Advertisement
Though the third Fast and the Furious installment, Tokyo Drift, wasn’t a huge box office disappointment with its $63 million domestic gross, it was significantly less successful than its predecessors, The Fast and the Furious ($145 million) and 2 Fast 2 Furious ($127 million). A fourth film would normally see an even bigger drop in box office receipts, but next week’s Fast & Furious has a good chance of actually being the highest-grossing film in the series yet, due to the return of original cast members Paul Walker, Michelle Rodriguez, Jordanna Brewster and, most importantly, Vin Diesel.
With the expectation that Fast & Furious will be enough of a hit to save the franchise, we take a look at ten other films that similarly kept their respective series going, either because of an increase in profits or a surprising increase in quality, following one or many disappointing installments.
Batman Begins (2005)
It’s appropriate to begin with the film that has “begins” in the title. Also, this is one of the more obvious examples (it’s also the first in alphabetical order), but it almost seems to count the least, because while it did lift the Batman franchise back up, both in terms of box office and quality, after Batman & Robin, Christopher Nolan’s reboot of the character isn’t much in line with the previous installments. For all the difference between Burton’s and Schumacher’s pairs of films, they are of the same continuity, for the most part. Still, compared to attempted reboots like Superman Returns and Punisher: War Zone, Batman Begins is a real savior; just imagine if it had failed, and we’d never have gotten The Dark Knight.
Goldeneye (1995) and Casino Royale (2006)
While Casino Royale is another obvious choice and could very well have been the only James Bond film on this list, it’s worth including Goldeneye, too, because after the disappointing 007 films starring Timothy Dalton, this installment boosted the franchise’s profits way back up and thankfully knocked Moonraker off the highest-grossing-Bond movie throne. Beginning a more action-packed run with new lead Pierce Brosnan, Goldeneye was a terrific addition to the series even if it led to a subsequent drop in quality where spectacle took precedence over story. Fortunately, a decade later Casino Royale came in and saved the franchise once again.
Halloween H20 (1998)
Thanks in part to the return of Jamie Lee Curtis, who was joined by a crop of young, likable stars including Michelle Williams, Josh Hartnett and Joseph Gordon-Levitt (not to mention LL Cool J), Halloween H20 was a huge success and a huge breath of fresh air after a number of unwatchable (even with Paul Rudd) Halloween sequels. This film did the Superman Returns thing, too (and first), where it jumped back and ignored all the terrible installments, treating them as having never happened. It wasn’t great, but it was better, and for the first time, a Halloween sequel grossed more money than the original (since that time, the remake has replaced H20 at the top).
Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (2004)
Following two adequate but not great Harry Potter adaptations from Chris Columbus, the series got a huge makeover and new life when Alfonso Cuaron took on the third film. Though some of us may think it a tad overrated and not actually as great as the fourth film, Goblet of Fire, Prisoner of Azkaban was undeniably important in showing that the franchise could (and would) mature along with its characters.
A Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors (1987)
It wasn’t necessarily because Heather Langenkamp returned to the series, and it wasn’t necessarily that this second sequel took in so much money (A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy’s Revenge had already out-grossed the original). After a darkly shot and depressingly non-scary sequel, Dream Warriors did the best thing a horror franchise can do (in our opinion): it turned it into a fantasy film that combined the likes of Dungeons and Dragons and superhero movies. Without this refreshing installment, we children of the ‘80s might not have continued following the franchise so enthusiastically.
Mission: Impossible III (2006)
This J.J. Abrams-directed installment may have been the lowest grossing of the franchise, but it is the best of the three. Coming off the sloppy and confusing disasters that were Brian De Palma’s original and John Woo’s sequel, that may not be saying much, but shockingly it is an exceptional action film. Part of its favor is of course Philip Seymour Hoffman as the villain (and as Ethan Hunt disguised as the villain wearing a Philip Seymour Hoffman mask), but overall the film was more critically lauded than the first two films, and in spite of its being a box office disappointment, M:iI:III may have saved the franchise simply on the merit of its reviews (or, is a fourth installment merely being made because Hollywood has nothing better to do?).
Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home (1986) and Star Trek: First Contact (1996)
Many Trekkies would note that every other installment in the Star Trek franchise saves the series, and it’s generally understood that even-numbered films are always better than odd-numbered. Many Trekkies would also argue therefore that Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan should be on this list for initially saving the series following a relatively weak start. But we non-Trek fans have to point to The Voyage Home for bringing in us kids who cared more about humpback whales than space battles. Or, at least that seems to be how this installment managed to become the (still) highest-grossing Trek movie. Unfortunately, there were no sea mammals in any of the subsequent sequels and it wasn’t until the Next Generation TV cast got their own movie (as in, not shared with the original crew) that another installment, First Contact, out-grossed all other sequels (except the always-reigning whale-filled one, of course) and appeared to temporarily save the franchise once again. Later this year, we’ll get to see if J.J. Abrams’ reboot, Star Trek, has any ocean life and/or what it takes to jumpstart the series, too.
Star Wars: Episode II – Attack of the Clones (2002)
It made the least amount of money of the three Star Wars prequels, but Attack of the Clones was the trilogy’s saving grace, because after the “George Lucas ruined my childhood!” disappointments of The Phantom Menace, this second (or fifth?) installment of the franchise got the old fans excited again by alluding to (and leading in the direction of) more characters and events of the original movies, while overall featuring a better plot and more satisfying action. It helped, of course, that Jake Lloyd isn’t in it and that Jar-Jar isn’t quite as prominent. If it hadn’t been so good, many of us would have never bothered with Revenge of the Sith. In a way, it’s to the other two prequels what Empire Strikes Back was to the other films of the first trilogy, though it’s not quite worthy of such a favorable comparison.
Kevin Buist
FLAME + CITRON Review
Christopher Campbell
Happy Halloween Links. Today in Film...
Brandon Harris
5 80s Literary Adaptations Worse Than...
Kevin Kelly
John Krasinski, Brief Interviews With...
Karina Longworth
SpoutBlog, Now Available in Book Form
Paul Moore
October 31, Karina’s Last Day
Lauren Wissot
Sasha Grey Interview
We’ve had a bit of trouble getting this episode to go through the iTunes feed, so we hope this re-post will fix the problem. The original post, with episode description and embedded player, is here.
filmcouch-114
I can’t say I really agree with this list.
- I think that the Star Wars franchise has been “dead” since (and including) Return of the Jedi. As soon as the first Ewok came on screen.
- I felt that Prisoner of Azkaban was fairly awful
- And M:I 3 was just as crappy as the second one, even if no one wants to admit it. It was just embarrassing.
Re: Attack of the Clones
“If it hadn’t been so good”? Is that a joke?
What? Attack of the Clones was good. Not great, like the original films, but certainly better than the other two prequels. It’s not like I said “If it hadn’t been so brilliant…”
The first Dalton Bond film was the best since “On Her Majesty’s Secret Service” (no, i’m not joking)
…but, i forgot to add, the *second* Dalton film sucked dead moose.
Through a straw.
Rocky Balboa should be on here. The series had become awful, and the idea of bringing Rocky back as a 60 year old man was ludicrous and was mocked even a decade before Balboa came out. Then it comes out in 2006 and shocks everyone by being the best since the original, completely redeeming the series.
Great list. There are some I don’t care about (H2O, Dream Warriors) but with Azkeban, Attack of the Clones and Mission Impossible 3 you are bang on the money.
No, That’s not true. Of the six, Attack of the Clones is the worst. I can’t remember a single scene from that movie, and that’s not what a Star Wars film should be.
Everyone bangs on about how the first two Potter films were disappointments. They laid the ground work for the franchise, cast the mains (that have not changed other than with the death of Richard Harris) and provided the exact wide-eyed child view of wonder that was needed for the first film. A step into the darkness was taken in the second film that third and subsequent films have capitalised on.
Harry got older and the stories became darker with each installment, so far from failures, they have made the franchise what it is today.
I also agree with Mike Weber, OHMSS was a great film but suffered being the first without Connery. With Connery’s return in Diamond are Forever, overweight and over paid, Roger Moore breathed new life into the franchise after that.
Attack of the Clowns?
I don’t believe it. The film is a mess plotwise and the love story is stomach turning. Hopping Yoda is just ridiculous. The one good thing I have to say about it is that it’s better than the other two prequels but that is not saying a lot. They all seem to be just movie-tie-in to the merchandising campaign.
