Coming off the box office blunder Lions for Lambs, and looking towards a potential disaster with Valkyrie, Tom Cruise needs another big hit, and he needs it soon. Everyone in Hollywood pretty much assumes that Cruise will push another Mission: Impossible film into production before the release of Bryan Singer’s historical thriller early next year.
Now an insider pretty much confirms our suspicions, telling Life & Style Magazine, “Tom will make M:I 4 once Paramount greenlights the script. There will most definitely be another Mission: Impossible!”
When in the middle of a big career backlash, why choose edgy challenging (read: risky) films when you have a popular action franchise in your back pocket. Plus, foreign markets still love both Cruise and American action movies.
via: Perez
April 30th, 2008 at 2:45 am
Any word about J.J Abrams’ involvement? Or will Cruise continue with his original concept of different directors for each installment?
April 30th, 2008 at 3:11 am
Who owns Mission Impossible? Paramount or Cruise? If it is Paramount they should turn it into a James Bond franchise, with the Ethan Hunt actor getting replaced every now and then. Or just to a reboot. The Mission Impossible name is more valuable than the Tom Cruise name right now.
How much money would a MI movie make if it starred Hugh Jackman, or Ben Affleck, or whoever, versus what it would make with Cruise? More, Less, or the same?
April 30th, 2008 at 3:16 am
I wonder: Not exactly sure, but I think Paramount and Cruise both have some kind of contract. I know Paramount cant make a MI movie without Cruise, at least for now. And to be honest with you, Cruise is still huge overseas, especially in asian countries. So would the moie make more with Hugh Jackman? probably not overall.
April 30th, 2008 at 4:23 am
These movies start out OK but end up being ridiculously over the top and inane. I’ve never seen the TV show so I don’t know if that’s a convention of the franchise but for my money it would be nice to see them reign it in a bit and make it a tense, dark thriller - with some well orchestrated action pieces.
If I remember correctly David Fincher’s name was being touted around for MI3. That was a step in the right direction. Maybe Joe Carnahan would be good?
April 30th, 2008 at 7:22 am
I think Paramount owns the franchise with Redstone calling the shots. So personally I will believe this when it basically comes out. UA is an offshoot of Paramount and currently funded with something like $500 million from Merrill Lynch for start up costs. Since Redstone believes that TC cost the franchise around $150 million with his antics and behavior during the release of the last MI movie, it is really difficult to believe he would jump on TC making another one. But in Hollywood, anything can literally happen-if enough money and power is thrown in a particular direction.
April 30th, 2008 at 8:32 am
what ever happened to all that talk about Brad Pitt replacing Cruise on the next MI movie?
and @I Wonder… Ben Affleck? lol probably not that much
April 30th, 2008 at 10:31 am
This is the mov(i)e that will finally put a sizable dent in Cruise’s career. I guess David Poland and “all of Hollywood” were right though.
April 30th, 2008 at 12:19 pm
……
Tom, don’t go away mad.
JUST GO AWAY.
April 30th, 2008 at 8:57 pm
I liked the third part of the film. Although I dont like Tom Cruise…
May 1st, 2008 at 5:19 pm
If Tom will do mission 4 pray the the story does not end up with further evil IMF agents. The IMF sting operations in the first three movies were downright boring. The movies did not capture the mindbending IMF operations of the tv series. Let the villians be based on todays world politics. Enemies such as Hezbollah, Al Quader, the Russian mafia, African warlords, the Iranian nuclear weapons. No more corrupt IMF agents with Ethan Hunt on the run from the agency. Mission 2 and mission 3 pandered to submoronic teenagers. Adults want to watch these genres also, but not when they pander to teenagers who want simple storytelling and boring missions. The tv IMF operations teased the mind with it’s surreal set-ups when they captured their targets. The only aspect that the three movies got right was all the face switching that the tv show was famous fall. The villians in the three movies were cutboard cutout characters with no characterization whatsoever. Mission 4 will need an overpowering villian that would make all the other characters in the movie, including Ethan Hunt look good. If the audience gets a truly sophistcated and visual mission movie then I’m sure Paramount pictures will have their most successful mission movie yet, that will not only pander to undemanding teenagers/
May 6th, 2008 at 3:08 pm
WELLL TOM CRUISE I DID NOT KNOW YOU wore making a 4th
series of mission impossible welll thats cool
May 8th, 2008 at 2:48 pm
No one else can be ethan hunt. that would be just stupid and i for one would not watch it. I wish brad pitt would be in the next one and the two of them would be assined by anthony hopkins. Did not like him not being in the third one.