Mannix

[ZelenskyTheValiant (Ivan)]

"Thanks for the warm welcome and I'm, once again, glad to be here."
--Ornithologist

Great post, Ornithologist. I hope you become a regular here at Magnum Mania.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rupert of Hentzau(Douglas Fairbanks): "I see you let the drawbridge down. I just killed a man for that."
Rudolph Rassendyll(Ronald Colman): "An unarmed man of course."
Rupert of Hentzau: "Of course!"

From 1937's immortal Prisoner of Zenda.
It was remade in a 1952 color version, an exact scene for scene twin of the original but Stewart Granger was no Ronald Colman and James Mason's acting suffers
in comparison to possibly the most charismatic acting job in history, that by Douglas Fairbanks jr. as bad guy Rupert of Hentzau.

Thank you very much, my good fellow. I'm a huge Magnum, P.I. as well, so I should feel right at home, here.

Greetings, everyone.

After intensely googling one of my favorite shows of all time, Mannix, I've come across this thread and what better way than to have in a forums website that celebrates one of the greatest television shows of all time, Magnum, P.I. (which I've seen in full for at least three times). Of course, as this thread is solely about Mannix, I've been reading a lot of comments here detailing members' experiences and opinions with the show which put a smile on my face.

Mind you, Mannix ended its run 20 years before my time, so you could say I'm a young fan (but not that young, if being a 30 year old counts for something). Of course, me pursuing the show has a lot to do with Mike Connors himself whom I consider a "paisan" - both of us are of Armenian descent so I find that quite endearing since he's the only Armenian-American action hero (if you'd call it that) so far. That isn't the only factor, though: I'm a huge fan of everything 1960s (excluding the mod culture, hippies and the so-called "counter-culture"; nothing against them, just not my scene) which started with my admiration for the classic James Bond films, multiple spy shows that came out during the spy craze of the 60s and the EuroSpy movies that hilariously (and sometimes compellingly) ape the Bond movies themselves. So, that's a little background.

Have I mentioned my love for Lalo Schifrin's 60s and 70s works? It's criminal, in my opinion, that to this day, Mannix hasn't had its full score released, unlike Mission: Impossible. I'm a huge fan of Jazz and easy listening music which really inspires me as an aspiring writer who refuses to live in the present day (and I don't apologize for it) but embraces the pop culture of the olden days. Say, a lot of people would watch something like Bosch (and rightfully so), I'm a guy who'd stick with the likes of Mannix, Peter Gunn, Magnum, P.I., Kojak, Hawaii Five-O, Columbo and currently, I'm watching Tightrope! for the first time ever.

It's a treat finding a place to belong. I tip my hat off to a lot of members here whose comments are quite insightful and entertaining (there was this one comment detailing Mannix's traits in here that actually made me chuckle because they were true).

Looking forward to discussing the show with you folks. I'll also pop up on other threads, of course, since they're all right up my alley.

Cheers!

Welcome to these boards, Ornithologist. Are you a lover of birds or does your name have anything to with James Bond and the birds of the west indies by Ian Fleming?

Hey, if you love classic television and especially the 60s then you've come to the right place. One of the best decades for film and television! Like you I am a huge James Bond fan, especially the Cubby Broccoli era (1962-1989) and especially the Connery and Moore films. Endlessly stylish and entertaining. Not the hum-drum that we get today. Films and television of today hold zero interest for me. The last "modern" television show that I was really into was "24" (with Kiefer Sutherland) and even that's already more than 20 years since it debuted. But TV shows of today in general are just dark, joyless, and depressing with story arcs that go on and on and needless subplots that distract from the main story. And then there's all those remakes of classics that can't hold a candle to the originals. So it's no wonder that most of us here (myself especially) basically live in the past when it comes to movies and television (and music too). It's a joy to watch a weekly show with self-contained plots that have no distracting subplots and that wrap things up nicely at the end and put a smile on your face. Old-school acting, old-school filming, story-telling, music all combine to create a mood that modern stuff can't give you. You mentioned Lalo Schifrin - he's a legend. Both on the small and big screen. They don't make 'em like they used to. Also Morton Stevens, Richard Shores, Don Ray all gave us some fantastic music for my all-time favorite HAWAII FIVE-O. The original, of course. Not the crappy remake. But yeah you can't beat the good old days, whether it's crime dramas like Five-O, Mannix, Streets of San Francisco, Columbo, Kojak, Rockford Files, Harry-O or my favorite westerns like Bonanza or The Big Valley or spy fare (Mission: Impossible being an absolute highlight) nothing today can compare.

