Reaperscout's Replies


I think people can handle like 10 minutes of her. I saw Mission Impossible 7 on opening day, and had to put up with Tom Cruise for 2 and a half hours. REALLY enjoyed the movie, but I'm not a fan of Tom Cruise in real life. I was able to separate the art from the artist though. So if I can handle 2 and a half hours of Tom Cruise, everyone else can stop whining and suck it up about having to sit through 10 minutes of Amber Heard. I survived 2 and half hours of Tom Cruise, so 10 minutes or so of Amber Heard won't kill you, and is something you can easily survive. I'll be able to survive that 10 minutes or so. I already knew she was a terrible person when I saw the first Aquaman. Still highly enjoyed the movie and it was my favorite movie of 2018. I can still easily watch the movie too. Plus I see Mera, not Amber Heard whenever I watch/re-watch the first Aquaman. And that's why I enjoyed Mission Impossible 7. None of that crap except being a sequel (7th sequel). The movie was 100% entertainment. It focused more on being entertaining than being filled with agendas. Well, there IS strong female characters in it, but the movie allows you to like them and stuff. And they aren't calling Tom Cruise's character (Ethan Hunt) a POS the whole movie or they aren't saying some variation of "men suck and women are the best" throughout the whole movie. The women work with Tom Cruise's character. Everyone treats each other like equals in the movie. Mission Impossible 7 is a sequel that deserves money. And it's very rare for me to say something like that nowadays. The only movies (and sequels) I REALLY liked in 2023 (so far) is Extraction 2 and Mission Impossible 7. Fast & Furious 10 was okay, but it won't go in my best movies of the year list unless I can't come up with 10 movies and need something to complete the list. For now, Fast & Furious 10 is an honorable mention. All the other sequels though released in 2023, I either did not like or were at best "meh." The only 2023 superhero movie I liked in any capacity was Ant-Man 3. But I'd put that in the category as Fast & Furious 10. The movie flies by. The movie is actually only about 2 hours 34-ish minutes without end credits. But it feels like it's 20-30 minutes less. I've seen 80 and 90 minute movies that felt longer than Mission Impossible. Oh and it's kind of funny how long it takes to get to the opening credits for the movie. When the opening credits finally pop up, you are already quite a ways into the movie. And no the opening credits don't pop up at the end of the movie. Also, there is nothing during or after the end credits, so once the end credits start, you can leave. The runtime wasn't an issue. The movie flies by. Plus it's only like 2 hours 34 minutes (ish) without end credits. And there is nothing during or after the credits. So when the end credits start, you can leave. I wasn't bored with those scenes. They remained interesting for me, especially the one in the club. Mission Impossible 7 wasn't 3 hours though. Remove end credits, the movie is about 2 hours 34 minutes. And there is nothing during or after the credits, so once the end credits start, you can leave or turn it off (in case someone is reading this when the movie releases on Blu-Ray and streaming). Also, the movie did not feel 2 hours 34 minutes. Felt 20-30 minutes shorter. The opening credits let you know you are about 30 minutes in since they don't happen until around 25-30 minutes into the movie. I knew someone would use the flashback response, but I think there is something more going on. Something seemed off when she showed up at the bridge. Plus it's Mission Impossible. Characters fake their death all the time. Go to Part 2's IMDB page. You'll see a certain name in the cast. And I have a separate comment. Check out that to read my further thoughts on stuff. I don't really want to copy/paste when someone can scroll down a little and see my separate comment. If you go the IMDB page for Part 2, look who is in the cast. That COULD be a cover-up to hide spoilers for Part 1, but I remember what happened when I got home from seeing Batman V Superman on opening day. When I got home from seeing Batman V Superman, I went to the IMDB page for Justice League. Superman died/dies at the end of BvS, but the cast for Justice League had Henry Cavill in it. So IMDB spoiled Justice League, although they could've been hiding spoilers for BvS. And what actually does happen in Justice League? Superman comes back from the dead. So, maybe the same thing is happening for Mission Impossible. I wouldn't count on it. I think the movie is (sadly) going to do terrible. Everyone is more excited for Barbie and Oppenheimer than Mission Impossible. Even the Facebook page to the movie theater in my town is doing more marketing for Barbie and Oppenheimer than marketing Mission Impossible. And this is new for the Facebook page/odd behavior. They didn't pull this crap for Evil Dead Rise, John Wick 4, Fast & Furious 10, Transformers, The Flash, The Little Mermaid, Indiana Jones, and so on. They gave all those movies the proper marketing/attention when it was their opening weekend or the final week build to their release dates AND they continued to market them for a week or two afterwards. Mission Impossible got like one or two posts, but the Facebook page has moved on to Barbie and Oppenheimer. Even the movie theater doesn't give a crap about what's currently playing (Mission Impossible). And all over the internet and social media I'm seeing "I'm saving my money for Barbie and Oppenheimer. F'k Mission Impossible (and Tom Cruise)." Mission Impossible is more than likely not going to do well, although when it comes to sequels, remakes, reboots, prequels, superhero movies, etc. (stuff people are tired of), Mission Impossible 7 is one that actually deserves the money. The way I felt after leaving Mission Impossible 7, I haven't felt since maybe The Batman. The last couple years I've been pretty hard to please. So Mission Impossible 7 did something right. Well, I did like Fast X, but I'm only going to add it to my top ten movies of 2023 if I don't have enough movies to make a complete top ten list. For now, it's an honorable mention. But yeah. I don't see Mission Impossible 7 doing well. It's all about Barbie and Oppenheimer. Well, it's a hit quality wise. When it comes to box office, it's a flop. The movie is out, but what are people talking more about? Barbie and Oppenheimer. Even the movie theater in my town is marketing the two movies more on their Facebook page than Mission Impossible