothing left to care about. We have no sense of who or what Ripley is protecting. The inmates at the prison are all bad guys, even Charles S. Dutton. So who is Ripley dying for? This idiotic company that's bound and determined to destroy itself anyway. There's no hope at all, and again, this Ripley whose dying for nothing here. I realize that if you like misery and squalor you probably love this movie's cynical take, all the way to the nightmare of seeing Bishop, the most benevolent and good souled creature in the Alien movies, reappearing as the face of evil in his maker. But to anyone who loved the first two movies, Alien 3 is a betrayal, a slap in the face, and a flat out piece of sadistic shit, fit for only masacists to enjoy. So there, THAT'S why so many people hate the movie. Note that most of these problems are not really Fincher's fault as a director, and are not criticisms of his style. The sick feeling that ruined the Alien films is common in his other works, but it's not the same with characters that are not already familiar to us. I don't think I would have enjoyed Se7en at all if I'd already known and loved the Pitt and Paltrow characters from a previous, happier film. And if I cared about Cruise's M:I character, or anything from that series, I'd probably feel bad about Fincher's involvment in this franchise as well. As it is, Fincher can only improve on what Woo did in the last film(DePalma isn't the best director, but he did pretty well with the first one). Fincher's style works best when he has complete control over the characters and our relationships with them. The only franchise I could see Fincher working on and shining in his own style is probably X-Files. But then, I don't really care about those characters anymore either. Frankly, I want him to make Rama NOW, and not waste his time with crap like M:I 3 or any more lesser films. Rama could be the 2001 for the new century, and I want to see it, not another American James Bond film.

  • April 17, 2002, 12:48 p.m. CST

    I am jacks total lack of factual information

    by mEloN jAvEliN

    yar yar...listen ya godamn ledbellys...Fincher will rock on dis...but first: Alien3: The Facts...Fincher shot all of alien3, but at least 2 thirds of it wound up on the cutting floor... After filming for months with 3 suits from Fox following his every move (& i mean EVERY MOVE - he was even shadowed in the cafeteria at pinewood) fincher cracks and leaves the set towards the end of principal photography. The suits then proceed to cut out Finchers original ending and replace it with a half-baked T2 rip off, and re-edit the whole film until it bears no relation at all to Finchers original story arc. Actors on set that spoke of him believe that Finchers hands were tied from day one - Paul McGann's part was not originally that of a retarded prisoner - but one that believed that the alien had arrived as "the wrath of god" for the prison sinners and that ripley arrived as their saviour... But as word carried back to Fox on this direction the execs of course got cold feet and ordered Fincher to cut the part back down...The source for all this is an alien special in this months Hotdog movie mag, available in the UK...homies...

  • Ooooooo...look at how my hair whisps around as I leap from the motorcycle! Don't you just love me? Am I not the all encompassing action God that I wish I could be? Watch as I climb this rock! Aren't you impressed with me? Stuntmen? I don't need no stinking stuntmen! I'll do it all on my own! Don't you know I am Hollywood God? Don't you want to be me? There is no team here! It is all about me! There is an "I" in team when I spell it! I, Tom Cruise, spells team t-i-e-a-m so now all you lowly, groveling second class citizens who can't afford a facial every day like,I, Tom Cruise can will change the English language for me. BOW before me as I spritz my hair and make sure that I am in my "light"!

  • April 17, 2002, 1:10 p.m. CST

    I don't believe it

    by jurgenmaas

    Isn't this like those Batman Year One rumours before Aronofsky got suckered into doing it? The only way I believe this if Fincher's now doing some Scorsese-like "one for them, one for me" compromise to get his own wacky stuff financed.

  • Unless you equate Tolkien with sex.

  • April 17, 2002, 1:44 p.m. CST

    why alien 3 sucked

    by NormanFell

    1.Bishop--dead and a bad guy; we loved this guy...he gets ripped in half and still saves Newt. what if the next star trek open with Jean Luc saying oh well Data is dead or the next star wars opening with a shot of Obi Wan dead. Why do these hollywood hacks think they know how to improve a franchise. hell they probably never saw ALIENS. 2.Michael Biehn--dead: see above. 3.Newt--dead and autopsied! what the hell. iknew when i saw ALIENS for the 4th time that i wanted to see that kickass little girl who out witted the aliens dead on a slab in the morgue. thats great filmmaking. so all you "alien3 rules! why dont you guys like it" posters, that is why we loathe the film.

