‘Fast & Furious 6′ Opens To Big $6.5M … 
‘Katie’ Shakeup: Rachel Miskowiec Replaces … 
Hammond On Cannes: French Hero Jerry Lewis On His Return To … 
Cannes: Another Jewelry Heist? $2.6M Necklace Missing After … 
Hammond On Cannes: Leo DiCaprio’s Moon Trip Tops … 
Specialty B.O. Preview: ‘Before Midnight’, … 
2012-2013 Season Network Rankings: CBS Sweeps In Final … 
Full 2012-2013 TV Season Series Rankings 
TOLDJA! Paramount Pocketing $190M From Disney For Marvel … 
‘Good Morning America’ Hits 19-Year Viewership … 
MGM Buys ‘Modern Family’ Producer Ben … 
‘Fashion Police’ Writers Chant On Picket Lines: … 
Universal Makes Seven-Figure Deal For ‘The School For … 
Steven Soderbergh Will Interrupt Retirement To Direct And … 
Cannes: EOne Announces Itself As Player In U.S. … 
Will LIN TV Stations Go Dark On Time Warner Cable? 
RATINGS RAT RACE: ‘Modern Family’, ‘Law … 
Hammond On Cannes: Paramount’s ‘Nebraska’ … 
Hot Trailer: Joseph Gordon-Levitt’s ‘Don … 
Hammond On Cannes: A New Day Comes To The Fest As HBO and … 
Cannes: Fleming Reflects And Finds Talented Trio A Breath … 
While 20th Century Fox is the studio sweating it out hoping Knight and Day overcomes lackluster tracking to turn in respectable 5-day opening numbers, Paramount brass is paying close attention. That’s because the studio just received the screenplay for the new Mission: Impossible 4 penned by Josh Applebaum and Andre Nemec. I’ve learned that Brad Grey and Rob Moore are reading the script over the next few days and figuring out the preliminary budget next week on the Brad Bird-directed fourquel. Cruise reprises his Ethan Hunt role and produces with MI3 director JJ Abrams. But what effect if any will Knight and Day’s box office have on the new pic? Paramount insiders tell me no decisions have been made yet. But Hollywood has been buzzing that the studio might kill MI4 if Knight doesn’t connect with audiences despite Cruise’s action hero character.
What are Paramount’s choices? The studio could choose not to accept the mission, but that seems next to impossible after all the development that’s already gone into this still viable franchise. Especially after Paramount repaired its fractured relationship with Tom around this film and just committed to a film with his Les Grossman character. Plus, Cruise made what I hear is a reasonable deal to get the film off the ground, and there is a risk-sharing partner in exec producer David Ellison and his Skydance banner. More importantly, MI4 is a big film for Abrams’ Bad Robot, one of the most important producers on the Paramount lot right now. Paramount could downsize the budget, but how much can you cut back from the $150 million mark that seems to be the going rate for action franchises, and still make MI4 look like past installments? I’m hearing the most likely course of action is for the studio to beef up the subplot that introduces a new and younger agent who becomes Hunt’s protege. The studio could then turn the franchise into more of a two-hander than the Mission: Impossible films traditionally have been. Mission: Impossible 3 grossed $398 million worldwide, while MI2 grossed $546.4 million. MI4 is schedule for release December 16, 2011, so those decisions will be made shortly.
Loading ...
Brad Bird is going to regret taking this “mission.” If he wanted a live-action project that much, he should have just stayed at Pixar and did a Disney project like Andrew Stanton.
Bob,
Brad tried. He’s been trying to get 1906 off the ground for WB/Pixar the last 2 years, but it stalled in pre-production. At least M:I-4 has a better chance of getting off the ground.
Please! Tom Cruise has had his day in the sun. He lost his female following with all his weird antics. EVERYONE would go see Brad Pitt in the MI4 sequel.
Make this movie the first three were great, don’t worry about some second rate film when m:i:4 is going to be awesome.
dear paramount,
you already broke my heart with ditching anchorman 2 – please make mi4 – brad bird is a god and ethan hunt is fucking awesome.
Agreed. The past MI films rocked and TC’s Ethan Hunt is a great character. Looking forward to seeing MI4 on the big screen and later a dozen+ times on the small screen.