during it's opening weekend. And the movie theater likes to stay on the current week, not upcoming. They weren't marketing Mission Impossible during the final week build to The Flash or Transformers' release dates. Every other post was The Flash and Transformers when it was the final week build to those movies' release date. Fast & Furious 10 had the spotlight too during the final week build. They weren't marketing The Flash or Transformers. But when it comes to Mission Impossible, there is more Barbie and Oppenheimer marketing. But I don't see anyone talking about Mission Impossible. Everything is heavily focused on Barbie and Oppenheimer. Mission Impossible will be a hit quality wise. Box office wise, it's sadly not going to do well. Oh and a lot of people are skipping Mission Impossible. All over the internet and social media I'm seeing "Why would I want to see Mission Impossible? I'd rather wait a week and watch Barbie/Oppenheimer instead/give my money to Barbie/Oppenheimer instead." Well, the first time I saw the movie, it was a CAM (I did go and see the movie in the movie theater afterwards though), so when it finally got to the opening titles, it was around the 26-27 mark. It could've been more closer to 28-29 minutes though since all the opening logos weren't there and the first 15 seconds was missing (although it was just more underwater footage and the camera traveling to the sub and giving more info on where the sub was (like what country it was near or what ocean/sea it was in)). The facial expression didn't bother me. Plus I feel I make stupid facial expressions sometimes, so I can't criticize someone else for how they look when making facial expressions. Doesn't hurt to have two tech/computer experts. Fast & Furious does the same with Tej and Ramsey. Both do pretty much the same job on the team, but it works and I like both characters. Well, Tej came first, but Ramsey is nice to look at and stuff. Plus that accent. I still think she is an interesting character though. And it gives Tej someone to interact with and brainstorm with. I think Benji/Simon Pegg is more there for the comedy though. Most of the Mission Impossible movies' humor comes from him. Well, starting with the third movie. Also, Benji is the one that usually goes out and does stuff with Ethan. Luther is the one that does stuff at the base and pretty much holds the fort. He leaves once in a while, but Benji is the one that "gets out of the office" more. But that could still connect with the humor in the movies since when Benji is out with Ethan, that's when a good chunk of the humor happens. I think the reason the movie flies by is because it's not really 3 hours. Remove the end credits and it's about 2 hours 34 minutes. But even then it still feels shorter because of pacing. Throw in that it takes about 25-30 minutes to get to the opening credits. So when you get to the opening credits, 25-30 minutes have already gone by. Well, it's definitely going in my top movies of 2023 for sure. I don't like Tom Cruise in real life, but I like that he focused more on making an entertaining movie than making sure all these things had a check mark next to it aka fill the movie with all these agendas. All I want is to be entertained. Don't fill a movie with agendas. Let the agendas be implied or put in naturally/organically, which they were. Were there non-white characters? Yes. Strong female characters, including new ones? Yes. Were they in your face/felt forced? No. Were the new female characters likable though? Yeah. I know people are tired of sequels, prequels, superhero movies, reboots, remakes, etc., but Mission Impossible 7 is a sequel that deserves money. This is one of those times a sequel deserves to make money. 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. If you followed all the news of Fast & Furious 10, you'd know it was Part 1. They didn't call it that, but those that follow news closely, especially news related to Fast & Furious, then you'd know it was Part 1. Actually, if you've been following news related to the movies since 8, you'd know that they confirmed 8, 9, 10, and 11 all at the same time. I've known about 11 since a week or two before 7 released in theaters. Everyone wonders why WB/DC sticks to Batman, well, the answer is right there. No one will see the other heroes. Batman gets butts in seats. They got lucky with Wonder Woman and Aquaman, but no one really watched WW84 (aka Wonder Woman 2) and majority of those that did said it sucked, and no one is looking forward to Aquaman 2. The Suicide Squad though flopped, Birds Of Prey pretty much flopped (but that could be blamed on it releasing a couple weeks before movie theaters shut down because of some stupid virus), Black Adam flopped, and The Flash flopped. The only recent DC movie to do well was The Batman. Oh and yes Batman is in The Flash, but his name is not in the title of the movie or some variation of his name (The Dark Knight, for example). If "Batman" was in the title for The Flash movie, probably more people would've saw it. But Batman is WB/DC's moneymaker and the one to get butts in seats. So no wonder WB keeps heavily focusing on Batman and no one else. With everything non-Batman flopping, it just shows that Batman is the only good thing about DC. Superman I'd say is in second place. Also, after James Gunn altered The Flash's ending to include Clooney, I've lost all interest in his DC reboot. I'll take it a movie at a time. Right now the only DC movie I give a crap about is The Batman 2. I want to be excited for Aquaman 2, but there is no point when DC is getting a reboot. So probably no more Momoa Aquaman after Aquaman 2. They'll probably reboot and re-cast the character for Gunn's universe. I don't get the issue with her. The first movie showed she had skills and had a couple cool moments in the final battle on the bridge. Extraction 2 got to build on that and show more of what she was capable of. I figured she could fight too, but there wasn't a moment in the first movie to show it off. And I find her believable. Plus size and weight don't mean anything. Also, you seem like one of the few that calls BS on her. Lots of people loved the character. Well, there is this thing called The Fappening, so pretty much everyone has seen her nude. There is nothing "for his eyes only" when it comes to her husband. Everyone has already seen everything that only he was meant to see. And probably The Fappening is why Jennifer Lawrence started doing nudity. Everyone saw her or has seen her, so she has nothing to hide or keep from people.