  • April 17, 2002, 1:46 p.m. CST

    Nicole Kidman to play the lead villian

    by ActiveM

    think about it, she already developed a working relationship with Fincher before she had to drop out of Panic Room. And she has kicked the shit out of Tom since their divorce, both in the box office and critical praise last year.

  • April 17, 2002, 1:51 p.m. CST

    I for one am excited about this

    by Vegas

    I don't know why all the fanboys are giving Fincher grief in recent days. I thought PANIC ROOM was a great genre picture that I had a lot of fun with, both times I saw it, and it's also one I'm buying on dvd the day it comes out (provided they don't two-tier the release with a special edition to come later, you hear me Peter Jackson and Ridley Scott?). If you people want Fincher to be able to make another SE7EN, or another FIGHT CLUB, then you have to realize he has to make himself bankable. That's not just one hit, that's several hits in a row. PANIC ROOM has him off to a good start, and M:I3 will almost certainly continue that, and afterwards he may be able to write his own checks and make the edgier films you're accustomed to. As for ALIEN CUBED, I personally love it. It's well acted, brilliantly directed, and is the perfect way to end the series. I know people give him grief for blaspheming Cameron before the opening credits are even done rolling, but I for one think that makes the series all the more resonant. Anyway, I guess Fincher's "flavor of the month" status has expired in Geekland now that that Hobbit movie has come out, but I for one am sticking with the guy who got me interested in how movies are made in the first place (with SE7EN).

  • April 17, 2002, 1:54 p.m. CST

    MI: 1 rocked, someone should wipe with the MI:2 reels

    by Bramton1

    How can you say that Mission Impossible had no plot? Ethan's team goes on a mission, it gets totally fucked, IMF thinks Ethan's a mole, and he goes undercover and deals with Max to uncover the mole, then leads IMF right to 'um. And it deal with teamwork, with two different teams. It's just that the first team was either killed or evil (with the exception of Ethan), and half of the second team was evil. But the teamwork was great. Now MI:2. Well, I saw the movie in the theaters. I know Cruise, Ving Rhames, and Anthony Hopkins are in it, and Cruise has a love interest. But that's all I can really remember. It was so bad, I think I slept for half an hour. The rest...well I'm repressing, I suppose.

  • April 17, 2002, 1:54 p.m. CST

    The future's so dark, I gotta smash my Ray-Bans...

    by CineRam

    NOT looking forward to this one. Cruise is interested in nothing but prolonging his superstar status with this bland, boring franchise. He insists on terribly unthreatening villans and lifeless love interests, ensuring that no one will pay attention to anything except himself. Word is he forcibly removed both Woo AND De Palma from post on the last two installments, most likely in order to select the less-than stellar takes of his costars (Even Ving Rhames came of badly in the last one, and how is that possible?). I have little doubt that Cruise, far more valuable to the powers-that-be than Fincher, will once again usurp control of the project at the appropriate moment and hack it into a soul-free, PG-13 bastardized version of whatever Fincher will attempt to bring to the table. It isn't even worth considering that he'll be able to set a new benchmark for the series' showcase set-pieces--after all, does anyone really believe that the Langley break-in, the bullet train pursuit or even the nail-biting footchase from "Se7en" can possibly be topped in terms of adrenalized spectacle? DAVID: I AM YOUR FRIEND. DO YOUR CRAFT, YOUR CAREER AND YOUR EMOTIONAL HEALTH A FAVOR AND BAIL FROM THIS PUPPY WHILE YOU STILL CAN! I want only the best for you.

  • April 17, 2002, 2:06 p.m. CST

    Also, the M:I3 that I think it would be neat to see

    by Vegas

    Cruise's team has to bring down another team that's gone "rogue." And of course, the rogue team would have to be led by Brad Pitt, with Jared Leto as a computer expert, and hopefully Forest Whitaker in some capacity.

  • April 17, 2002, 2:11 p.m. CST

    new chance for MI!!??

    by drjones

    mmhhh first of i rather thought of AIN`T IT SHOCKING NEWS. but this really COULD become a new chance for MI. i`ve never been a fan of the movies...let`s hope that fincher will turn this into the best film of the franchise...