You pretty much lost credibility by including “Attack of the Clones” on this list. Why don’t you just throw “Kingdom of the Crystal Skulls” on there?
lol @ this list.
Prisoner of Azkaban sucked.. I thought the first 2 HP films were the best; Michael Gambon’s a bad actor see.. ruined the entire personality of Dumboledore by yelling and screaming.. I don’t consider it a good film at all..in fact 3rd 4th and 5th Potter films are some of the most terrible pieces of crap ever to come out on release.
Attack of the clones; well clearly this guy’s not thinking right.. it was the weakest of the Star wars films; and I agree the prequels over all weren’t that bad. I loved The Phantom menace and Revenge of the Sith , but who ever said the franchise was dead prior to the prequels coming out..
Sorry mate.. I feel you need to get your facts right..like seriously !!
I think Rocky Balboa re-juvinated the Rocky series after the disappointing Rocky V and the music video Rocky IV.
Man, this was such a good list…Then we get to Attack of the Clones.
Really? Episode 2? The movie that takes nearly everything wrong with Phantom Menace (wooden acting, lame direction, atrocious dialogue, idiotic humor, dull plotting and pacing, over-reliance on CGI) and adds on the most cringe-worthy romance ever depicted on screen? I’ve rarely been so disappointed walking out of a theater.
Attack of the Clones, no. The only reason Attack of the Clones is better than the Phantom Menace is because Jar Jar is so minimized. Hayden Christensen was a slight improvement over Jake Lloyd but still unbearable. I did not go see Revenge of the Sith because I thought Attack of the Clones was a vast improvement over the Phantom Menace. I saw it because I thought there was no way Lucas could screw it up yet he managed to still vastly disappoint me.
Some movies on here don’t really make a lot of since.
I think the Star Wars prequels are, in some ways, unfairly treated because of the foundation they were built on. The only good part about Phantom Menace was the pod race; the third movie just completely gave up trying to fit all the stupid pieces together, not to mention. The second one, at the very least gave me some meager hope for the third one (except for the terrible romance scenes). But there just wasn’t a “save” for the prequels, they’re pretty much the definition of Epic Fails.
All three mission impossible movies did fine at the box office and stand, critical-review wise, pretty much for what they were: needlessly-and–questionably-complicated-but-who-cares-powpowpow action movies. Differentiating any of the three as saving the other two seems moot.
Same pretty much goes for Harry Potter. Honestly, how much money did these movies rake in? How can anyone call one of these movies a success that redeemed the others when every time one comes outs it grabs the public by the short ones and takes all their money?
I’m a Halloween fan, but as much as I liked H20, I don’t think it really did anything for or against the Halloween series. Halloween started off a big slasher hit, but over time it just became a good horror fan pastime. Every once in a while they have a big screen whoopdy-do, bring Jamie Lee back because, well, she’s still hot. Yeah, I said it. But they were going to keep making these movies anyway. I could say Phantasm III saved the Phantasm series because stuff started getting super awesome, it focused on Reggie, and we didn’t have James LeGros bleeping it up, but that doesn’t change the fact that there’s still the same crowd watching these movies and Coscarelli could make Phatasm 20 and we’d still be hooked.
I also feel that prisoner of azkaban was the weakest HP so far but it’s in no small part due to the fact that it’s probably the one HP movie that truncated the book it’s based on the most.
Also just because AOTC and ROTS weren’t QUITE as bad as TPM doesn’t mean they weren’t still complete shit.
And personally while i thought Die Another Day was pretty horrible, Daniel Craig didn’t succeed to bring James Bond back for me. It’s a lame attempt at a bourne copycat cash-in. The essence of Bond (the movie version, i know in the books he’s different) is gone. SO what’s the point?
Are you all retarded?
First off, how did H20 revive Halloween? I haven’t seen a new one since then, other than the remake (which doesn’t count as a continuation).
Attack of the clones sucked, and it didn’t save the series. The trilogy was planned out.
Dream Warriors? Give me a break.
I loved MI:3 but it didn’t save the series.
Also, Marcusg, Roger Moore came after Connery, not Dalton.
Also, it should be noted that Martin Campbell directed both Goldeneye and Casino Royale.
He saved the franchise twice and should direct every Bond film.
wow….are you retarded? attack of the clones is easily the worst star wars “film” ever made….if you can even call it that.