And just going back to Bond in the 60s, man, I remember when I first saw Dr. No and Goldfinger (rented them from a local library on VHS in the summer of 2001) those two just made my imagination go wild. I thought Connery as Bond was the single coolest thing I had ever witnessed. To this day I think he's unsurpassed when it comes to the ultimate leading man/hero. Forget the spandex wearing superheroes of today. Bond WAS the man! Connery WAS the coolest! I think it was seeing those 2 films that not only made me an Anglophile for a while but just made me fall in love with 60s cinema and 60s television and the styles of the decade and just the whole spy genre. At that time I thought being a British spy had to be the coolest thing ever. I often think I was born in the wrong decade. I mean I was born in the 80s and love all things 60s, 70s, and 80s but I would sooner sit down and watch something in black and white from the 40s and 50s than something from today. I'm only about 10 years older than you so hardly an old geezer to be rewatching reruns of old shows and movies. Most folks my age and older are watching the latest stuff that's out today and not looking back at stuff from 50-60 years ago. But I am and have been doing it for pretty much as long as I can remember. As a young teen in the 90s I'd be rewatching reruns of The Andy Griffith Show and it didn't phase me a bit that I was watching something in black and white from the 60s instead of something like Seinfeld or Friends which was all the rage back then.

So yes, welcome to these boards. The coolest place to be.

You, sir, are definitely a man of culture. I do have fondness for birds, but they're not of the aves avitium species, if you do catch my drift, just like the namesake of the author who penned The Birds of the West Indies.

I have to agree with you regarding the 60s being the best decade of television - but then again, pop culture was at its peak in that one. Most people nowadays yearn for the geeky synth wave culture of the 1980s but they don't attract me in any sense or form. I'm cut from the cloth of the kind who'd rather watch suit-clad action heroes who eloquently express themselves while knocking you down like combat enforcers, attract the most beautiful women and pull them with their charm and one-liner quips, and listen to Jazz (everything else, like Mannix, is a take it or leave it situation). Regarding James Bond, to me, Sean Connery (but only in his first four films, he was replaced by someone else who bore his name and some resemblance but none of the attitude; a story of comedy that I'll explain later), Roger Moore, and Pierce Brosnan (I'm a very staunch defender of his and his era) are the holy trinity of the Bond franchise in my book. However, I'm very conflicted about calling myself a Bond fan since I'm no longer interested in the franchise in any shape or form, particularly with the fatal blasphemy that was the last film that forever poisoned the well in 2021 along with the rest of his (a certain blond fella) era that's nothing more than an insult to Fleming, Bond, and everything both stood for. But, anyhoo... Story for another day.

It's really nice to see that we millennials have people in our generation who are drawn to these kinds of stuff. I started cultivating myself with the stuff that I'm fairly informed about when I turned 18, starting with the Harry Palmer films with Michael Caine, continuing with Danger Man (Now, this, in my book, is the greatest spy series on television that is still unparalleled), later discovering that not only the show actually started off as "James Bond adaptations on TV" but in its final form (the half-hour episodes, which I refer to as Season 1) actually influenced the Bond series themselves, especially Dr. No and From Russia with Love. They borrowed a lot from the show. The rest is, of course, history. Fast forward from 2011 to 2024, I'm an avid lover of everything spy fiction and anything that resembles the Bond of old (1962-2004). If you haven't by now, you should check out some of the EuroSpy films that really made terrific substitutes for the Bond films of the 60s. I can even type up a list for you and DM them to you.

As for modern shows, boy oh boy, you hit the nail right on the head! And it isn't like I didn't try watching some of them, but Christ! I couldn't stand them. Overlong melodramas, no plot. What I loved about old shows is that the plot came first, characters came second, saving drama for last - Don't mind the drama if it's earned, but if it's not... An example: I attempted to watch The Blacklist with Spader not too long ago since the premise seemed interesting. But, ten episodes in, the melodrama stunk like a fish out of water. Knowing what I know from experience, I knew where it was all headed and I bailed out. However, there are three particularly great shows I can recommend you to see, but they do have subplots like most shows: Burn Notice is one show I was obsessed with as a teen and I still watch the show for a chunk till I know when to stop. Halfway into the fifth season, it loses its magic and becomes that very melodrama that I hate, thus ending up throwing its potential away like a bad habit, only difference is that it wasn't a bad habit. I do a marathon of it up to half of the fifth season and then, I stop, using the cliffhanger to imagine the rest of the show in my head the way I want it in my head-canon. And then, there's the 2010 version of Human Target that's really awesome. Only the first season. Forget the second. The third one is the 2010 reboot of La Femme Nikita, simply called Nikita that, in my opinion, is a vast improvement over the movie by Luc Besson as well as the melodramatic show with Peta Wilson that ran from 1997 to 2001. That's about it.