  • April 17, 2002, 2:20 p.m. CST

    Alien 3 - in no way Fincher's responsibility for killing a

    by Silver_Joo

    Alien 3 did commit a sin in that it disregarded the main elements of Aliens. Ripley had a 'new' daughter, overcome her fear of androids, she even had a new man. Infact she had the complete set, it would have been right to end it there, but curiousity would have still gotten the better of us all. Alien 3 is the result of that, it is closer in spirit to the first, and is a much tauter affair than the overblown, technically sound, but dull Aliens. I loved Alien, find Aliens dull, Alien 3 I enjoy because it is clever and understated, and Alien Ressurection is Buffy in space - an abortion of a movie. If any film killed the franchise, it was infact Aliens. Cameron and his OTT ending in no way helped the cause of the inevitable sequel. Alien Ressurection is probably liked by the people who enjoyed Aliens because it is dumb and mindless, turning the aliens into nothing more than cannon fodder - they were formidable enough not to be that way.

  • April 17, 2002, 2:30 p.m. CST

    Finch is a movie-god

    by stuart_bannerman

    He was shafted with Alien3, but that was down to the producers and the studio more than anything. The fact that Finch managed to salvage any film at all from that mess is a bloody miracle. Every time i see another amazing Fincher movie, i smile my ass off at the thought of all those idiots that slagged him off in 1992 over Alien3. I would happily spend ticket money to watch anything that Finch makes, and i for one would love to see where he could take the MI movies. Anythings better than that last one.

  • April 17, 2002, 2:37 p.m. CST

    Alien 3

    by twan_deeth_ree

    I guess the reasons I like Alien 3 so much are the exact reasons why so many of you hated it. I liked that it discarded a lot of the baggage from the first two films, started with a clean slate. I liked that Bishop is evil, that Newt is dead and that Siguorney has no reason to go on. I liked that she killed herself at the end (and there was a reason, she had the last remaining Alien in her belly - or so she thought). I'm sorry, but I don't have that much of an emotional attachment to these movie characters, if their deaths help move the story line forward, I say go for it. I save most of my feelings for the REAL humans. Oh, and to add fuel to the fire, Aliens is my least favorite of the series. It's a fun action/adventure/horror romp, but lacks the noirish suspense and psychological terror that made the original a classic. That's just my $.02

  • April 17, 2002, 3:13 p.m. CST


    by NFLRefugee

    Saying a movie "sucked" is a completely valid critique of a film. But if you must know I didn't like Alien 3 because the ending just didn't work for me. Quite frankly I didn't want to see Ripley die. Especially, in that fashion. A blaze of glory would have been more appropriate considering her hatred of the species. Nevertheless, thats my reason. Though I will concede that Fincher showed expert craftsmanship on the film. It is the best made of the series.

  • April 17, 2002, 3:15 p.m. CST

    Fincher is GOD

    by JohnDoeKiller

    I think it's great that Finch is branching out. I fell in love with his work from back in the days of Se7en, and have been a fan for as long as I can remember. He seems to be taking on more interesting projects lately, Panic Room didn't include his trademark plot twists and complex storyline, but it was wildly entertaining nonetheless. I think he will finally be able to flew his directing skills with an action film of this calibre (assuming it's on the same level as the previous one0. I'm extremely interested and confident that this will be another landmark in the amazing career he is making for himself. Oh yeah, John Woo's MI:2, didn't suck. If you know anything about gun balet films like his Chow Yun Fat flicks, then you know that movie has some wicked shit in it.

  • April 17, 2002, 3:15 p.m. CST

    i think that we would all like to see tom cruise looking likejar

    by andolini

  • April 17, 2002, 3:23 p.m. CST


    by StarUnlit

    I am curious as to what specific problems everyone has with Alien3. Personally its my favourite and i would like to hear some points of criticism on the problem with the picture if anyone has the time to draft them out please. Thanks.

  • April 17, 2002, 3:36 p.m. CST

    I've said it before: To revive this franchise, make a "MI:0

    by Ted Striker

    Bond and Hunt, CIA with Her Majesty's Secret Service... It will rock!!

