Mission: Impossible 4 Officially in Development for 2011!
by Alex Billington
June 18, 2009
Damn is 2011 starting to look like a great year! Just last week we ran a somewhat sketchy rumor that J.J. Abrams would return to produce another Mission: Impossible 4 with Tom Cruise. It came from a very small blurb in TV Guide - but it looks as if they just beat the Hollywood Reporter to the punch. Now THR is officially reporting that Paramount has put M:i:IV on the fast-track for a 2011 release. It's not a surefire prospect - both Cruise and Abrams have so many other projects in the works, that neither will confirm what they're doing next or if they'll even have the time to get to Mission: Impossible by 2010. We can only hope!
What the THR article does say is that there are two different scenarios that Abrams and Cruise will choose from: 1) they "could reconceive it in a way that is closer to the ensemble approach of the TV series", or 2) they "could reconfigure Cruise as Ethan Hunt in a less front-and-center role, as some kind of mentor to the new M:I crew." This is all very early speculation and no writers have been hired. To be honest, I don't like either of those, but I think they're right in that this franchise might be on its last legs. It needs something new if they're going to keep it running. But is rebooting it, to use that trendy term, the right thing to do?
Reader Feedback - 18 Comments
The "something new" should be that...Ethan Hunt dies at the end of the movie. i'm serious. i think this is the only way for the movie to go over the top and be better than its predecessors. him being a mentor won't cut it no matter who his pupil is. Ethan needs to be center stage and he needs to die to bring the series to a close.
Matt Suhu on Jun 18, 2009
Last 2 sucked - why will this one be any different?
dom on Jun 18, 2009
last one was best, second one sucked, first one fun...look forward to this one
ocp on Jun 18, 2009
FIRST 2 sucked, the 3rd one was pretty good... but it wasn't exactly Bond or Bourne, either.
Frame on Jun 18, 2009
hope they show some sweet government technology like always.
Cat on Jun 18, 2009
@2 signed I'm appreciating it, that they would like to return to the ensemble style they created with the series.
Narf on Jun 18, 2009
The Third SUCKED Can someone who liked it please tell me why it was good?
WB Exec on Jun 18, 2009
@7 It had Simon Pegg in it. Instant win!
Marcus on Jun 18, 2009
tom cruise is a lot like brett favre, he needs to retire before he loses the rest of his fans to shame
harrison on Jun 18, 2009
does anyone care anymore?
I have anxiety on Jun 18, 2009
I actually think Cruise was great in MI: 3. Why are they thinking of rebooting this franchise? Just make a straight up sequel. He's not approaching the "too old for this" age - if Harrison Ford can do Indy 4 (and, ugh, potentially 5), then Tom can do MI: 4.
Ben on Jun 18, 2009
All of the previous movies were great in their own way. They all brought something different and none of them sucked. The first was a mystery, the second was a straight-up action movie, and the third was a dramatized action movie. Though they are inconsistent with their styles, they were each good in their own way. I think the fourth should be a sequel and definitely not a reboot. It should mostly be like the third one because the third was real, human, emotional and not just some excuse to blow things up.
Matt on Jun 18, 2009
@ 12 Matt I totally agree with you. The third was quite refreshing with it's "dramatized action" and intensity. Once the plot started rolling, it didn't stop until the end...the movie rarely let up, but just kept moving forward. A great action/adventure film.
Matt Suhu on Jun 18, 2009
Rebooting or continuing is lame at the moment, i respect JJ and Tom but enough already guys they might screw up something was once beautiful.I say don' t please.
Fisherr on Jun 18, 2009
I loved the 3rd one man it was so good I thought it was a series that kept getting better as it went a long anyway I am looking forward to the 4th can't wait to see what they come up with.
ichoppryde on Jun 18, 2009
I prefer option 1, this actually made the first movie enjoyable & fun to watch. Tom Cruise could still be the star, but not the headliner. Turn him into some sort of M, or the first Jim Phelps. IMHO the Vatican sequence of MI:3 was fun since it brought the team element back, similar to the capers of the MI:1 in the CIA. The drama part was good in MI:3, but as mentioned by #8, it was balanced by the characters of Simon Pegg & Philip Seymour Hoffman. So I do hope option 1 is the road MI:4 would go to without Tom Cruise hugging all the screen time. MI was overshadowed by both the Bond & Bourne movies in term of a good center character, so they should stick to a team based movie.
somwerbtwnblungrn on Jun 18, 2009
The last is the best .
led panel on Jun 19, 2009
go with option 1 more close to TV seriers the films have driffted of the TV presept of imf doing imposible jobs without noticeing there were ever there.
Allen Reeve on Jun 19, 2009
Sorry, new comments are no longer allowed.