Ain't It Cool News: The best in movie, TV, DVD, and comic book news.

New Director Chosen on MISSION IMPOSSIBLE 3!

How would this film self-destructing be any different from the o by rev_skarekroe	Jul 23rd, 2004 02:01:36 PM
sk
Instead of Slow-Mo Doves... by Karl Childers	Jul 23rd, 2004 02:02:47 PM

Bummelum by DjBeau	Jul 23rd, 2004 02:02:50 PM
Might do a good job.
More more more by Pretzelnuts	Jul 23rd, 2004 02:08:26 PM
Personally I cant wait to see the b*llshit factor multiplied by a factor of 10 for this movie! Perhaps we can see Cruise drop from a helicopter with a tissue as a parachute and land on a motocycle so he can have another incredible bike duel. Then to finish it off at the end of the movie he can pull off a latex mask to show it was really L Ron Hubbard all along and that scientology really is the way! Either him or sloth from the goonies!
Nimoy said he won't act anymore. Also I'm pretty sure Ratner wi by Tall_Boy	Jul 23rd, 2004 02:09:11 PM
never know, though. For the record, I dug Red Dragon. No In Da Gatta Da Vitta window smashing scene is a good thing in my book.
Replace Cruise with Chan by antonphd	Jul 23rd, 2004 02:13:01 PM
You know that he wants to be James Bond or an MI agent so bad. Or... make him the bad guy and let him kick Cruise's ass. Not that I don't like Tom Cruise movies. I do. I would just rather see Jackie Chan kick ass.
agent hunt has a beer and cheats on spock by dry_heaves	Jul 23rd, 2004 02:15:23 PM
.
Casting by SPlissken	Jul 23rd, 2004 02:18:42 PM
Definitely bring Jackie Chan and Chris Tucker into the IMF Team. They're all assigned to protect some family man, played by Nicholas Cage -- who ultimately turns out to be the villain. Charlie Sheen will be the reporter who gets in the way because "money talks".
by Biddlerama	Jul 23rd, 2004 02:19:05 PM
Doesn't Ratner have a reputation for being a studio stooge, he basically does whatever they say. Don't get me wrong, I like Cruise but it wouldn't surprise me if Ratner was hired to basically floow Cruises lead rather the lead the project himself. If this film turns out to be a true "team movie" I will flabbergasted.
This made my day. by Mr Brownstone	Jul 23rd, 2004 02:20:05 PM
Rush Hour 2 is one of of my favorite movies of all time. Ratner brings it old school a la the kings of 70's cheese. He will bring a much needed sense of fun to this series. It seems like post x-files / seven everythings gotta be a brooding drag to be considered "cool". Those days are over.
State of the Art by Jervis Tetch	Jul 23rd, 2004 02:23:44 PM
Both "Mission:Impossibles" to date illustrated what went wrong with the movies -- even though they were based on a TV show. A show specifically about a TEAM of experts being selected and put together for various missions was converted into a movie about one guy (Tom Croooze) doing the missions with "some back up" (like Ving Rhames dropping off/picking up with a helicopter.) Part 1 ended with Croooze flying through the air from an explosion onto the slick window of a speeding train and having a helicopter blade stop one inch from his throat, just like that. Part 2 was nothing but physics-defying stunts, homoerotic pretty-boy shots of Tom and a laugh-inducing series of "mask rip-offs." They even trashed the famous musical theme in Part 2 --you could barely hear it. But here's the biggest twist of all: both movies were big hits for Tom, and the second was among his biggest ever. We showed up for these horrible "anti-movies" and have helped keep Tom Croooze a star. The studio suits are right: we'll show up for anything. We'll show up for this. P.S. Brett Ratner is the all-too-typical generic studio-approved "Director" (trademark) guaranteed to deliver a soulless 00's thriller. Perfect.
Expect banal, pedestrian rubbish. by Desk	Jul 23rd, 2004 02:42:05 PM
DePalma, Woo... Ratnerd?!? In desperation Cruise and company turn to a middling second-rate director with an over-inflated sense of his own ability in a bid to rush something resembling a film into cinemas next summer. It's the Silence of the Lambs series all over again! Intelligent, sophisticated and subdued first film followed by an outrageous, over the top, but comically enjoyable and cinematically beautiful second, and then Ratner arrives to deliver a mind-numbingly prosaic and listless third instalment. I love the Mission: Impossible concept. Creator Bruce Gellar was a genius! The films have been reasonably diverting to date, and any incarnation of M:I is better than none at all. However, Gellar's creation isn't meant as a star vehicle for Cruise. Where it really belongs is on TV, as a slick, widescreen, Hi-Def, CSI-style series following a rotating team of IMF agents, using their diverse skills and the latest cutting edge technology to pull-off ingenious, convulted stings topple middle-eastern despots in gripping 43-minute instalments. Get Mission: Impossible back on TV if you can't produce a decent film!
I think they ment Rush Hour 3 not MI:3 by spectrebeeyatch	Jul 23rd, 2004 02:42:43 PM
This makes no sense to me Bret Ratner just sucks. All this means is that the studio wants to make another pointless spyish movie but just have things blow up and go through the motions. So they got a director who would not complain which would be Ratner. The Rush Hour movies are so basic and simple its sad. These guys should look at the Bourne movies those are real great spy movies and they make money. Oh well I would have been happy with John Woo again instead of Ratner because at least I would have known I'd have a fun time watching the movie, now I might just skip this one whenever it comes out
Yes! The very fucking reason I loved Mission Impossible was beca by Big Bad Clone	Jul 23rd, 2004 02:51:40 PM

