Literally 0 hype

Maybe because the last several M:I movies are literally the exact same movies in tone, cinematography and directing style.
At least the first 4 or so MI movies had their own personality behind them that made them unique.
Christopher McQuarrie is a hack.

why did there need to be like 8 mission impossible movies

To be honest, after 4 I can't even tell the movies apart

the center of gravity of pop culture has finally switched fully over to scrolling past garbage on your phone.

there's no need for serviceable-but-not-great content from movies anymore. people would literally rather watch actual garbage if its memetic because it synergizes better with posting on your phone.

That explains the success of Barbie and I guess Minecraft. People no longer go to "movies" they go to "events".

I've never seen mission impossible expect parts of one as a kid, which ones are worth watching? i downloaded the first already

poeple are tired of "ai" shit and they are also tired of mission impossible part 20.
i mean how many impossible missions you can have?

the first one is actually a really spy thriller. the others ones are basically action movies. if you want to watch more after the first one then you should stop after mission impossible 4

The first two. After that they're all the same.

Okay cool, at least i know the front end of them are good then

my partner

your boyfriend who is a guy who fucks you, who is also a guy, in the ass you mean

It's not ending at 8. Tom wouldn't allow it.

Obsessed much?

I can't stop thinking about it

Is this a "part 2" to the previous movie or is this "final reckoning part 1" and there's a "final reckoning part 2: even more final" coming out after this? Google just makes it more confusing.

Well, there wasn't that much of hype for Part 1 either.
And the trailer is way too generic for its own good

I'm gonna need you to trust me.........................................................................................one last time

FUCK OFF
youtube.com/watch?v=KAOdjqyG37A

At least the first 4 or so MI movies had their own personality

This, it should be one director per movie and a different tone and direction for each one. It's like the shifts that occur when a Bond actor changes but accelerated.
I think Tom has honed in on a formula that lets him maximise his fun with stunts, at the expense of variety.

Hyping movies is so 2013 coded

It was meant to be titled "part 2" but they realized they would lose even more money if it was called that, and they even removed the "part 1" from Dead Reckoning recently

That last one was complete dog shit.

The fatal mistake these two movies made was the main threat.
Terrorists, ringleaders and rogue operatives trying to control or destroy the world through money, viruses and nuclear warfare are tangible, but the idea of a bunch of spies fighting an AI is much more nebulous, requires far more suspension of your disbelief and because of the lack of a face or personality to it you need to spend a lot of time with the characters discussing how much of a threat it is rather than us seeing it firsthand.
I honestly believe they could have carried out the Solomon Lane plotline to another movie and it would have worked much better and made it more cohesive with the other McQuarrie movies.

best spy robbari

I just got home from watching this and honestly it was just shit….

Apart from the one action sequence in the submarine on the ocean floor nothing fun even happened - yet it still took 3 hours

Dead Reckoning Part 1 had a lot of fun action and was miles better

dead reckoning was the worst movie ive ever seen

MI series was interesting cause each movie was stylistically different with different directors. It was like an anthology series. Fallout was great even though Rogue Nation had the same crew. Fallout also felt like a part 2 to Rogue Nation with the story. But they should have switched directors after that. Now it just feels like the same old shit with a new worse story and villains.

Too many movies. The first one is a classic, the 3 beyond that had the gimmick that every one of them was by a different director with a different style. I remember 5 being praised as having the good of all the previous movies, but in retrospect that's where the movies stopped having different styles and became more generic.

What went wrong?

Writers strike

There were too many parts in Dead Reckoning where someone really should have had a gun from a logical standpoint, but nobody did. The Venice fights, are one instance. Another was when Ethan fought that guy on the train. Fallout was better because the characters were stripped of their guns in some way either during or before melee fights.

Maybe reviewers didn't receive money this time. Anons paypal accounts are still empty. They better start thinking in more well funded social media hype next time. The first hour of the film is nothing new. You got to watch a 25 minutes epilogue and after that Cruise running from one building to wherever Luther is and that is retard. It's just lazy writting with a lot of we-spent-a-lot-of-money-to-make-these-two-frames scenes

It's too evidently a vanity project for Tom Cruise now. A glorified Neil Been movie executed by top talent and massive resources, but still transparently a vanity project at heart..

Wait, he made another?