I've a lot of shows I cling to. Most of the ITC Entertainment series from the 1960s are in my top ten. Danger Man (known as Secret Agent in the US starting with Season 2; actually a retooling of the show serving as a departure from the half-hour episode format), The Saint, The Persuaders! (seventies, yeah), Man in a Suitcase (shame it ran for just one season!), The Baron, and many more. And you know which series they all stylistically bear a resemblance to.

And then, there was the likes of Peter Gunn, Mannix, Mission: Impossible (I stop after the fifth season, again, especially when they turn from spies into undercover cops, basically doing the police's work for them), Kojak, Hawaii Five-O and others. I have to admit that I like both versions of Five-O, but the reboot, like most modern shows, loses its way after killing off Wo Fat. What they did wrong, however, was rebooting the show rather than making legacy sequels. Now, I dream of making a legacy sequel to Mannix myself and have a script ready that I'm trying to shop around. While it's set in the present day, it's as though it wouldn't feel like it as I approach this kind of stuff very conservatively. I'm a traditionalist, what can I say? Not against updates as long as they retain the spirit and standards of what they're building up on. Fiercely. Five-O's reboot felt like NCIS: Hawaii (funnily enough, they actually did make a show with that name once the reboot series was cancelled; both exist in the same fictional universe). And then, there's the new Magnum, P.I. which, while not very offensive, is nothing but a pale shadow of the original. I would've approached a "reboot" project very differently. I'll discuss that on a different thread one of these days.

Like you, sir, I also feel like I was born in the wrong decade. I would've loved to enjoy my 30s in the 1960s where I can read the best books out there and feel the spirit of the adventure within, my favorite author being Alistair MacLean, I would have loved to have met the man one day. Thanks to three film adaptations of his novels (that he himself penned), I was introduced to his work. Say, some of them could have used exposure by Mannix who did adapt a couple of existing source materials (Venetian Bird being one of them) to an episode of the show, having Mannix replace the protagonists of these lesser known novels. One I could think of is Caravan to Vaccares (which itself is a great movie, I mean... Charlotte Rampling! Whistle! Now, you know why I'm an ornithologist. ) and another being Fear Is the Key. One thing I wish Mannix did not abandon was Intertect. One way or another, I would've loved to see Joseph Campanella return to the show NOT as a new character but as Lew Wickersham, who was Mannix's best friend, really, more than Lt. Tobias and Lt. Art Maclolm. A spy agency-like detective agency that trains its detectives and teaches them field tactics while keeping them in shape is a very novel idea. Didn't like that Mannix was simply phased into a traditional private investigator, but I still love the show in every aspect. For the sake of some continuity (I like continuities provided they don't get in the way of a good adventure), I would've loved to see Wickersham pop up every now and then and hire an independent Mannix as an outsider. Lots of ideas to explore.

I blabbed a lot, didn't I?

Thanks for the warm welcome and I'm, once again, glad to be here.

That was quite a mouthful there. A Die Another Day reference for you. And now that I think about it of course the ornithologist line comes from the same scene in the film. And predators coming out at night to feast and all that... It's been a while since I've revisited that one. Speaking of Brosnan, hey I'm with you. As a matter of fact when they used to have the James Bond board on IMDB about 10 years back (where you could post discussions) my signature was "Connery, Moore, and Brosnan. Accept no substitutes!" So when I say that for me the classic Bond era that I absolutely love is the Cubby era from '62 to '89 it's not because I'm discounting Brosnan (which was very fashionable when Craig took over) but because it's the era that I love the most - 60s, 70s, and 80s. Cubby was still onboard still supervising things and you could really feel his presence in those films and his vow to always entertain his audience above all else and to put the money up there on the screen. Also it was the era of practical effects, before CGI killed the fun of action in cinema. It was a less politically correct time which I love (even Moneypenny gives Bond a feminist mouthful in GoldenEye, as does 'M') and I just prefer an era with less Rambo-style gunplay and explosions which really took over in the 90s. I like my Bond to dispatch the baddies in a clever way with a cool quip, instead of just mowing them down with a machine gun. But that aside I think Brosnan was the perfect Bond for the 90s - he had some of that rough edge that Connery had but also the debonair and witty style of Roger Moore. So he was the best of both worlds. Plus GoldenEye is actually one of my favorite Bond films and probably the last truly great Bond film! And Tomorrow Never Dies has probably risen in my rankings more than any other Bond film over the years - I hated it when I first saw it way back when in the early 2000s. It was just such a huge departure from the cool 60s and 70s Bonds of Sir Sean and Sir Roger that I was constantly dieting on. The Rambo gunplay and John Woo style action went overboard and actually gave me a headache. I did not feel well after watching that film. I thought it was as far removed from the world of Bond as it could get. Boy, was I wrong. I had no idea what lay in store in the years to come LOL. Over the years revisiting TND I began to appreciate it more and more and now I look at it as truly the last Bond film that followed the traditional formula - a crisis is brewing, Bond is summoned by M, Bond gets his assignment, picks up his gadgets from Q, and goes on his merry mission. Faces a megalomaniac villain (brilliantly overplayed by Jonathan Pryce) and stops WWIII. Just like the good old days. Plus an excellent David Arnold score to boot! Unfortunately the next 2 films (despite a strong showing from Brosnan) have never won me over. TWINE had a lot of potential and a superb boat chase on the River Thames (backed by another stupendous piece of music by Arnold) but unfortunately the rest of the film never lived up to that and kind of petered out. The submarine climax was very underwhelming. And then Die Another Day, well, too many problems with that one LOL. Though honestly the invisible Aston Martin (which seems to give everyone an aneurysm) for me is actually one of the highlights. So go figure.