  • April 17, 2002, 3:39 p.m. CST

    The horror... the horror...

    by ebon

    Now, I do love me some Finch. "The Game" was great despite the presence of Sean Penn and Michael Douglas, "Se7en" changed the face of the detective noir thriller forever, and "Fight Club" taught me that I am not my fucking khakis, for which I will forever be grateful. But "Alien 3" was a festering pile of worm-infested troll stool of which the world and its inhabitants were entirely undeserving. It took this unknown, for-God's-sake-he's-an-MTV-video-director-what-in-the-hell-is-Fox-thinking-son-of-a-rabid-yak-beeyotch all of about five minutes to destroy one of the greatest film experiences of my youth. You see, I CARED about Ellen Ripley. I LIKED Dwayne Hicks. I was worried that Bishop was gonna get all soggy in that ziplock bag full a' milk on the long trip home. Maybe a little piece of me even had a crush on lil' Rebecca Jordan, aka Newt. James Cameron may be out of the loop here anymore (I mean, what has it been, FIVE GODDAMNED YEARS since "Titanic"?), but on that day a ways back yonder in 1986, for those two hours, he made me happy. He made me laugh. He scared the shit out of me. He made me hold my breath. And he made me care. It was one of only two movies that I have ever been to where the audience rose to it's feet and cheered (The other being "Rocky IV"... ah, for a return to the eighties...). That was special... and I couldn't wait to see what was going to happen next. Well, next was everybody died and we cut the little girl open and everything was so fucking dark and ill-put together you didn't know what the fuck was going on, and then the end. To compound matters, the print I saw was actually spliced together out-of-order. Yeah, that's right, you heard me- the worst-case-scenario just got worse. Uber-worse. People were dying and coming back, the alien was running around killing people and THEN popping out of the dog, scenes were cut in half at just the moment when things may have at least reached a point of credible tension... the lights came up, and I wanted to run up and scratch the screen, piss on it, and then light the fucking place on fire. One thing I can say: at least Finch got my attention. The man has since redeemed himself, and I love him and, more importantly, trust him as a film maker... but, geez, Finchie. MI3? Not even John Woo could prop that wheezing old dino up... do us all a favor and go adapt Rama. Or better yet, you want a sequel? Go back and give us "Aliens V". There's no way you could screw it up any worse... and I mean that in the nicest possible way.

  • April 17, 2002, 3:53 p.m. CST

    The first rule of Mission: Impossible...

    by Fitzy Funk

    Is there is no impossible mission. Anyway, will be interesting to see if Fincher raises the bar on M:I movies, or M:I movies lower the bar on Fincher. He still needs a writer. Oliver Stone, do you still write screenplays for other directors, or are you *past* that? If so, this would be the perfect opportunity for a great satiric piece on Hollywood action movies, while still throwing in his trademark conspiracy-theory twists.

  • April 17, 2002, 4:03 p.m. CST

    This should be interesting

    by peejee

    Fincher and mainstream material? Verrrrrrry interesting. He says that it's gonna be REALLY violent and if they let him do half the things he wants it'll be an interesting movie. De Palma made a decent attempt, Woo's MI2 was a bag of shite but Fincher's movie will easily stand out as the best. It's just gonna be real interesting to see David Fincher do a film like this. Lot's of darkness, WE LIKE DARKNESS! By the way, stylistically Alien3 was awesome. The plot was shit and the narrative a little jerky but it only gets dissed so much coz it's an Alien film and looks completely different to Cameron's acid filled orgasm. Can't really see why Fincher is so unhappy with it either? Probably the experience in making it. I read recently that the studio guarenteed that he would be able to do reshoots on it and when he phoned up Pinewood Studios to tell them he was coming back for reshoots they told him they'd burnt down all his sets!!!

  • April 17, 2002, 4:15 p.m. CST

    durhay-- While I don't personally...

    by Wino-Forever

    I'm confident that anyone who would make such a slip probably does.

  • April 17, 2002, 4:22 p.m. CST

    Rendezvous with Rama

    by StarUnlit

    Excellent book and a potentially incredible movie... what do we know about this film beside Fincher's supposed involvement? Who owns the rights? Is there a script? Inquiring minds want to know.