Does it make sense to throw in good money after bad? Cruise is playing a super agent in both and if the audience stays away from Knight, it just doesn’t bode well for MI4. MI3 already did less than expected. Those relationships can be nurtured in other ways that do not put the studio at risk of losing a lot of money. There are other non-superspy roles Cruise can play.
I disagree. While loyalty to actors can be important, I really think people are more loyal to franchises. The way actors are paired with those franchises are what makes a winning or losing formula. For example, Tom Cruise has nailed three successful jaunts in the MI franchise (with three different directors, I might add). Around the same time, Tom Cruise was also in a little failure called Vanilla Sky, of which I don’t think we will be seeing a sequel anytime soon. Along the same vein, I think audiences would reject an MI sequel where Cruise was replaced by, say, Brad Pitt.
This kind of thinking drives me BONKERS. MI is a franchise. One has nothing to do with the other. How bout you cancel all Twilight Movies because the Twilight actors other movies bomb? Or cancel The Bourne Movies because Matt Damon stunk up the box office with Invictus, Green Zone and The Informant. Franchise movies draw.
I can’t tell the difference between Knight And Day previews and MI # whatever and I am far from the average movie watcher. MI1 was pretty decent. #2 was junk and then I half watched #3 on HD DVD. I’m done.
ISTR being pretty disappointed by MI1 (and I only saw it that one time in the cinema.) Ethan Hunt let his boss kill his entire team in that Russian Embassy (Emilio Estevez in the elevator – what a waste!) And that lovely french actress from Manon of the Spring (Emmanuelle Beart) was absolutely wasted in her role. But hey, box office rules. Not schubs like me.
Solid franchises draw, not any franchises. The gross was down on MI 3, despite JJ. The Twilight comparison is just silly, as you well know. MI was built on the bankability of Tom Cruise and Tom Cruise has been on a big losing streak since his meltdown.
personaly, I think Brad Bird took this in agreement for getting something he really wanted to make greenlit.
The logic is sound if people are actively avoiding Tom Cruise movies because of his past actions. I think this is what we are seeing now – do the studios want to take a risk on an actor that people are avoiding? Sound question I think.
Paramount is a little doe lost in the woods, while all of its competitors are moving forward with authority into this very changing industry landscape… It’s all very amusing for competitors like me.
MI 2 was ludicrous, MI3 was brilliant.
I’m looking forward to watch MI4, especially directed by Bird. And I wouldn’t like Cruise to babysit a trainee played by Shia LaBeouf or God knows who as his successor.
Taylor Lautner should protege
Anyone but Sam Worthington – PLEASE..
Chris Pine would be a fine addition.
M I 3 was brillent … and cruise was excellent – hoffman helped as did michelle .probelm is this mission impossible stuff always had an older guy playing hunt – p[armount should have left well enough alone – they coulda cashed in on cruise for a very long time – hes in really good shape and young looking for what 45 % ?
id take the job for for 4% revnues – ! lol
Most of the information you have is spot-on. But rest assured, MI-4 is going to happen regardless of how Knight and Day does this weekend. And it has nothing to do with Tom Cruise and everything to do with J.J. Abrams.
I support JJ Abrams so I say whatever he wants to do, Paramount should trust him. Although I am still disappointed with the Lost finale. I think it’s a good idea to make the next mission more of a “team” movie than an Ethan Hunt solo adventure. And yes, I too love Brad Bird. I THINK HE SHOULD DIRECT THE HOBBIT!
Don’t be absurd, Mike. MI3 made $400m worldwide. The franchise is a cash cow for Paramount. I don’t know why you and Nikki are so determined to see Knight & Day fail. Enemy at Fox? Cruise rubbed you up the wrong way?
I thought Paramount basically agrred to hand over all the theatrical profits from MI3 to Tom Cruise, Producers, and Directors. But since the film underperformed expectations, it left Paramount scrambling in the home market to break even. It all depends on how the deal is structured.
It’s the lack of a cohesive, believable plot, that’s what’s wrong. Has nothing to do with Cruise or liking or not liking him. All action, no content.
They could always retool and make an actual MISSION IMPOSSIBLE movie, instead of co-opting the cool theme and classic brand name for another Bourne knock-off.