Ratner is one of the worst directors working today!I can't belie by nicola	Jul 23rd, 2004 03:03:19 PM
How do you go from Fincher to Carnahan to fuckin' Ratner?!?I'll tell ya how-complete desperation.How else to explain it?And Cruise is coming off of working with Speilberg and Mann and now handing the reins to his franchise to the director of the Rush Hour movies????I'm in shock, what a let down.
still wish it had been carnahan by Demosthenes2	Jul 23rd, 2004 03:08:31 PM
He would have understood and emphasized the internal conflicts between the team and such and made it feel more rooted in honesty if it had been anything like Narc, substance over flash. Ratner hasn't given any indication that he's more than a studio craftsman.
Ratner is directing? Okay expect ebonics, Tony Hopkins and bland by Spacesheik	Jul 23rd, 2004 03:31:08 PM
Well I suppose its better than JJ "Luthor was an alien, Krypton doesnt explode" Abrams.
Yay, Ratthead. Mission Impossible III = Rush Hour IV (are there by SalvatoreGravano	Jul 23rd, 2004 03:39:00 PM
Oh well, at least it won't be as insultingly dreadful as his failed Manhunter-wannabe, the shitfest that was "Red Dragon". It can't be any worse.
Let me get this straight... by JiggamanSpence	Jul 23rd, 2004 03:42:53 PM
Ok, so, Joe Carnahan, whose eight-minute BMW film was more entertaining than the entire two hours of MI-2, is now gone and they hired the most unimaginitive, boring, and all around crappy director they could find this side of McG? Good going, Paramount! This is like a goddamn Warner Bros. decision!
Eh? by dr_buggerlugs	Jul 23rd, 2004 03:45:01 PM
So first we have De Palma...then we have John Woo...both generally regarded as fine auteurs in their own rights..then we have Brett Ratner. Just like we first had Michael Mann, Jonathan Demme and Ridley Scott with the Thomas Harris adaptions, they were joined by er...Brett Ratner. Can anyone else see what's odd here. Oh well, at least it won't get the grimier, hard-edged MI3 either Fincher or Carnahan could have given us. Joy. Can I have some more alcohol now?
"This is like a goddamn Warner Bros. decision!" by Spacesheik	Jul 23rd, 2004 03:48:27 PM
HAHAA - aint that the truth bro...
We'll see ... by The Dracut Stomp	Jul 23rd, 2004 03:48:42 PM
Fincher would have been great. I just watched "Narc" again the other day. Carnahan would have been good. I imagined Carnahan doing to the Mission: Impossible franchise what Liman and Greengrass did with the Jason Bourne movies. Those are gritty spy movies. Hopefully Ratner tries to bring something different to the table with this one.
I think its safe to say by Kaleb.09	Jul 23rd, 2004 04:00:12 PM
that someone will post in this forum that Hulk hogan should be the villian
The biggest problem by The Grey Man	Jul 23rd, 2004 04:08:14 PM
...is Tom Cruise. I agree with Harry that the best part about the original show was the teamwork. There was never any one "star." The MI flicks have turned into one-man shows, and I think we can safely blame the star for that. Which is a shame, since I actually like Tom Cruise and I didn't mind the second MI all that much, thanks to the action sequences. The first MI was at its best when it was showing a team of IMF agents working it. But I don't think any director can return this franchise to its proper roots, due to Cruise's presence. If, perhaps, the original movie had started with a group of actors who weren't making $20 million a flick, and took it from there, maybe carrying over two or three agents from the original, it may have stood a chance.
Almost forgot... by The Grey Man	Jul 23rd, 2004 04:10:41 PM
...Ratner is a hack and he will defintely make the poorest of all three MI films. BMW commercials with Clive Owens rock.
do you really want "truth" from a mission impossible movie? by Mr Brownstone	Jul 23rd, 2004 04:14:13 PM