I don’t get what you are saying chris…
I said Attack of the Clones sucked.
Also, I mis-read Marcusg’s comments as they related to mike weber’s.
I don’t know how anyone could think The Prisoner of Azkaban was the weakest in the series. It’s so clearly the best, and pretty enjoyable even by people who are not into Harry Potter.
Whats embarrassing is anyone who doesnt realize that M:I 3 was was a work of action movie genius. If you think its on the same level of quality as :I 2, you A. have NO taste or B. dont remember the 2nd installment at all.
Star Wars was never a dead franchise and trust me if it was Episode 2 certainly wouldn’t have saved it. Many people agree it’s the weakest of the 6 films.
It’s a mad house!!!!!
When C3PO screams a Planet of the Apes quote, and R2 can suddenly fly, if you listen closely you can actually hear the integrity burning.
Clones was so bad I almost skipped Revenge Of The Sith. Almost.
Brian DePalma’s Mission:Impossible was clearly the best in the franchise. We should be applauding DePalma for not dumbening down the film for the masses, but instead people trash it because they cant follow along. After that, the franchise turned to pointless action which was never what the Mission:Impossible franchise was meant to be.
Anyone who thinks Attack of the Clones is better than Revenge of the Sith must have the sensibilities of a bag of bricks. Or enjoys watching half a movie about the world’s worst written and most boring love story.
Not the Star Wars franchise, just the fandom.
The first two entries on this list were spot on. Then Halloween H2O, hmm, i don’t really think that saved the Halloween franchise. THEN The Prisoner of Azkaban? How can you save a franchise when you make less box office money than your two predecessors? This list obviously has no rules and is based solely on the tastes of the author. POA is in my opinion the worst harry potter movie, but they’re all great. After that the list has one more entry i agree with which is Nightmare 3. So overall this is a bad list based on a good idea. Oh, and there is only one movie on this list made before the 90’s! What a missed opportunity.
I think THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK and REVENGE OF THE SITH are the best STAR WARS films. ATTACK OF THE CLONES was good, but i feel REVENGE OF THE SITH really saved the STAR WARS franchise.
I think GOLDENEYE and CASINO ROYALE are two of the best James Bond Movies ever made and great beginnings to the Pierce Brosnan and Daniel Craig eras. I didn’t enjoy MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE III as much as MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE II. But to me, i think THE DARK KNIGHT is one of the greatest films of all time. I enjoyed THE DARK KNIGHT more than BATMAN BEGINS. Heath Ledger did a brilliant performance as The Joker and i think he deserved to win Best Supporting Actor at the OSCARS. THE DARK KNIGHT lives up to BATMAN FOREVER. I think THE DARK KNIGHT really saved the BATMAN film series.
you are such an idiot and this is the most retarded list ive ever seen.
You put Attack of the Clones on this list? Are you serious? That is not only the worst film in the Star Wars canon, but one of the worst films EVER MADE. The fact that you suggest that ANY of the three new films “saved” Star Wars makes your opinion on anything film related completely moot. All three of those movies took a great franchise and destroyed it with the giant, ugly wrecking ball that is George Lucas’ greed and ego. How dare you even suggest such a thing. The new films actually make me like the original trilogy less, and I will never forgive them for that.
Also, Brian DePalma’s Mission: Impossible is a great film, and no question the best of that franchise. If it was too confusing for you, then you’re a moron. I did like the third one, however. It was very cool, but the first one is a much smarter movie.
Wow, Mission Impossible 3. Really? And where is that franchise today?
Star Trek 4? Great movie, but the series was already fine after 2 and a way underrated 3.
I’ll give you Batman and the 2 James Bond movies, but that’s about it.
Props for mentioning Dream Warriors, though.
Timothy Dalton’s two films are among the standouts of the long series. LIVING DAYLIGHTS performed strongly, but LICENCE TO KILL suffered due to poor promotion and the BATMAN steamroller of ‘89.
All of the movies on this list sucked except for Batman Begins and Casino Royale.
Congrats on getting some imdb exposure…. but this list is complete shit.
Timothy Dalton’s two Bond films were actually superb entries into the series, maybe the reviewer should watch them before trashing them.
wow this was a waste of time. you sir, are a waste of bandwidth
Umm, I’ll agree with Casino Royale and Batman Begins as total “well duh” placements but I’m gonna have to be like everyone else and say that this list kinda sucks.