  • I haven't read the book, and I'll tell you why: a friend of mine (Nordling), whose opinion I trust dearly, told me it was boring. Now, normally when someone tells me that, I take it with a grain of salt, but for the most part Nord and I like the same things. So I ask all of you, refute this: tell me what happens in Rama. I know a spaceship arrives, and some guys explore the inside of it. And from what I gather, THAT'S IT. Nothing else. Just some guys looking around a spaceship. No real conflict. So someone redeem Rama in my eyes, and maybe I'll give it a shot. BUT, it seems to me that if Fincher DID make a movie of Rama, that 90% of the story would have to be changed to give it some, what do you call it? Oh yeah, CONFLICT, and that you fanboys would then just bitch about Fincher making changes. Again, I haven't read the book, so someone give me a reason why I should, and perhaps I will.

  • April 17, 2002, 4:31 p.m. CST

    M:I Directors

    by mascan

    Cruise has said all along that he wanted the series to be a directors' showcase, hiring directors with wildly different styles for each installment. This would definitely point in an interesting direction for the series, even if it's only for one film (Cruise wanted a different director for each one). And, by the way, Alien 3 sucked because it ruined Aliens for me; I can't watch the end of Aliens anymore without thinking about how Fox ruined a great ending by stretching the series out for two more movies that I can't bear to watch.

  • April 17, 2002, 4:54 p.m. CST

    David Fincher directs bloody hard-core R-rated M:I3!

    by FD Resurrected

    With tons of raining bullets and exploding blood and cleaning heads off a la The Professional that would make John Woo envious - he was saddled by the studio that insists on editing the film to receive PG-13 from the MPAA and the sequel was a huge hit of 2000 as the result, partly thanks to the PG-13 rating. (it's impossible to achieve over $120 at the domestic B.O. for an R-rated film, but The Matrix and Saving Private Ryan overcame the obstacle due to word of mouth). M:I2 blows anyway. I really think Fincher should make a PG or PG-13 film for a change - I wish Lucas would give him a job to direct SW: Episode III which should emphasize dark themes - even darker than ESB - and still attain a PG rating. Fincher don't need to rely on graphic violence and language making his films - he needs to show that he's capable of grand filmmaking talent in Hitchcockian suspense and drama beyond the R-rated content thrown in. PG-13 rated M:I3 (however restrained on-screen violence may be - he'd have to give up part of his creative freedom in editing content to receive the specific rating) should be a refreshing change of pace for his career who, like Oliver Stone, has never made a film less than an R (Stone did make PG-rated Seizure but that was 28 years ago). If only Quentin Tarantino would write a script without the barrage of F-word and abundant graphic violence and drugging and make a Western movie on par with one of his faves Rio Bravo, Dollar Trilogy and The Searchers. David Fincher just needs to get off his addiction to profanity, gory violence and gross stuff to make a good PG-13 film for a change.

  • April 17, 2002, 5 p.m. CST

    Superhero: Perfect!!! Tom Cruise is the most insipid,blandest,bo

    by Tarl_Cabot

    I will not see "Minority Report" or any other TC movies even if Harry and Moriarty say "they blow the FOTR out of water"! I had my fill of his "acting" since "Days of Thunder". He's never made a movie I'd wanna see again and I never liked "Top Gun"; It was a fucking 2 hour beer commercial. "Days of thunder" was even more shameless in it's product placements: Cheavy Lumina-Miller MGD-Levi's-Harley Davidson-He is a vapid star cashing in on mediocredy for so many years and I don't care who is directing him. He sucks. "Jery maguire" (ok i saw it on cable) was his best film and he should stick to lifetime channel chick flick shit like that and stay away from action movies** Just my opinion :)

  • April 17, 2002, 5:13 p.m. CST

    Duray: correction:I meant "token"-no spell check on talk backs-

    by Tarl_Cabot

    "The concept of Mission Impossible was all about a TEAM inwhich the players all had a role-not a one Man army with a token* black sidekick". ***My bad

  • April 17, 2002, 5:29 p.m. CST

    And this is how it would work...

    by NapoleonWilson

    I will watch MI3 if someone in the first five minutes smashes that fuckin Cruise smile to smithereens.

  • April 17, 2002, 6:11 p.m. CST

    I refuse to believe that Fincher would be Tom Cruise's bitch

    by Cash Bailey

    After Tom steam-rolled over great directors like Woo and De Palma, what makes Fincher think he would survive unscathed.