Then came Craig. Oh boy! He was supposed to be the second coming. Everyone got on board with the Brosnan bashing. Everyone was in love with Craig. Casino Royale was actually the first Bond film I saw in the theater with a buddy of mine. He absolutely loved it. I walked out confused by what I had just seen. I felt like I saw a good and entertaining film but not a Bond film. It took another viewing or two on DVD to really accept it as a Bond film. I accepted that it was a Bond film but just a very different one from the norm, I guess similar to how On Her Majesty's Secret Service and Licence to Kill bucked the norm (even though the former was written by Fleming himself, as was Casino Royale). But then came Quantum - a lame Jason Bourne knock-off and completely forgettable. With Skyfall I had the same reaction as Casino - I walked out feeling like I saw something really cool and beautiful (the Roger Deakins cinematography was a highlight!) but again I missed the Bond feel of the classics. But at least we got a really colorful villain in Javier Bardem and his own private island which hearkened back to the good old days. But again we get all that heavy-handed stuff that all the Craig films are laden with. All the "drama" that shouldn't even exist in a Bond film. This gets even worse with the next 2 films. Spectre is just a mess from beginning to end - when they turned the iconic Fleming creation that was Blofeld into Bond's half brother I thought it was the single stupidest idea in the history of EON. But then it's like they said to themselves "but wait, we can top even that!" and they go ahead and nuke Bond in the next one. So yeah, I've no interest in Bond at all at this point. Clearly the producers have no respect for the series or the fans and at this point their motto is that anything goes. Bond can die, resurrect, be black, female, gay, etc. etc. Bottom line - we have our classics that we love and everything else to me is irrelevant. For all intents and purposes the Bond series is over. Whew, okay, enough about Bond. Is there a James Bond thread on this site? Might need to create one if one doesn't exist.

Regarding television and plot coming first - agreed 100%. This is why I can watch virtually any old show with some level of interest. Because they all focused on plot first and foremost. And for me that's always the most important thing. What's the case to be solved today? I could care less about the personal lives of the characters. That's not why I'm tuning in. Occasionally you would get an episode that would focus more on the character where it would be something that would touch him/her personally. So when that came you felt it was earned. It would be a "special" episode. But this wasn't the case week to week. So when it happened it felt real, not forced. Mission: Impossible is one of the best shows of all time and that show is the ultimate example where we virtually knew NOTHING about the characters or their personal lives. Can you imagine what a disaster that show would have been if they started delving into their personal lives?? I shudder to think. Hey, speaking of M:I isn't it the first 3 seasons that are the classic spy/Cold War seasons? I've read that starting with season 4 (but more so with season 5) is when the IMF began focusing more on battling the Syndicate or home-grown organized crime. But you say it started with season 6. I only saw the first 3 seasons (rented the discs from Netflix several years back) and only recently purchased the newly released Blu-Ray of the entire series but haven't had the chance to delve into it yet. Gonna be a real treat. Speaking of Mannix and Intertect I'm also in agreement with you that it was a cool concept. I'm actually shocked when people say to skip season 1 because of it. They say it's not Mannix. Really?? Here he works for a detective agency and here he has his own office. That's the only difference. Same Joe Mannix that we all love. I don't get the hate for season 1 at all.

