| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Airbolt 
"teil mann, teil maschine"
|
 Posted - 09/09/2007 : 00:40:42
|
Anyone ever get upset over a fictional character?
I know Mission Impossible is an old film but i invested a lot of time in it growing up. I got to admire Jim Phelps and his frankly implausible plots.
Then the movie tells us he is a traitor and we have to support the grinning Tom Cruise. Another childhood ideal smashed!
It was a bit like finding Napoleon Solo worked for Thrush or Captain Kirk took bribes from the Klingons!
So i now think that Peter Graves is the REAL Jim Phelps and the Jon Voight version was a cunning plant!
Not sure what brought this to mind |
|
|
Stalean
"Back...OMG"
|
Posted - 09/09/2007 : 01:56:20
|
I agree. I thought it was quite a shoddy plot device.  |
 |
|
|
MguyX 
"X marks the spot"
|
Posted - 09/09/2007 : 04:49:25
|
Ditto. In fact, AIR, thank you for clarifying that matter for me. The Jon Voight Phelps had to be an imposter, because the Jim Phelps we know and love would never betray his calling.  |
|
|
|
duh 
"catpurrs"
|
Posted - 09/09/2007 : 04:56:40
|
quote:
Originally posted by MguyX
Ditto. In fact, AIR, thank you for clarifying that matter for me. The Jon Voight Phelps had to be an imposter, because the Jim Phelps we know and love would never betray his calling.
SO! I'm NOT the only one who found that plot device to be completely implausible!!!!!!!!!!!!! Jim Phelps would never ever betray his country or his team! That is something that really bugged me about that movie! |
|
|
|
ChocolateLady
"500 Chocolate Delights"
|
Posted - 09/09/2007 : 06:41:19
|
I loved watching Mission Impossible on TV. Aside from the fact that Greg Morris was really hot, and Peter Graves was very cute as well, I always enjoyed how they put amazing twists into each episode and all those disguises were terribly clever. It was an intelligent action TV series and never failed to be creative.
There are three main reasons why I refuse to ever see the Mission Impossible movies.
1. Tom Cruise has become an egotistical, putz
2. Jim Phelps would never be a traitor
3. They made it into a one-man show, and the whole fun of the TV series was that they were a TEAM!
The last reason proves that I am correct about the first reason.
(This message will self-destruct in five seconds!)
|
Edited by - ChocolateLady on 09/09/2007 06:51:07 |
|
|
|
Rovark
"Luck-pushing, rule-bending, chance-taking reviewer"
|
Posted - 09/09/2007 : 11:02:32
|
I didn't like the whole Phelps becoming a traitor thing, especially to the extent that his people were killed. But I went along with it as I figured the movie was not really aimed at my generation who loved the original tv series. They wanted to go somewhere new with it and the film did move along with a certain enthusiasm.
But, when Cruise failed to build a new team, and then, especially into the next film turned it into his I-always-wanted-to-be-James-Bond solo, that was when I really lost interest.
BTW, best delete posts suggesting the Voight Phelps was an imposter. Some studio exec might see it and think now here's somewhere we can go with the next in the series, it was all a ruse to discredit Phelp and he's really in a Cuban prison being sweated for all his secrets. Let's send in Bond - I mean Hawke to rescue him. |
|
|
|
demonic
"Cinemaniac"
|
Posted - 09/09/2007 : 15:05:23
|
I didn't mind so much becasue Jon Voight was nothing like Peter Graves in any way, so it was easier to forget about it. If it had actually been Peter Graves (tricky) I would have been devastated!
And Choccy - Cruise is very much the front man, but in all three films he works with a team of chosen agents and they are vital. I'd recommend the first one, even if you do have a thing against Cruise; no matter what he does in his private life it's a really good film. |
|
|
|
Sean
"Necrosphenisciform anthropophagist."
|
Posted - 09/10/2007 : 01:59:20
|
quote:
Originally posted by AIRBOLT
So I now think that Peter Graves is the REAL Jim Phelps and the Jon Voight version was a cunning plant!
I'm looking forward to MI4 where Tom Cruise turns traitor, and while hiding in an outhouse in India from Peter Graves (I mean the real Jim Phelps), Tom falls head-first into the cesspit and drowns.... in the first five minutes of the movie.  |
|
|
|
MisterBadIdea 
"PLZ GET MILK, KTHXBYE"
|
Posted - 09/10/2007 : 02:50:03
|
| I never even watched the original TV show and that bothered me. |
|
|
|
ChocolateLady
"500 Chocolate Delights"
|
Posted - 09/10/2007 : 08:03:11
|
quote:
Originally posted by demonicAnd Choccy - Cruise is very much the front man, but in all three films he works with a team of chosen agents and they are vital. I'd recommend the first one, even if you do have a thing against Cruise; no matter what he does in his private life it's a really good film.
Um... I'm not convinced. From my recollections of the TV series, the team members took turns in being the "front man", depending on who had the plan for getting the job done. If you look at the IMDb page for the TV series, you'll see that it isn't Peter Graves who was in all the episodes, but Greg Morris! Hell, both Peter Lupus and the guy who was the voice on the tape were in more episodes than Graves. Graves only joined in 1967, and wasn't at the start in 1966. Yes, Phelps quickly became the most popular of the characters, but I clearly remember episodes where Greg Morris was the guy in charge and many where Martin Landau was pulling the strings. There was even at least one where Barbara Bain took the lead.