I mean, you don’t really have a rule going here. When I consider a film saving a franchise, I think of a film that was made years after the initial films that restarts it…like Batman Begins…so you seemed to understand that until you got to Halloween 20 Years Later.
H20 didn’t do anything to the franchise, it was just a cash in film to popularize on what Scream was already doing. (I mean H20 came out ONE year after Scream 2, which means it was in production before 1998).
Then, Nightmare on Elm Street 3, while I agree it’s the best sequel after New Nightmare, it didn’t reboot the franchise…it just continued it. Same goes for Harry Potter (4th one is my favorite), it doesn’t really save the franchise when your first films are just as successful. So, no you lost me at this point.
Can’t say anything about MI3 or Star Trek because I’ve never watched them. And I don’t intend to anytime soon. However, Attack of the Clones was part of a trilogy which again was not REBOOTING the franchise just continuing it. ROTS is the only one I remember watching anyway.
Bad list man.
What is the criteria for this list? If it’s talking about saving a series in purely commercial terms, Die Another Day actually made more money than Casino Royale, even though Royale was better reviewed and is more beloved by fans.
Star Trek II was also the film that saved the Trek series in every way (commercially, critically, fan reaction, etc.) and also cast the mold that future Trek films and tv series would follow in. Trek IV might have brought in a broader audience for that single film, but it was hardly a film that “saved” anything.
Mission Impossible III? I liked it quite a bit, but it got very mixed reviews, and its disappointing box office led to the termination of Tom Cruise’s development deal with Paramount. It proved J. J. Abrams could helm a mega-budget picture, and surely led to his being asked to take over the Trek series, but, so far, it’s saved nothing.
Batman Begins and Goldeneye are pretty legit examples; otherwise, the only criteria seems to be films that saved the author’s interest in a given series.
You have got to be kidding about some of these films. Halloween H20 wasn’t even a good movie. It felt like more of the same old pathetic stuff from typical horror films. I didn’t see Nightmare on Elm Street so I can’t say anything about that. Mission Impossible III was the worst in my opinion. Even though the plots of all three movies were confusing, the first one had the greatest thrill to a mission impossible. Did not see the original Star Trek. Star Wars: Attack of the Clones in my opinion was the worst Star Wars movie out of all six movies. Revenge of the Sith should of been the one that saved the franchise. Does it have something to do with seeing Yoda fighting for the first time?
New Nightmare saved the Elm St series more than Dream Warriors
Good to see First Contact and Goldeneye get recognition.
Not good to see Mission Impossible III and Attack of the Clones. They both sucked
I have to throw in my two cents because this list is a bit flawed, and some of the other comments have hit why bang on the head, but I’ll summarize. Apologies for any repetition:
Batman Begins - I think everyone agrees with this. Though Nolan took the entire franchise to an entirely new direction (and created a much different product), Batman fans struggle through the Schumacher films almost universally, which, continuity aside, made mockeries of Burton’s original wash.
Goldeneye - I think most people agree with this. There are actually some stalwart Dalton fans (though, let’s face it, his Bond films are mostly uninteresting). As to Casino Royale, I’ve heard nothing but mixed reactions; although, I haven’t heard much positive about Brosnan’s last two, so this is probably feasible.
Harry Potter POA - So flawed. One person hit it right by saying that this franchise was never doomed financially, even if it’s received an average or lukewarm critical reception. Another person hit it right by saying that if not for Columbus’ pedestrian but otherwise enjoyable adaptations, Cuaron and subsequent directors would not have the appropriate visual groundwork to create their darker, more visually complicated entries. Another person hit it right by noting that the evolution of the visual complexity only mirrors the increasingly dark tone of the novels. And still another person (or maybe it was all the same people) noted that most fans of the books find POA to be the most offensive entry of the film catalog in that the adaptation from the original source, a fan favorite (and one of Rowling’s too) was horrible, neglecting important revelatory details that actually come into play later and also undermining the emotional substance of the third volume — and the point for its existence to begin with. Though, I am aware that the fans of the films (only) seem to appreciate the visual stylings of POA more than the other films, to suggest that POA saved the franchise is specious at best. And second to the commenter who expressed a lack of appreciation for Michael Gambon’s depiction of Dumbledore. I’m a bit afraid of HBP (the 6th movie) because he’s more central in that one than in all of the others.
