Did Mytharc Kill M:I:3
May. 12th, 2006 04:17 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shipperxLOS ANGELES (Hollywood Reporter) - Was it the couch-jumping? The marketing? Some flaw in the movie itself? Ever since Paramount Pictures' "Mission: Impossible III" opened Friday to what most observers judged a disappointing three-day domestic gross of $47.7 million, the hunt has been on to explain the shortfall.
One theory holds that as the third film in a series, "M:I-3" is simply experiencing franchise burnout. But the reality, as far as that notion goes, might be more complicated. Thanks to television and the Internet, the way core fans engage with their favorite entertainment is changing in a way that might have simply left "M:I-3" behind the curve.
Blame it on "The X-Files." That ground-breaking TV series -- with its ever-more convoluted story lines about alien invaders and government cover-ups -- popularized the notion of creating a "mythology," a growing catalog of hints, clues and underlying relationships, that enriches a tale. It also feeds the enthusiasm of its core fan base, flattered to be asked to tease out the mysteries, often on Internet chat boards, even if the mysteries are rarely ever satisfactorily explained.
While the phenomenon has thrived on TV -- ABC's "Lost" is the reigning example -- it also has shown up in the movies. George Lucas' "Star Wars" is, in many ways, the grand-daddy of the ever-expanding mythology. In between films, Lucas kept his franchise alive by developing it in books, games and cartoon series, so that when the series' second trilogy was released, fans were panting with anticipation. This month, 20th Century Fox's "X-Men: The Last Stand" will attempt to build on the success of the first two "X-Men" movies by adding new characters and further exploring the relationships between the returning mutants.
From the start though, the "Mission" series rejected mythology. The first movie killed off the character of Jim Phelps, the one link to the 1960s TV series. On the big screen, the franchise chose to bet primarily on its star Tom Cruise, surrounded by spectacular explosions.
Part of the appeal of the old TV series was that it established a team of covert operatives -- Martin Landau's master of disguise, Barbara Bain's femme fatale, Greg Morris' tech expert and Peter Lupus' strong man. Then each week, it combined their expertise in different combinations in jigsaw puzzle plots. On the big screen, though, each of the films essentially has erased all memory of its predecessor -- only Ving Rhames has teamed with Cruise in all three movies. In effect, each of the movies has been a stand-alone entertainment.
Certainly, stand-alone movies without an evolving mythology can still turn into blockbusters. The James Bond series is the prime example, even if in recent years, it has coasted on moviegoers' nostalgia as Bond re-enacts familiar rituals. But stand-alones, lacking a dedicated fan base eager for new details, can face bigger hurdles.
"M:I-3" director J.J. Abrams compensates for the series' lack of its own mythology by borrowing elements of his TV series, most especially "Alias," where emotional bonds are constantly tested in the midst of flashy spy capers and table-turning third-act betrayals are to be expected. There are in-references to delight his fans: A cameo appearance by actor Greg Grunberg, who has appeared in all of Abrams' series; a star turn by Keri Russell, star of Abrams' "Felicity;" passing references to Oceanic Airlines and the Hanso Foundation, which figure in "Lost."
Some critics have knocked Abrams' dependence on the "Alias" tropes. But -- though there is no way to prove it -- because "M:I-3" lacks a mythology of its own, without its shout-outs to "Alias" fans, "M:I-3" might have encountered even more resistance than it did.
Reuters/Hollywood Reporter
One theory holds that as the third film in a series, "M:I-3" is simply experiencing franchise burnout. But the reality, as far as that notion goes, might be more complicated. Thanks to television and the Internet, the way core fans engage with their favorite entertainment is changing in a way that might have simply left "M:I-3" behind the curve.
Blame it on "The X-Files." That ground-breaking TV series -- with its ever-more convoluted story lines about alien invaders and government cover-ups -- popularized the notion of creating a "mythology," a growing catalog of hints, clues and underlying relationships, that enriches a tale. It also feeds the enthusiasm of its core fan base, flattered to be asked to tease out the mysteries, often on Internet chat boards, even if the mysteries are rarely ever satisfactorily explained.
While the phenomenon has thrived on TV -- ABC's "Lost" is the reigning example -- it also has shown up in the movies. George Lucas' "Star Wars" is, in many ways, the grand-daddy of the ever-expanding mythology. In between films, Lucas kept his franchise alive by developing it in books, games and cartoon series, so that when the series' second trilogy was released, fans were panting with anticipation. This month, 20th Century Fox's "X-Men: The Last Stand" will attempt to build on the success of the first two "X-Men" movies by adding new characters and further exploring the relationships between the returning mutants.
From the start though, the "Mission" series rejected mythology. The first movie killed off the character of Jim Phelps, the one link to the 1960s TV series. On the big screen, the franchise chose to bet primarily on its star Tom Cruise, surrounded by spectacular explosions.
Part of the appeal of the old TV series was that it established a team of covert operatives -- Martin Landau's master of disguise, Barbara Bain's femme fatale, Greg Morris' tech expert and Peter Lupus' strong man. Then each week, it combined their expertise in different combinations in jigsaw puzzle plots. On the big screen, though, each of the films essentially has erased all memory of its predecessor -- only Ving Rhames has teamed with Cruise in all three movies. In effect, each of the movies has been a stand-alone entertainment.
Certainly, stand-alone movies without an evolving mythology can still turn into blockbusters. The James Bond series is the prime example, even if in recent years, it has coasted on moviegoers' nostalgia as Bond re-enacts familiar rituals. But stand-alones, lacking a dedicated fan base eager for new details, can face bigger hurdles.
"M:I-3" director J.J. Abrams compensates for the series' lack of its own mythology by borrowing elements of his TV series, most especially "Alias," where emotional bonds are constantly tested in the midst of flashy spy capers and table-turning third-act betrayals are to be expected. There are in-references to delight his fans: A cameo appearance by actor Greg Grunberg, who has appeared in all of Abrams' series; a star turn by Keri Russell, star of Abrams' "Felicity;" passing references to Oceanic Airlines and the Hanso Foundation, which figure in "Lost."
Some critics have knocked Abrams' dependence on the "Alias" tropes. But -- though there is no way to prove it -- because "M:I-3" lacks a mythology of its own, without its shout-outs to "Alias" fans, "M:I-3" might have encountered even more resistance than it did.
Reuters/Hollywood Reporter
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-05-12 11:37 pm (UTC)Then again, people actually did pay to see the XF movie when the series was still running. So maybe we're all just weirded out by Tom Cruise. I think that's probably it :)
no subject
Date: 2006-05-15 04:45 am (UTC)