MovieChat Forums > Mission: Impossible (1966) Discussion > TV vs. Movie

TV vs. Movie

posted 8 years ago by lima-2
23 replies | jump to latest

No, I'm not starting a new debate about which is better. We all know the TV series is the real Mission: Impossible.

Paramount has attached the Mission: Impossible title to the Tom Cruise movie franchise to bilk all the money it can, from a new and unsuspecting viewing public, who might be not be aware of the original series.

Do the math. The TV series was 172 episodes at roughly 50 minutes each. That equals roughly 143 ~ 144 hours worth of shows.

If Tom Cruise wanted to match the series, hour for hour, he'd have to make about 50 more movies at 2 to 2.5 hours each. Just a thought... yours?

[–] Mel_bor_ing 8 years ago

50 more Tom Cruise movies?! That is cringe-worthy on so many levels. He's no Peter Graves nor is Ethan Hunt anything remotely comparable to Jim Phelps.

That conjures up an incredible image of a tottering, hundred-year old Cruise being made to look good by special effects. Yes, I used the word "conjure."

[–] Cinna_Mini_Me 8 years ago

Mr. Graves had the good sense to know when to walk away from the role. The same cannot be said for the pretender.

Good to see you back here, Mel. How's my favorite sepo?
Conjure, conjure, conjure. That cracks me up! lol

[–] Mel_bor_ing 8 years ago

Hey cinna!
Me sepo? YOU sepo. lol
It's good to see the old gang so active again.
Irksome, irksome, irksome. That was a funny PM string.

[–] klondike6 8 years ago

It's a win/win for Paramount. After agonizing through Mission: Impossible I in a movie theater, I thought it was the studio's way of breaking with the past. The old M:I was out the window with Jim Phelps cast as the bad guy.

I admit I did watch the next two films on free TV. Still didn't change my opinion. I'm not sure what to think of the next few films, since I never watched them. But considering how financially successful the most recent films have been, it sparked new interest in the old series. DVD sales of the original series are are still pretty steady.

I remember when season one was released years ago, it was the best opening day of DVD sales up to that point. Paramount is making money at both ends of this.

[–] jayhn1111 8 years ago

I have to admit, I never thought they'd release all 7 seasons. releases of old series have been terrible over the years with 1 season release at a time that can drag on for a decade if they release it in full at all. So if this helped it that's great.

[–] adamwarlock 8 years ago

I'd put the series over the films but a long shot. The films are Tom Cruise vehicles rather than team efforts. The films are all the team goes rogue to find & expose some deeper conspiracy rather than a gov't mandated mission to get rid of America's enemies, after 5 films that plot gets tired.

Now, I do think the film series has improved over time. MI3 to 5 are getting closer to what the series was but still fall short. The series has more variety & has those wonderful endings where the baddies are just wondering what just happened to them rather than Cruise fighting it out with a baddie who knows exactly who he is (that's more a Bond thing).

if man is 5
then the devil is 6
if the devil is 6
then God is 7
and if God is 7...

[–] mariakelly-04164 8 years ago

Howdy,my fellow honorary IMF agents! Speaking of MI seasons on DVD, I have a question. I was able to get seasons 1&6 at Target for $9.99, but I paid between $16.00 to 20.00 either from Amazon or my local independent record/DVD store.

Does anyone know where I can get season 7 besides Amazon? Right now I've been checking Target, but the problem with that is you never know when or if will turn up.

[–] fanaticita 8 years ago

I'll never watch the movies because I have a problem with Tom Cruise.

[–] rjeisen 8 years ago

I will never forgive them, after a promising start to the first movie, for making Jim Phelps the bad guy and killing him off.

Cruise was basically Rollin Hand gone rogue.

The movies leave a very bad taste in my mouth. 😡

[–] BlissNEsb (108) 6 years ago

At least Jim was played by Jon Voight in the movie. This helps disavow any connection between the movie and the series. We assume Voight's character had a similar history, but he's not the same Jim.

[–] vranger (444) 6 years ago

That's an interesting idea we can hang onto. :-)

Since the team was always under cover, and the personal lives were never elaborated, let's assume that "Jim Phelps" was a Company identity, handed out at convenience to a current IMF team leader. Therefore the "Jim Phelps" of the movie was actually not the "Jim Phelps" of the TV show. Such a device would certainly confuse rival spy organizations trying to unmask US assets.

[–] BlissNEsb (108) 6 years ago

Hmm, I like that idea! Now someone should run it by Cruise and Paramount...

[–] vranger (444) 6 years ago

Well, that WAS all 20 years ago. LOL They probably don't even remember why TV series fans were upset about that movie. :-)

[–] PaladinNJ (21629) 4 years ago

Wasn't it Cruise's idea to make Phelps the villain so that he would be guaranteed the lead in the movie franchise?

[–] BlissNEsb (108) 4 years ago

Undoubtedly that was the plan from the start. Stealing from the series, Cruise had a pre-made product to start a successful blockbuster franchise, with an already iconic score and nifty tropes. Bruce Geller probably would've sued the socks off him and Paramount had he still been alive.

[–] Costumer (1829) 4 years ago

Interesting thought if the first season of the show didn't feature Dan Briggs instead of Jim Phelps.

[–] vranger (444) 4 years ago

So then, here's my continuation of the retro'd story. ;-)

Briggs mysteriously disappears. The IMF communally slaps themselves in the face and realizes that high risk agents are probably better off to not operate quite so much in the clear.

So the Jim Phelps identity is created, along with others. The operative assigned the Phelps identity is so successful it lasts until he retires, then it is reassigned. Certainly there are other operatives with similar covers, most not lasting quite so long.

The 'next Phelps' once comes so close to being disavowed that he becomes secretly bitter, and thus the rest of the excuse we hear from him for treason.

[–] Costumer (1829) 4 years ago

Its an interesting idea, but I really don't like it. From what we see in the actual series Cinnamon, Barnie, Rollins and the others seem like they have a personal, friendly relationship with both Dan and Jim. They all use the names easily and casually, so I don't get the impression that either, especially Jim, is an alias.

[–] vranger (444) 4 years ago

I'm just throwing a lifeline to everyone who objects to the way the Phelps character was treated in the movie. ;-)

[–] Costumer (1829) 4 years ago

I understand. I just don't like it. Others are free to use it for their own head-cannon if they like.

[–] PaladinNJ (21629) 6 years ago

Peter Graves was offered the job. He declined. My understanding is that his original team was intended to be the team that was wiped out in the beginning of the movie.

[–] BlissNEsb (108) 6 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Cognoscente (2720) 4 years ago

One way to look at it is this - the film series allowed the TV series to be remastered for a new generation.