Star Trek IV - This is also a flawed entry. All trekkers (me too) agree that the even numbered entries are generally more superb, and even if Star Trek III (The Search for Spock) was not the greatest, it was not the worst film of the series. Also, Star Trek has a firm and generally stable fan base. Now, you’re absolutely correct that IV made the Trek films more accessible to non-Trek fans, but that doesn’t mean the series was crying out for a revamp only to be cured by the whales. As to First Contact, the same argument holds; Generations isn’t the worst, though FC validated the Next Generation cast as a bona fide movie-making franchise for the naysayer loyalists to the original cast. Of course, then along came Insurrection and Nemesis.
Star Wars: AOTC - For crying out loud. If it weren’t for Jar Jar Binks, this would be the worst entry of the entire six films series, including Phantom Menace, which had an infinitely more interesting plot, even if the continuity between the original series and the prequel series was severely lacking. The gooey love scenes penned by George Lucas in AOTC play off worse than any Ewok-hater could opine, and most of the dialogue (and CGI Yoda) was laughable at best. I don’t think the Prequel trilogy can be classified as a reboot - the original series, including Jedi, are venerated so highly that it was almost blasphemy to consider a continuation, but considering that story (and good writing) were sacrificed to CGI spectacle and George Lucas’ facist need to control the property, the prequel trilogy was actually an abomination to the entire series, and despite opinions to the contrary, Jedi was not exactly a series killer. Some people like the teddy bears (count me among them). Besides, the best of the prequel three is ROTS - if only Hayden Christiansen had been directed better.
Very amusing list. I’m a little disappointed that you didn’t include Police Academy V. What with the change of setting and new leading man, it was as much of an unnecessary continuation as anything else mentioned here. The common denominator seems to be series that were in no real danger of terminating (Freudian slip) or should have.
I would like to add a special dishonorable mention for Mission Impossible, whose first installment disposed of its long-time fans by turning its TV hero into the movie traitor, thus clearing the way for Tom Cruise to continue to play the Tom Cruise role in yet another Tom Cruise vehicle, insert [Tom Cruise] title here.
But it is startling to omit the only movie that actually saved a major series, “Diamonds are Forever.” Yes, Sean Connery sleepwalked through his mercenary return as James Bond, but the facts are clear. Unadjusted US box office: $63.6 million for Thunderball, $43 million for You Only Live Twice, $22.4 million for On Her Majesty’s Secret Service, $42 million for DAF.
Aside from the bus-plunge receipts for OHMSS, Connery quit before that movie and George Lazenby quit afterwards. Many critics (as well as the ticket-buying public) agreed with the leading men’s assessment that the Bond series was dead on its feet.
If Connery had not agreed to return, James Bond today would be vaguely remembered along with our man Flint and the Matt Helm movies as camp period pieces.
Instead, the series has made billions. Yes, buyers have resisted some products, like the Man with the Golden Gun or License to Kill. But the response has simply been to rearrange the showroom floor, out with the Dalton model and in with the Brosnan etc.
DAF isn’t a great movie, but with Connery’s self-satisfied smirk, Jill St. John’s cleavage front and rear, Bambi and Thumper, gay killers and an amazingly benign take on crazed Howard Hughes, it has everything that On Her Majesty’s Secret Service lacks.
In constant dollars, the series never recaptured the peak of Thunderball, as the US box office shows. (The domestic figures parallel but are more reliable than the global receipts, particularly for the earlier films.) Translating their receipts into 1965 dollars, Diamonds did a hair under $29 million in the US, while Casino Royale took $26.8 million. Sorry, Moonraker’s adjusted figure is $30.4 million.
Slight correction: obviously that last $29 million reference is not to DAF but to Die Another Day, which is the most successful recent Bond film, financially if not artistically.
“This J.J. Abrams-directed installment may have been the lowest grossing of the franchise, but it is the best of the three. Coming off the sloppy and confusing disasters that were Brian De Palma’s original ”
I stopped reading here. Are you serious, really? The first one was the shit, one of the best thrillers ever.
The two sequels destroyed everything mission:impossible stood for, like espionage and teamwork. The were just Tom Cruise showcases.. YUCK!!!
copy right is imprtant