You mentioned Burn Notice. Never seen it but interestingly enough I think there's a Burn Notice thread here. There are some fans here so you're in good company. I guess it's got some similarities to Magnum. Regarding the Five-0 reboot yeah it's basically CSI: Hawaii or SWAT: Hawaii which is what they should have called it. There is ZERO in common with the old show, aside from the title, the opening theme song, the character names, and Hawaii itself. If you're not gonna honor the original why bother calling it a reboot? It's not. It's a totally different show shot in Hawaii. That's why you might as well just call it SWAT: Hawaii or Special Team: Hawaii or whatever. Come on, be original! Stop plagiarizing by using a recognized name and then just doing your own thing.

Alistair MacLean!! Boy, was there ever a better writer with a zest for adventure!? I haven't read anything by him but I've seen plenty of movies based on his work and they're the kinds of adventure films that we'll sadly never see again. Same as with the Bond films. WHERE EAGLES DARE is one of my all-time favorite films (definitely the best WWII adventure film) and every winter when the first snow falls I immediately pull out my DVD copy and enjoy the ride! I tell ya - it never gets old. There's just something about that first snowfall at night or as it begins to dusk that makes me snuggle into my easy chair and turn on this riveting adventure. I think the snow in that film is a major character in its own right! I've never seen a more beautiful snowy film. Yep, I love me some snow. And the Alpine scenery, the cable car, the scale up the side of the castle. That Ron Goodwin score!!!!!! You know, this film might even top all the Bonds of the 60s for me. There, I said it. Also by MacLean, big fan of THE GUNS OF NAVARONE and even FORCE 10 FROM NAVARONE. Also BREAKHEART PASS with Charlie Bronson - it's got trains and snow!

Ok, I think that's enough out of me for now. But once I start it's hard to stop. Fun topics of discussion here.

Touché. It's become one of my mottos to er... "Feast... Like there's no tomorrow." I honestly love Die Another Day in spite of its logical flaws, and like you, the invisible car doesn't bother me in the slightest because it's based on actual technology the US military was working on, at the time, which was also the topic of plot device used in the film adaptation of I-Spy. Now, this is one of the rarest instances where an adaptation uses the source material loosely that I tolerate, because the movie with Eddie Murphy and Owen Wilson is fun. The show was more of a straightforward spy thriller like Mission: Impossible, but this one was more of a comedy. I wish it did get a sequel. Another instance is The Man from UNCLE, but this is one of the instances where I think the movie is better than the show. However... I did have a lot of issues with the background of how the agency was formed which was very immaturely written. Being a Fleming aficionado as well as everything spy, I shudder to think most writers do not bother to do their research and actually spend time in developing their fictional organizations. As for the Brosnan era, what I love about it is that it very much remains true to the concept and structure of its predecessors. I'd only accuse Die Another Day of the constant use of Woo-isms (John Woo) but I can overlook it. I wouldn't say Bond went mindlessly Rambo everywhere but times were changing, you see? After all, "chocolate sailors" were no longer a thing, field tactics have changed, and Bond being an intelligence commando now was very fitting. After all, the newer the times, the newer the threats. He's the kind of man who'd lead a team of commandos on raids, and given his background, he must have been Special Boat Service and having earned his Commander rank rather than being given it without having to work for it, hence the "chocolate sailor" concept wouldn't have worked post-80s. As for Dench's "M", her grilling Bond for his mindset was sort of funny, because while she may have a jab at him, Bond remains unchanged. Come Tomorrow Never Dies, she was the one to insist Bond to resort to his usual tactics. "Pump her for information". Hardly the word of a feminist. Haha! They eventually learn. TND is my favorite Bond film alongside Dr. No and Thunderball. Regarding TWINE, let's just say, it was the prototype Barbara Broccoli movie and Pierce did object to Bond being a second banana when initially it was going to focus on Elektra King and be female-led while Bond takes a backseat (they achieved that with that 2021 blasphemy that I refer to as the atrocity known as 9/28 - the day it was released). So, Bruce Feirstein came on board at Pierce's insistence to fix the script by Neal Poncy and Robert Waste to put Bond back in the front and center of the story. For what it's worth, though, I still love the film as it enriched Bond's screen dimension a little more, exploring his detective side a little, making certain scenes feel like it's noir. Sorry, I keep jumping back and forth on the discussion. A little bit of inorganization on my part.