  • April 17, 2002, 6:25 p.m. CST

    i hope jared leto's face gets messed up again

    by larisa

    in every film that fincher has directed with jared leto, all two of them, ever notice some horrible scaring deformity happens to jared leto's face? it'd be kinda of cool, if he was in mission impossible, then like his face burned off in some horrible explosion.

  • April 17, 2002, 7:08 p.m. CST

    Another thumbs up for Alien3! Bring on the Director's Cut DV

    by exit272

    I was one of the folks who disliked it when it was first released to theaters, but then grew to appreciate it later on. I still think the theatrical cut has gaping holes and is almost utterly bereft of character, but now I'm aware these flaws were due to Fox not trusting their rookie director and chopping the film up like an axe murderer on a bender. So FoxVideo, if you're listening, RELEASE FINCHER'S CUT OF ALIEN3 AS A SPECIAL EDITION DVD, PLEASE. As for Fincher directing M:I3--dude, why? I loathed the first one (ludicrous dialogue, senseless story), was also disppointed in the second (Woo in fairly good form, and interesting to see Cruise trying to do Chow Yun-Fat, but the villian was as big a non-entity as the story, and what was Anthony Hopkins doing slumming in the thing at all?). The only thing positive I got out of M:I2 was that it wasn't as generic as the style-less Broken Arrow, and it's clear Woo is the guy the Bond franchise needs. But anyone who thinks M:I3 will be a David Fincher film is deluding themselves. Cruise has exercised solid creative control over this franchise, which is why the first movie bore DePalma's name and nothing of his style. Fincher should bail from this project to save his street cred, but if he doesn't, then his next movie needs to be as brutal as Battle Royale if he wants his name to mean anything any more.

  • April 17, 2002, 7:12 p.m. CST

    Do we need MI3?

    by meanman

    I don't see why they are even making a third (besides wanting to sucker millions of dollars out of the public). I don't think it matters who directs it, it will still probably suck. After all before MI2 came out John Woo was these action director and he still couldn't make that movie work. Just get Michael Bay to direct and turn it into the over-the-top crapfest that it deserves to be.

  • April 17, 2002, 7:30 p.m. CST

    Hmmm...not sure what to think about this.

    by Sod Off Baldric

    I liked the first Mission Impossible, but hated the second (even though I love John Woo...the guy just can't cut a break here in the states; all he gets to direct is crap). I run hot and cold with Fincher; I hated Alien 3, loved Seven, loathed The Game, loved Fight Club, and I really dug Panic Room. I'll have to wait for more info on this one before I can make up my mind.

  • April 17, 2002, 7:53 p.m. CST

    Speaking of spin-off/remake franchises...

    by Ambrose Chappell

    The New York Times has an interesting article about the current mania in Hollywood to create franchises based on spin-offs and remakes of old movies, TV shows, and comic books. Here's the linky-poo:

  • April 17, 2002, 7:57 p.m. CST

    Alien3 - A good flick?

    by Nixumb

    Yes, the negative comments on this film don't really seem to say why they disliked it. It's a good film and is a great conclusion for many reasons (Alien4=Alien Garbage)but for the parallels of Ripley as a savior diving in the lava at the end, the visual representation of the hell Ripley's in during the whole film (Filmed with the colors of golds and reds and even feels like it's underground in the film). Perhaps everyone wanted a kick ass movie like Aliens... I don't know. The acting wasn't bad at all and Weaver did a good job of changing her character slightly for this film as the Alien movies progress. There's alot going on in Alien3. Look Closer.

  • April 17, 2002, 8:08 p.m. CST

    I'm with Nixumb on Alien 3

    by DouglasAH

    People wanted another bug hunt, but they never stopped to think about how boring that would be after Aliens. Instead, Alien 3 stripped away the M-41 pulse rifles and power-loaders and made the alien truly threatening again, unlike the bugs in the second flick, which were all but indistinguishable from Viet Cong being hosed down by Rambo. Alien 3 is one of those good movies that a lot of people hate for idiotic, even childish reasons.

