MovieChat Forums > Mission: Impossible - Dead Reckoning Part One (2023) Discussion > why call it 'Part One'?

why call it 'Part One'?

posted a year ago by bozo_500 (13119)
13 replies | jump to latest

Surely thats risking some of the potential audience thinking 'well its just half a movie.. And I'm not bothered enough to invest in seeing two movies'

It'll probably pay off as its Tom Cruise/Mission Impossible but imo MI7 should've been just 'Dead Reckoning' and call MI8 something else. (even Dead Reckoning Part II but no Part I)

Avengers 3&4 was originally titled 'Avengers Infinity War Part 1' and 'Infinity War Part 2' before ditching them for Infinty War and Endgame so became like standalone movies (presumably so the audience goes into Infinity War expecting the culmination of the MCU, but then gets thrown by the shock end and then HAD to see the next one.. Had it been called 'Part I' the surprise mightve been affected ) ..

Justice League was also originally going to be Part I & II but then the whole thing got fcuked up anyway.. But had there been another it would've had to been called 'JL: something' (maybe JL Part II?)

Matrix 2/3 didn't do it either (no 'Reloaded Part I')

BTTF II (and Godfather II) was called 'Part II' but really that was just another way of saying 'BTTF II'

Dune wasn't advertised as Part I until after it came out, it was just marketed as "Dune" (unlike 'Dune: Part II')

[–] Reaperscout (605) a year ago

I heard that although it's Part 1, the movie is still standalone and has a beginning, middle, and end. I was worried about that at first, but then I started paying attention to reviews and they say that the movie does have a beginning, middle, and end. There will be some stuff unfinished and will be wrapped up in Part 2, but overall, the movie will feel like its own thing. And that made me a little more interested in it. I did like Fast & Furious 10, but I also knew before watching it that it was Part 1, although the marketing didn't include it. And knowing it was Part 1 kind of ruined stuff because I knew things weren't going to be wrapped up by the end of the movie and I'd have to wait for 11. 10 just felt like a 2 hour 10-15 minute preview for 11. I actually did think that Fast & Furious 10 would do what this Mission Impossible movie did and still have a beginning, middle, and end, but it didn't. So I am slightly more interested in the new Mission Impossible since reviews are confirming that it does overall have a beginning, middle, and end compared to other Part 1's.

[–] WhereIsRent (1080) a year ago

Having seen the film I liked that they’re upfront about it being part one of a two part finale. Plus it’s only a year to wait for Part Two.

It doesn’t feel like half a film either, you definitely get a full Mission: Impossible film in terms of the action and thrills you’d expect, it’s just that the story isn’t done yet.

The film should be huge anyway, the last one was the highest grossing film in the franchise so hopefully this one has similar success at the box office.

[–] mikeflatley (761) a year ago

They dont wanna trick any1 like in Spiderverse movie. Honest engine