Regarding the personal lives of the characters, I'm one million percent in agreement with you. They don't need to be explored unless they're "special" episodes and they shouldn't happen for more than one episode per season... If that! Funnily enough, Bruce Geller hated and objected to exploring characters on Mission: Impossible, and yet they started going for it in the later seasons. One "personal matter" season that I did love though was the one where Cinnamon Carter was captured and Jim had to go out of his way to rescue her, going rogue and disobeying orders. Hardly the kind of man who'd murder his own team (the stupidity of the 1996 film!). I can assure you it was definitely Season 5 where they started doing cops' work for them. I mean, it still did have globetrotting espionage all over, but that was when they started losing their touch. Season 4 and 5 had Martin Landau replaced, but I can tell you... Leonard Nimoy was an amazing substitute and was even more of a "badass" version of Rollin Hand, called The Great Paris. Them fighting the Syndicate on a constant note felt very tiresome. Glad the movies actually gave "The Syndicate" a real purpose but making them a rogue black ops unit... An anti-IMF. By the way, I love the movies too, but they don't get M:I-like until Ghost Protocol, which is still the greatest installment in the series. Felt very much like a Brosnan era Bond film, except it was tailored for M:I. Christopher McQuarrie admitted publicly that he loves the era and his movies do pay several homages to the Brosnan films. Dead Reckoning Part One alone reuses ideas and concepts that were discarded with the original draft for Tomorrow Never Dies. My least favorite movies in the film series are those where Ethan Hunt's personal life comes into play. Most people love the third film (it's the worst in my book!) and worship Fallout (I find it overtly overrated), I do not. I have hopes that the atrocity they pulled in the first film is fixed, because Jim Phelps is no traitor, let alone killing his own team members for a reason any child would scoff at: "President running the country without your permission". Hah! Whoever wrote that movie did not watch the series nor knew Phelps. I have several ways of fixing it and posted my concept someplace else even, which most people liked. Bottom line: Jon Voight did NOT play Jim Phelps. More like Jim Fakelps.

Back to Mannix: Never knew people hated Season 1. How is it not considered Mannix? It very much is Mannix and the only difference is that he doesn't have Peggy around and that he's working for an agency rather than being independent. It perfectly serves as an "origins" arc if anything else, considering Mannix always wanted to be fired because he "hates the system" and "doesn't fit in", so Mannix finally got his wish and left. Heck, Peggy even goes to Intertect for help in the first episode of Season 2, to which Mannix reacts badly. You're 100% correct on it being Mannix precisely as is!

I think you will love Burn Notice. At least the first four and half seasons, since your views regarding these subjects are very much like mine. Most even referred to it as an old school show trapped in the body of a new one. It's Man in a Suitcase, Mission: Impossible and The A-Team rolled into one. Jeffrey Donovan is an amazing actor and the role of Michael Westen really allowed him to take on different guises and disguises to demonstrate his acting skills. Honestly, if anybody had to make an Archer movie, there's no one more suited to the role than Donovan!

Boy oh boy! It's like I'm talking to my alter ego! Where Eagles Dare is the greatest WWII film AND spy film in my book, period! More than all the Bonds combined! The novel is just as thrilling, if you haven't read it. In fact, I love this movie so much that I gave the codename "Broadsword" to my very own literary character. Ron Goodwin's score for the film is nothing short of amazing and I have both releases of the soundtrack (the score and the source music used in the film) which I constantly listen to when I write my own novels. Like you, I never get tired of this film. One I do recommend to you is When Eight Bells Toll. It's more like a For Your Eyes Only-like spy film, but Anthony Hopkins just carries the whole thing so brilliantly. Have to admit, though, I felt very underwhelmed with the Navarones. The novels were infinitely better and they should've stuck to them. Then again, outside of Caravan to Vaccares and The Satan Bug, the only adaptations of MacLean's works that really work are those whose scripts MacLean himself penned. I also really wanted to like Ice Station Zebra but it suffers from the same problem as the first Navarone - it prolongs the plot and provides unnecessary additions to the plot that don't help the events advance forward. Shame, really, because as a huge fan of Patrick McGoohan (Danger Man and The Prisoner), I was let down by it. Where Eagles Dare perfectly balances all of this. It's just brilliant to a tee! I heard Christopher McQuarrie is attached to a remake project... Well, just another adaptation, really, and I trust he can perfectly provide a better take on the subject than John Sturges. Regarding MacLean... and Mannix... The Last Frontier (adapted to film starring Richard Widmark) could have very much worked as a Mannix episode. A lot of them would have been. As for MacLean, snow, and shootouts, since you mentioned Breakheart Pass, I heavily recommend seeing Avalanche Express starring Lee Marvin, Robert Shaw (I'm a die-hard fan of that guy, and not because of FRWL nor Jaws), and our very own Mike Connors! It's very much like an Alistair MacLean-style adventure, even though it's based on someone else's novel.