  • April 17, 2002, 10:48 p.m. CST

    alien 4

    by frank cotton

    while i liked alien 3, i liked alien 4 better. sure, there were some things i didn't like about it, particularly the half-human alien, and some of the cgi, but overall, it was entertaining. Weaver gave it her all, as usual, and hey, it beat the hell out of event horizon, soldier, etc. and what is it with all the Fincher bashing? i'd like to see him do SNOW CRASH, the best movie that will never get made. my first choice for it would be the Wachowski bros., but they seem to prefer writing their own stuff. FIGHT CLUB FANS: the book is as good, if not better than the movie, and all of his books are hilarious. my favorite is CHOKE.

  • April 17, 2002, 11:50 p.m. CST

    Well, looks like Fincher has given up on the idea of being an in

    by Phil S.

    At one point, not so very long ago, it looked as if David Fincher might develop into one of the most unconventional filmmakers that mainstream Hollywood had seen in quite some time. I'm genuinely surprised that he's given up on it quite so soon.

  • April 18, 2002, 12:15 a.m. CST

    Fincher, The Empire Strikes Back, Class, Action

    by mike FRENZY

    Granted M:I 2was great fun to watch but was it a classy film like the original? No. I hope that the script is smart and not off the wall, slapstick action, and gadjets like the sequel. Fincher is one of my favorite directors (any one who's influenced by The Empire Strikes Back and then goes off to make films like Fight Club and Se7en is alright in my book) and I believe that Fincher can restore that certain sense of class and action mix back to the series. P.S. John Woo is absolutely crazy and only makes crazy films . . . and should never be allowed to direct sequels to "classy" movies.

  • April 18, 2002, 2:30 a.m. CST

    Michael Bay

    by joeypogi

    I would've preferred Michael Bay to direct Mission Impossible 3 It seems a logical succession from de Palma to Woo to Bay won't Fincher be a little to dark? and then for MI4 we could have John Moore (of Behind Enemy Lines) to direct it =) in the meantime, wouldn't it be kewl if we had Woo or Bay direct a Star Wars episode ;)

  • April 18, 2002, 4:02 a.m. CST

    ebon : damn right about "Alien 3"

    by MGTHEDJ

    The first film was adapted from 2 short stories, one of which is the gremlins on the WW II bomber segment in the movie "Heavy Metal". The second was in part an homage to "Them", one of James Cameron's favorite films. The third fim , because Ms. Weaver insisted "You want me to come back, then NO GUNS", hamstung the scripts and Weaver agreed on the one set in a prison. Now how this plot does this fit in with everything else we have seen in the 2 prior films? Those exposition scenes were not in the film as released. Also, between 1987 and 1992 FOX allowed the creation of the comic books. The film flew in the face of that material, and as a result most of the fan-base rejected the movie. Even FOX yielded after 1992 when making the video games and using the characters from "Aliens" for the toy line. Now Fincher on MI:3? One of Fincher's favorite themes is "Man cut off from technology." He could succeed if he made the film in the style of the series: team pulls a mind-fuck on their assigned target, with only one hitch halfway through the operation that is resolved in a few minutes. Will Tom Cruise and Paramount agree to that type of script? That is the key question-----later-----m

  • April 18, 2002, 4:52 a.m. CST

    i'm a bit drunk here, and i look at the title of this post a

    by a goonie

    now, the thing is, unlike Harry and a few others here on talkback, i LOVED Mission: Impossible 2. Mission 1 was a confusing mess. a cool movie at times, but altogether a confused mess. and i am NOT the biggest De Palma fan. but for me, John Woo nailed it. he made a fun, silly, COOL action movie that held back for close to an hour-and-a-half. then he went nuts. you have the Lab action scene, the action scene on that island base thing, the motorcycle chase scene, then the martial arts kicking ass scene. altogether. in a row. consecutively. it amazed me. i mean, i'm the guy who spent about twenty five dollars more on the DVD instead of buying the cheap VHS simply cuz i wanted this movie in widescreen. i LOVE M:I-2. i really do. M:I-3, i imagine, will be great fun. Fincher will have good fun with it. Panic Room had a great title sequence, but it falters after that, and continues to falter until Shore's brilliant score plays over the credits. i want the Fincher that made Se7en. i want the Fincher that made The Game. i want the Fincher that gave us Fight Club. and i want that Fincher to give us Mission: Impossible 3.

  • April 18, 2002, 5:37 a.m. CST


    by bilabooteen

    I mean I just don't buy this guy as an action star, but he keeps squeezing himself into that batch. He's completely unconvincing when he punches someone on the faces or do the running man. He just looks sooo gay.. Oh well, this one's not for me.