Pretzelnuts by phanboi	Jul 23rd, 2004 04:14:48 PM
Buahahahhahaha ... WHAT A RIDE! I just spilled diet coke all over my kb ... thru the nostrils. Thanks mate
The trouble with John Woo... by obi12kenobi	Jul 23rd, 2004 04:42:00 PM
...is that he hasn't evolved. When we were younger, in body and mind, we enjoyed his films. But we've grown and evolved and he has not. He's still doing the same stuff, the 2 gun dive in slow mo through a flock of doves. I watched Face Off again the other day and the gun play is so shit. It's just to over-dramatised to be scary, tense or hard hitting. obi_TWELVE_kenobi
I liked Red Dragon by super Cucaracha	Jul 23rd, 2004 04:51:09 PM
but Ratner should not do this. Who knows?!... Maybe we'll be surprised by his work. WB should kill this franchise after what Woo did to it, kill Cruise's cahracter and start a new with Nicholas Cage.
It's CHARACTER by super Cucaracha	Jul 23rd, 2004 04:52:39 PM
sorry, I fucked up.
They should've gotten Woody Allen by I Like Batman	Jul 23rd, 2004 04:57:15 PM
In addition to directing, he could replace Anthony Hopkins as the mission commander!
should have got Tony Scott for this... by TheFastTheFurion	Jul 23rd, 2004 05:12:13 PM
The guy needs a hit, and with enough bull tranquilizer he could turn out a nice stylish, restrained action flick.
NONE of the MI films have been good. MI2 was marginally enterta by jrcash	Jul 23rd, 2004 05:30:59 PM
I'm sure they got Ratner for one reason only. He was available. Funny how the hit director of Rush Hour 1,2, The Family Man and Red Dragon was available. Remember when Ed Norton told Entertainment Weekly that there was tension on the RD set because Brett Ratner had no experience working with good actors, so the actors had to take over? 'Member? And then Ratner hasn't worked since then? 'Member? That was awesome. Ratner has no talent. I am fully confident that Cruise will be the real director on this, and that the film will feature several shots of him doing masculine things so the world will buy him as an action star and so the next time he goes on Oprah, people will ask him deep questions that he will pretend to have an informed, wise answer for because he's a Scientologist. He was a pussy in Top Gun (I only speak the truth - watch it again sometime), a pussy in Days of Thunder, a pussy in Color of Money, an idiot in MI1, and MI3 will be just as ridiculously horrible as MI1. The times when he's good (and there are times) is when he plays an asshole, like in Rain Man, Magnolia, and Color of Money. Is he gay? Probably not. But he's NO NICOLAS CAGE! Brett Ratner is a preppy film school bitch who thinks he's "down" 'cause the rappers couldn't find a black director willing to stoop low enough to direct their sexist, ghetto-assed videos. This film will implode. Trust me.
I agree with Tony Scott directing it by super Cucaracha	Jul 23rd, 2004 06:10:21 PM
Man on Fire kicked gigantic Oprah ass!
get what you deserve by hank quinlan	Jul 23rd, 2004 06:14:30 PM
Sad. REAL sad. I think I can only echo most of the comments here. I always noticed Cruise's impeccable taste in director's. He worked with Kubrick for Christ's sake. And after Minority report there really wasn't anybody left he hadn't worked with. I knew when Carnahan left this late it would end up with a journey man director. Spottiswoode, Donaldson or even Amiel. The trinity of British hacks. But Ratner. Wow, the 20 year streak has ended. It's not surprising. It's Cruise's show and Ratner has zero personality anyway. He's an sycophantic player. My brother worked with him personally. He literally just shoots everything in the room. Doesn't want to make a decision on set. Some of his post team had to tell him how to rip off Deep Red for the only good moment in Red Dragon, which was an abomination. Look the movie will open huge. Make money. And be a lame ass entry in a spotty series. Tommy...I love ya. But come on...