It’s funny that KILLERS and KNIGHT AND DAY seem as if the writers worked on both projects, swapping pages back and forth. I can see if they were a year apart or even six months but to be out within weeks of each other with this setup and premise is weird.
Total budgets and P&A for MARMADUKE/A-TEAM/K&D is over 400 million.
So FOX has every reason to be sweating.
Wooooa Nelly! Marmaduke. A-Team. K&D. That them there is some powerfully good film/decision making. Dash darn it I wish I was a really spit polished creative college feller who could come up with such good ideers. Let’s all hop in the cement pond and selllabrate!
Let’s see. MI4 is known to be a loss-making movie, out of the box, because audiences don’t really care about Tom Cruise as a super-agent and that is all the movie really is.
BUT … they’ll make a sure-fire big time money loser because they don’t want to tick off Cruise (who no longer draws people and doesn’t make money anymore) or JJ Abrams, who is both hit and miss. Because the execs know they’ll get fired eventually and want a rolodex as their golden parachute.
This is why Hollywood’s in trouble. MI4 will sure-fire lose money. Why? Because Tom Cruise got old, lacks charisma, has played the same role over and over again, is not a good leading man (terrific villain or character actor), and rehashed sequels run out of steam quickly when they are about a very basic situation (superhero secret agent).
All the time and effort and money wasted would be better spent doing something that could make money. Even if Cruise has a reasonable deal, basic production costs will make this an expensive flop.
Bourne? After Damon ticked away audience good-will by GREENZONE, there’s no reason to do Bourne 4.5 or whatever. Since GREENZONE was Bourne in Iraq.
The only original idea I saw was the cross-over idea of “Die Hard 24/7″ with Bruce Willis and Keifer Sutherland playing their iconic characters going after terrorists. THAT even I would have paid to see in a theater! It would be like being 12 years old again and seeing Batman and Superman team up for the very first time.
But if you’ve already seen the first few MI movies, why see the latest one?
Here’s your answer, Par.
Anyone who frequents this board knows: look to Whiskey for the exact opposite of what you should be doing.
Whiskey needs to stick to what he knows best. (No clue what that is, but further proving he’s an uninformed twit by his senseless postings certainly leads me to believe showbiz ain’t it.)
Nah. He is frequently right. He just says it in the most offensive way possible. His other weakness is getting obsessed with hating on one film, which screws up his analysis, but that doesn’t seem to be the case here.
No. Wrong answers.
First off: Tom Cruise is actually very, very good in Knight and Day. He’s the best thing about the movie by far. His charisma is in full flower in this picture, and his abilities make an otherwise relatively standard action pic a pretty fun sit. So saying he has no charisma is about as far off the mark as you can get. Have you even seen K&D yet?
Next: The success/failure of K&D is going to have about ZERO to do with the MI4 project and its success/failure. Two of the three MI movies have been extremely entertaining, and the franchise is very healthy, based on the third film’s international business.
More importantly, the two films have very little to nothing to do with each other. What, because Cruise is in both of them? Give me a break. Go look at the films of Eddie Murphy and how they perform. It has very little to do with the star’s presence solely determining a movie’s box office success.
Next: If you honestly believe that Matt Damon messed up the Bourne franchise by making Green Zone you really are clueless. First off, Green Zone was a very strong piece of work. Yes, it wasn’t a smash hit. It happens. But to use that as the leap of faith that the Bourne Franchise is done because of that doesn’t make any sense.
Try harder.
MI4 is an international money making no-brainer for $150 million.
Think worldwide Par People.
Produce Local, Gross Global.
I think that’s why they become FRANCHISES…
First of all, as Cruise Power says, what is with DHD’s enormous hard-on against Knight and Day? It looks like a decent action movie, which is more than you can say for most movies released this year (and most of those yet to be).
Second of all, Paramount is in no position to make any creative demands on J.J. Abrams, unless they want to lose him to another studio. M:I 4 will happen the way he wants it to, and if it doesn’t it’ll be his and Cruise’s decision, not theirs.
I don’t understand all this negativity around Knight and day — it just got three stars from USA TODAY and people who have actually seen it say it is superb. I really hope tracking is wrong on this, it is one of the movies i’ve been dying to see.