My point is, it was never "Phelps' and the gang", and Cruise turned the movies into "Hunt, Ethan Hunt (and, oh, yeah, by the way, there are some guys that help him)". I will NEVER forgive him for that, and I will NEVER watch any of these movies.
|
|
|
|
Airbolt
"teil mann, teil maschine"
|
Posted - 09/10/2007 : 14:40:29
|
quote:
Originally posted by Se�n
quote:
Originally posted by AIRBOLT
So I now think that Peter Graves is the REAL Jim Phelps and the Jon Voight version was a cunning plant!
I'm looking forward to MI4 where Tom Cruise turns traitor, and while hiding in an outhouse in India from Peter Graves (I mean the real Jim Phelps), Tom falls head-first into the cesspit and drowns.... in the first five minutes of the movie.
LOL! Now there's a film i WOULD see
He could even throw in an appaling "Graves" pun and wink at the audience
|
Edited by - Airbolt on 09/10/2007 14:42:21 |
|
|
|
demonic
"Cinemaniac"
|
Posted - 09/11/2007 : 06:33:38
|
quote:
My point is, it was never "Phelps' and the gang", and Cruise turned the movies into "Hunt, Ethan Hunt (and, oh, yeah, by the way, there are some guys that help him)". I will NEVER forgive him for that, and I will NEVER watch any of these movies.
You seem to take it very seriously, I don't know if it's really that drastic.
It seems obvious to me why it concentrates on Cruise's character -
a) these films star Tom Cruise - he is the top billing and a lot of people will have come to see the film solely for that reason. He also does it very well.
b) Giving three agents equal billing and their own plot strands wouldn't work in a feature length.
c) at the start of the first film, and it probably wouldn't be spoiling too much to say so, the entire team he's working with is killed and he is accused of betraying them - not much opportunity for equal time shared amongst the squad.
You could just watch the first movie, think of it like an extended episode where one member of the team (Hunt) features prominently - then what's the difference? 
Okay, I'm winding you up a bit... but I've never understood the notion of hating a movie on principle. I'll see it first and then stick the boot in if necessary. |
|
|
|
Stalean
"Back...OMG"
|
Posted - 09/11/2007 : 15:00:53
|
Then don't name a film after a beloved TV series and change it for your own convenience or egotistical purpose.
You can see who the Big Name team/ensemble players are in film today:
Christopher Walken
Al Pacino
Robert De Niro
George Clooney
Brad Pitt
Johnny Depp
Matt Damon
Clive Owen
Julia Roberts
Benicio Del Toro
Kevin Spacey
for all his ego, Russell Crowe
Bruce Willis
Catherine Zeta-Jones
Andy Garcia (The Godfather III, Ocean's Trilogy, etc.)
Anyway, I could go on and on with Big Name stars who do a lot of ensemble work, but I can't think of any Tom Cruise films that were true ensemble. There was Taps and The Outsiders (done before Risky Business), but he didn't become well-known until Risky Business. Maybe Magnolia, but he was still the main character in my opinion.
|
Edited by - Stalean on 09/11/2007 15:24:17 |
|
|
|
ragingfluff
"Currently lost in Canada"
|
Posted - 09/11/2007 : 17:53:22
|
Far be it from me to defend Mini Me Tom Cruise, but I think criticizing him for "not being a team player" is a bit silly. He is a movie star who gets to pick and choose what he does, and if he chooses star vehicles (and yes, that sometimes includes taking beloved TV series and reworking them to focus on one character, namely, his), that's his decision. As Demonic points out, it's his name that gets bums on seats, and he does what he does (running while exhaling loudly; looking confused; flashing his killer smile; staring into middle distance while looking thoughtful; standing on orange crates to appear taller than his co-stars) very well indeed.
In any event, the relatively poor (by Hollywood standards) performance by MI3 at the box office, coupled with Tattoo's Cruise's couch-jumping resulted in Paramount throwing him off the lot and ensuring there will be no MI4, or if there is, it won't star Mickey Rooney Tom Cruise.
And besides, who gives a %$#@ about Peter Graves? He was already a has-been in the 1970's whose only memorable performance post Mission Impossible was in Airplane. Graves was unhappy with the Mission Impossible movie (because he wanted to be in it...I'm guessing because he needed the money)...just like Adam West bitched when they passed him over in favour of Michael Keaton for the big screen Batman. Cruise may be an arrogant %^$!, but he's an arroagant %^$! who can open a movie, and if you don't know by now that that is all that counts in Hollywood, you're naive.
Most movie versions of TV series tend to destroy a little of the original. The first Star Trek movie was utter garbage. The Avengers: piece of stinking pooh. Thunderbirds: blech! Lost in Space: like the script, I assume. There are exceptions (The Fugitive), but they are few and far between. We all have beloved TV shows from our youth that we would hate to see destroyed in the cinema (hands off The Prisoner!), but that is sometimes the way it is....
|
|
|
|
w22dheartlivie
"Kitty Lover"
|
Posted - 09/11/2007 : 18:35:29
|
| What bothers me about Hollywood big screening great TV shows is that it seems to reflect a lack of imagination. Can't think of a fresh, original idea?? Hey!! Let's revive a TV show from our youth. We can skew it anyway we want. Who cares if it demeans it instead of glorifying it? The same thing applies to the majority of the remakes that Hollywood seems fond of regurgitating. With a choice few exceptions, most of them are crap. It all reminds me of the Infinite Monkey Theorem. |
|
|
|
Downtown 
"Welcome back, Billy Buck"
|
Posted - 09/11/2007 : 19:16:53
|
| Anytime I hear the name "Phelps" I immediately think of those lunatics from the Westboro Baptist Church in Kansas. Ol' Fred has kind of tainted the name, I think. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Jim Phelps