by Washingtonian	Jul 23rd, 2004 06:16:02 PM
I thought J.J. Abrams was in the running for this?
Part one sucked and it was 10 times better than the god awful MI by Logo Lou	Jul 23rd, 2004 06:45:30 PM
Yes, I'd like an actual team movie too. We won't get it. Tom Cruise is a cock. A GAY cock.
The MI:2 DVD case.... by Huffy1968	Jul 23rd, 2004 06:47:03 PM
...stated "The world's greatest spy returns!" Exactly! The name's Hunt, Ethan Hunt! Fuck the whole team aspect, yeah we'll have Ving Rhames back, and some Aussie no-one will remember - lets stick em in a copter for half the film while Hunt gets all the car chases, cool stunts and the girl! At least it was different than the first one where most of the team are offed in the first half hour! MI:3? BRING BACK THE TEAM!
dumb, dumb spies by kev_uk	Jul 23rd, 2004 08:16:44 PM
lets face it. the tv series was very average at best, lame at worst. same with the movie trilogy. but hey, round of applause to TC for making so much money from the franchise. the only reason i see for him choosing BR as director is because he wants to go in a different direction again, which is commendable i suppose. never mind guys, at least you get to enjoy an average spy thriller in the bourne supremacy. by the way, how did the bourne identity deserve a sequel? an ok film, but surely undeserved of a follow up.
The Great Brett Ratner. by RainJacket	Jul 23rd, 2004 10:52:20 PM
I was hoping this man would never direct another movie ever again, but I guess that's another dream of mine dead. This is pretty much a guarantee that M:I3 will be uninteresting and pedestrian, just like all of Ratner's films. At least that's a step above "unbelievably stupid" the sequel gave us.
Red Dragon/Deep Red by BillEmic	Jul 23rd, 2004 11:21:20 PM
Hey, I love Deep Red and all things Argento...but it's been some time since I've viewed Red Dragon and I've tried to forget about it as much as possible. What shot did Ratner steal from Deep Red?
The action in M:I2 was INCREDIBLE by AlwaysThere	Jul 24th, 2004 01:30:12 AM
The DVD displays it perfectly. Why so much hate?
I love Mission Impossible. by Azlam Orlandu	Jul 24th, 2004 01:54:52 AM
Loved the old show, loved the newer show, loved the first film, love Crusie in general, but if MI3 is anything like MI2 then please let me know ahead of time so I don't end up here bitching and complaining after the fact to a bunch of children. I'd just assume let good franshises fade away save for being scrapped and dismantled by unfitting overhyped directors like Woo. Here's hoping. -Az
Because... by Huffy1968	Jul 24th, 2004 01:58:40 AM
...MI:2 was an action movie where the action sequences were worked out first, and the plot written around them - and it shows. Also, it couldn't have got further away from the core values of its titular franchise if it tried, which is where my DVD sleeve quote came in.
Oh my god... by Gluecifer	Jul 24th, 2004 02:04:08 AM
From Brian de Palma and John Woo to...Brett Ratner. The beginning of the end of this franchise... Brett Ratner, Tom, he's one of the worst!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