A lot of people who have seen it find it tried and implausible. Tom Cruise had a spark a long time ago, before people knew anything more than the grin and RayBans, now it’s gone. G.O.N.E. MTV ratings dropped big time when he was on.
MI4 is a Cruise movie I would see. And maybe even buy on Blu-Ray.
I think you get the point.
Are you guys morons over there? Or is it just a light news day? This is the dumbest non-story on Earth. MI4 goes ahead regardless of K&D’s numbers. Anyone who thinks otherwise just doesn’t understand how this industry works. Nikki, please stop letting your staff write stupid articles that waste everyone’s time. Every actor bombs from time to time. Franchises grow. They can bomb, too, a non-franchise bomb makes zero difference to the value of a franchise. {shakes head}
A logical subplot would be the Irish, wild-card Jonathan Rhys Meyers character from MI3. His role was small but notable. He’s a charming and talented actor.
I think it would be useful to boost Tom Cruise with more interesting characters around him. But the movie will make money and is a far surer bet than most films these days.
Time to take a cue from M.Night and diversify!
Have Tom Cruises new sidekick be… Aziz Ansari!
Aziz killed it durig the MTV awards (the very same Tom rehashed his Les Grossman character). Ansari is notorious for being an unashamed networker. Two and two together = Aziz and Tom met at the awards = Tom was smitten by Aziz (who isn’t?) and bada bing, bada boom:
Aziz Ansari to co-star in new MI picture!
“people who have actually seen it say it is superb”
Knight and Day is superb? Call it what you want, but it is not that.
Question is whether it is an enticing Twinkie or a 3-year-stale one (and yes, I am one of those “people who have actually seen it”…are you?).
1. It all depends on the script – people!!! Let’s just assume it is better than MIP 3
2. Then looking at Brad Birds style and rhythm – the man is damn good, he WILL deliver!
3. To Paramount: Just cut some of the ridiculous overhead costs, by some 30 Mill.
4. To the folks who bash Tom the Cruiser. Name me any actor with that kind of a track record.
7 out of 9 (!) movies in the past 10 years which did over 100 Mill. domestically (not counting
the cameos) – which studio doesn’t want THAT track record????
5. What about Sumner Redstone……? Can he and Tom have a drink and call it quits????
LOVED MI3 and was completely sad that most people ignored it due to Tom jumping on a couch on Oprah.
It was the best movie of the series by a long shot and actually mixed character with great action set pieces. Not to mention a convincing villain you could root against in Phillip Seymour Hoffman.
Knight and Day is tracking poorly because Fox has not gone out of it’s way to show audiences that there is something different and unique in it.
Everything I’ve seen has a been there done that feel. I barely know what the movie is about and it just feels “meh” to me and I love Tom Cruise.
That said, it was a crime that audiences didn’t get behind MI3 when it was released. My wife and I both loved it and we’re smack in the target demo.
What will be “different and unique” about MI4?
By that same logic you use on Knight and Day, won’t MI4 also flop?
I’m sorry, but MI:3 was the best in the series; woulda made just as much if Tom didn’t flip off a bunch of potential viewers with all the couch jumping, dissing depressives, et al. Brad Bird was a great choice and I for one hope it goes through. I just hope Simon Pegg reprises his role.
It’s extremely rare that a movie’s release date gets past me, but I completely missed the fact that this was opening today. (For some reason, I thought it didn’t come out until next Wednesday.)
Either I was just completely set on seeing it the week before July 4th weekend, or Fox didn’t do a very good job of promoting it. It’s probably a bit of both, since Fox seems to have a poor track record lately when it comes to promotion. (I’ve seen just about everyone from the Grown Ups cast making the usual late night rounds over the past few weeks, but no one from Knight and Day.)
Did they make you OT IV for saying that??
They should just have Angelina Jolie take over this role too. Evelyn Hunt.
Now that I would pay to see.
If ever a franchise needed a total reboot, MI does. It was a mistake to make Cruise’s character central to this series–Hunt is not that interesting, and the appeal of this material has always been the MI team’s ingenious teamwork. (Come on–the best moments from the Cruise MI movies were the caper ones.)
Yes, maybe it is time to break out the “R” word. Reboot. The franchise still has value, but it doesn’t have to continue on from part 3. They can reboot, focusing on young Ethan Hunt’s recruitment into the MI team and first mission.