We've strafed too far away from the topic of discussion, haven't we? Always a treat to talk to likeminded folks, though.

As I said, since this is a Mannix thread and -I'll be honest- it's why I came here. I truly hope the legacy sequel script I'm working on does prevail and does not disappoint Mannix fans. Obviously, since it is a legacy sequel, it won't be centered on the Joe Mannix that we know but his grandson, who's very much like his grandfather but also his own man. All things considered, Mannix was too kind a fella despite being knocked out 55 times throughout the series, my take on the new character would be smugger and a smart aleck with a rich intelligence background, very similar to Mike Connors' unnamed Tightrope! character (yeah, they say he's named Nick Stone, but I don't buy it). References to a lot of other Mike Connors films will also be made throughout. I'm listening to Lalo Schifrin, Henry Mancini, John Barry, Johnny Mandel, Ron Goodwin, John Cacavas, Don Ellis, Elmer Bernstein, David Shire (I'm crazy about the theme from The Taking of Pelham 123!) and many others as I'm penning them. Let's just say that I intend this movie, which would serve as a pilot episode, to be shot and edited exactly like a 1960s/1970s film and using music that are exactly like soundtracks from that period. It's set in the present time, smartphones and all, but this Mannix would be sort of like a walking anachronism with the way he wears his suits (very 60s-like, early Sean Connery style) and speaks with a mid-Atlantic accent, like Connors in his earlier works from the 50s. He listens to Jazz, Bossa Nova, Blues, and all else he either takes it or leaves it, like his ol' grandad. For the sake of continuity, I also intend to find a way to bring back Toby Fair (Peggy's son) who'd be played by Mark Stewart, thus reprising his role. Now, I won't go into the details, but I'm just giving the key notes to what I intend to do, so, God willing, if it ever gets picked up, Mannix fans have nothing to worry about.

P.S. If you want a cross between Mannix and Bond, well... I highly recommend watching Kiss the Girls and Make Them Die where Connors essentially plays a Bond-like secret agent, albeit American. The movie is more or less a spoof, but it's very entertaining. The plot is similar to the film version of Moonraker in a way. This is a funny one because not a long ago, I found a newspaper article archived by the CIA (yes, the CIA archived this page!) where Connors was talking about this film, having shot the Mannix pilot episode a year prior to the release of this EuroSpy spoof, saying something like it wasn't getting picked up and didn't seem enthusiastic about it. The newspaper speculated if Connors was going to be forever associated with this secret agent character like Sean Connery was with Bond and Michael Caine was with Harry Palmer, and that more sequels could be coming. What could have been, huh?

Hi ornithologist, sorry, got side tracked on some things.

Yes I agree with you that by TND Judi Dench's M is the M of old - pimping Bond out to accomplish his mission. They did want to have their cake and eat it too. Trying to stay current but then also be faithful to who 007 really is. I have no complaints with that whatsoever. I love both GE and TND (GE more of course) so none of these things bother me. It's just that I think the series in the 90s (probably because of Babs and Michael taking over from Cubby - more Babs than Michael I think) tried to be more current with the changing times (which included being more PC, plus Bond not smoking though he then lights up in DAD) whereas in the previous 3 decades under Cubby Bond seemed to be a more unchanging character in a changing world, which is something that to me was always a major plus. Of course to criticize a changing Bond in the 90s is so unfair when compared to what they've done with him during the Craig tenure. So that's why ultimately the 90s was still a safe place for the 007 series compared to where we are now. Very sad what's happened.