"knock knock..." ....... "....Who's there?......" ........... ". by TheGinger Twit	Jul 24th, 2004 02:26:21 AM
Mission implausible is the worst fucked up franchise hollywood has tried to dish out. Sure the first was inventive, but the fact that the second exists makes the first out to be some whore of a film used to give pretty boy Tom his own james bond superhero film series. What a crock of shit!
What the fu-u-uck? I don't even like these movies, and this is b by heywood jablomie	Jul 24th, 2004 02:56:53 AM
How is it Cruise knows to shut up and do what he's told with Kubrick, PTA, Cameron Crowe, but on these cheeseball movies he drives DePalma, then John Woo, then poor Carnahan to drink? Can some Dianetics scholar please explain this? He could not have picked a worse guy for MI3 if he tried. Nora Ephron would've been a smarter choice.
Here's Why... by Dr. A. Ravenwood	Jul 24th, 2004 04:34:24 AM
It's very simple, boys and girls. Why not Fincher? Because he couldn't understand the rules of the "M:I" club. What are those rules? Rule #1. Tom Cruise IS "M:I". Rule #2. Nobody argues with Tom Cruise. Rule #3. You do NOT talk about arguing with Tom Cruise... arguing is to be referred to as "creative differences." So. Tommy taps Joe Carnahan... a good director, but a director with only 2 (count 'em 2!) films to his credit... One, a film fest style deal, and the next a film that mysteriously took no less than 16 producers to get made (including Cruise)! So. Again. Why Carnahan? Because TC thought, "now here's a guy I can control... a puppet for me to pull the strings of. 'Narc' did good critically, but not financially, so this guy NEEDS me." Yeah, um... No. Carnahan bailed, as he should have. So, finally we come to Ratner. A director whose only style is his ability to imitate other director's styles. "Red Dragon"? Please. It seemed like Ratner studied Demme's "Lambs" for months. "Oooh, Demme! That was a good shot! I think I'll use it!" So. Ratner will say, "O.K. Let's put the camera here," and Daddy Cruise will say, "I think it would work better over there," and Ratner will say, "you know what, Tommy? You're right! That's why you are so good. Brilliant, even! Let's move camera over there... right where TC said to."
Can someone please tell me how the hell Brett Ratner is still wo by My Ass Smells	Jul 24th, 2004 09:49:59 AM
anyone?
You're all missing the point by Mr.Klaw	Jul 25th, 2004 02:30:08 AM
MI3 is supposed to start rolling next month. This means that: locations have already been scouted, a script has long since been approved by Cruise and the studio, as has casting, and Ratner is a director for hire on this one. No discussion of his merits or lack thereof here, just the facts. The Klaw has Klacked.
Darabont by Spacesheik	Jul 25th, 2004 03:25:19 PM
If Darabont is doing this a prison will be prevalent in he plot (maybe a jail break) and there will be flashbacks.
re: the biggest problem (Grey Man) by Andy_Christ	Jul 26th, 2004 06:57:19 PM
Tom Cruise is the biggest problem. And the biggest problem with Tom Cruise is that all Tom Cruise movies exist solely to masturbate Tom Cruise. MI2 did this more than perhaps had ever been seen until The Last Samurai. Hell, nothing else has ever even come close for wankiness except maybe the Scientology circle-jerk Battlefield Earth, and every movie with Jennifer Lopez in it.

Talkbacks

New Director Chosen on MISSION IMPOSSIBLE 3!

User login

Quick Talkback

Talkbacks