  • April 18, 2002, 5:40 a.m. CST

    by Ali786

    If the script is good then Fincher'll be able to make a decent flick I'm sure...but you have to wonder just how much credibility can be put into the concept of Tom Cruise as an action takes directors of a high quality to make us believe THAT...

  • April 18, 2002, 6:13 a.m. CST

    what the hell happened to Rendevous with Rama!?!?!?!

    by Jack's_brain

    Seriously, why isn't Fincher doing Rama or Seared? This is insane. Oh well, I will definetly see MI:3 if he directs it.

  • April 18, 2002, 6:59 a.m. CST

    M:I 3

    by stackpointer

    Alien 3 was'nt Fincher's fault. The whole project was fucked up from the beginning. If you guys get a chance to direct a movie, even if a piece of shit like Alien3, you would not hesitate for a second. Billy Wilder told us: everything depends on the script. If Fincher get a good script, M:I-3 will rock. But I would like see Rama first. I've read an interview with Fincher on BBC, and he told that 95% of the film will be CG effects. Great.

  • April 18, 2002, 7:53 a.m. CST

    How about this for a story line.

    by stuart_bannerman

  • April 18, 2002, 7:55 a.m. CST

    How about this for a story line.

    by stuart_bannerman

    Let Finch write the screenplay. At the climax of the movie, we all find out that Ethan Hawke/Tom Cruise is just a figment of our imaginations. We can then go about our daily lives with the thought of no more cheesy tom cruise movies. Tom needs to go the way Keanu does now and again (by playing a total psychotic bastard) IMHO Finch is too good for this franchise. anyone directing an MI movie will be playing "directing by numbers" and would be better digging down for some original storyideas, rather than spitting out another film for dummies

  • April 18, 2002, 9:11 a.m. CST

    the facts

    by Ali786

    Fight Club's original screenplay was by Jim Uhls and based on a novel by Chuck Palahniuk..and( obviously) directed by D.Fincher...just cos he didn't write it..don't mean it ain't good tho..

  • April 18, 2002, 12:35 p.m. CST

    by joeypogi

    i would've like to have seen Seared =)

  • April 18, 2002, 3:31 p.m. CST


    by Jar Jar Balls

    The mission impossible series has been mostly geared towards eye-stimulating shots of action...Fincher is a good choice. Maybe even the best choice if he does something like what he did with The Game.

  • April 18, 2002, 4:12 p.m. CST

    So, Kong...

    by ebon that a yay or a nay on "Fight Club"? Because I do agree, Chuck Paluhinuk (And yeah, I know I probably did just spell that wrong- my bad) should get even more credit than Fincher, for God's sakes... 99% of the greatness that lies on the celluloid was lifted verbatim from the novel. If anybody out there hasn't read it yet, put it on your to-do list. But then, you sound kinda down on the whole non-existing character thing... hmm. Guess I better go erase "Psycho", "The Usual Suspects", and "Harvey" from my top 100 list... I appear to have been bamboozled!

  • April 18, 2002, 4:44 p.m. CST

    I am Jack's impossible mission force.

    by rabid_republican

    We have lost cabin pressure. I like Fincher and respect him as a director of all things dark. But does he have to do MI3? Not that I don't think it'd be f'n great. Certainly nowhere to go but up here, given the last misstep of MI2. Then again, Woo (whom I have covered in another post regarding Windtalkers) was sabotoged by Cruise and the studio. Will Fincher be next? I certainly hope not. No offense to Cruise, but I wish he would just butt out and try "acting" for a change. It couldn't hurt.

  • April 18, 2002, 6:21 p.m. CST

    A correction for MGTHEDJ

    by TimBenzedrine

    I remember reading that the first Alien movie was based on a film from the 1950's called "IT- the Terror from Beyond Space". It couldn't have been based on a segment of the Heavy Metal movie since Alien was released in 1979 and the Heavy Metal movie came out in 1981. Its more likely that the latter was influenced by the former.

  • April 19, 2002, 7:01 a.m. CST

    TIM B

    by MGTHEDJ

    The line should have been the second FILM was an homage to THEM. And on O'Bannon story also appears in "Heavy Metal", I know the chronology. It was just a side note. my bad----m