It's funny that you mentioned your love for the MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE film series. I'm with you 100%! That series is now doing successfully what the Bond series used to do - thrill and entertain! Bond is all about moping and wallowing in self pity these days with too much "personal" angst and baggage. The M:I series has some of that but the spectacle and the creativity of the set pieces and the plot comes first which is what draws me to these films. 100% agreed that GHOST PROTOCOL was the turning point for the series where it basically shot to the next level. It finally founds its identity. I remember once watching the first one on VHS years ago (this was long before I ever saw a single episode of the TV series) and being confused and underwhelmed by it. Then I saw the second one on VHS and was surprisingly entertained by it - it was basically a high-octane John Woo actioner with a pretty straightforward plot that was easy to follow so it pleased me just fine. But let's be honest - it hardly feels like M:I. Then I saw the third one on DVD and again was underwhelmed by it. Like you I thought the personal soap opera baggage was too much and quite frankly the film lacked a big budget feel to it. It felt like an extended episode of ALIAS (J.J. Abrams was behind both). But now the 4th one I actually went to the theater to see with a buddy of mine and I honestly didn't expect much (based on the previous 3 films) and was mainly looking forward to the Burj Khalifa scene which was so heavily promoted. But man, I was totally blown away!! Every part of that film just clicked for me, every set piece was amazing. Maybe things slowed a bit when they got to India but then there was the cool car park scene (very creative!!) to cap it all off. Even the score by Michael Giacchino had a cool 60s retro feel to it, including the first usage of Schifrin's famous "The Plot" theme from the TV series. Man, that brought a smile to my face. Anyhoo, I thought the film was a fluke (they got lucky) and the next one couldn't possibly be this good. Imagine my surprise when I walked out of the theater in 2015 after seeing ROGUE NATION and being blown away yet again. Honestly, I think it even surpasses GHOST PROTOCOL. Just a perfect film, not one scene wasted, not one misstep. Plus the addition of Rebecca Ferguson was a major asset! Imagine how disappointing it was later in 2015 to watch SPECTRE on the big screen (another spy film about a secret shadowy organization controlling things - Syndicate vs Spectre). Boy, what a difference between the 2 films. Big fan of Sean Harris too as the creepy Solomon Lane. Probably my favorite M:I villain (along with Henry Cavill). Which takes us to 2018's FALLOUT. This is where we may disagree because to me it's the perfect M:I film and quite possibly the greatest action film of all time. I literally had to hold on to my seat because the action was so visceral and so intense!! That helicopter vs helicopter battle at the end amongst those cliffs in Norway is probably the most insane thing I ever saw, followed by the Hunt vs. Henry Cavill battle to the death. Amazing film!! I can't believe that there's someone out there (McQuarrie and Cruise) who seem to have some secret formula on how to create the perfect film. Again and again and again. This type of thing isn't supposed to happen with sequels. But somehow they managed to find a way to top each one. The last one DEAD RECKONING was another fantastic film but I've only seen it once unlike the others so I still need to see it again to figure out where it ranks. It's definitely near the top. Can't wait for PART 2.

Speaking of the M:I TV series I think the episode you mentioned where Cinnamon is captured (and tortured too, or at least sleep deprived) is season 3's "The Exchange", correct? John Vernon is the main baddie in that one, as he always is. Our guys are trying to do an exchange to get Cinnamon by giving up some foreign agent. It was a very good episode. Back to the first M:I film - I don't think any of the TV cast liked that film. I think Martin Landau had some negative things to say (not sure about Peter Graves) and as for Greg Morris he walked out of the film after about 20 minutes (long before the Phelps as bad guy reveal) and basically called it a piece of sh!t. I'm sure the killing of the whole IMF team at the start rubbed a lot of folks the wrong way. Folks walked in to expect something resembling the old series and got something completely different - a major subversion of the series. It's like if you walked in to see a traditional Bond film (back in the day, because anything goes these days) and expected Bond to get his mission from M and go on his merry way to complete his assignment.... instead Bond shows up at the Mi6 headquarters and finds M, Moneypenny, Q, Minister of Defence, Bill Tanner, and other staff all assassinated and he himself framed for the murders. Now he has to spend the rest of the film on the run and try to figure out whodunit. Oh, and at the end M turns out to be alive and turns out he/she killed everyone. Hey, I'm surprised Babsie hasn't tried this yet with the current Bond films. Maybe we'll get it in the next one... Anything goes, right?

As for the film version of THE MAN FROM U.N.C.L.E. it actually just popped up recently on my Netflix account - it's on my to-watch list. I heard good things about it from a buddy of mine who's a big Bond fan. Wasn't too big on the old TV series. A bit too out-there for me, and this is coming from someone who enjoys the outrageous Bond films like YOLT and MOONRAKER. But I think the TV series often went too far into the fantastical realm. It's okay from time to time. But on a weekly basis it gets to be too much. And too cheesy. Fun for the kids though. It becomes too much like THE WILD WILD WEST (the TV show, never saw the film) where it's basically science fiction/fantasy. I prefer more grounded TV spy fare like M:I or even I SPY. Though some of the earlier B&W episodes of U.N.C.L.E. are pretty good. "The Iowa-Scuba Affair" comes to mind. Mostly for the casting of Slim Pickens as a rural good ol' boy type who's apparently the head of a Commie spy ring bent on overthrowing the leadership of some Banana Republic. Now that's a hoot!

Regarding Alistair MacLean, I completely forgot about ICE STATION ZEBRA. You probably know that Howard Hughes was absolutely obsessed with this film and played it constantly almost on a loop. Weird chap, eh? I did finally see the film some years back and enjoyed it quite a bit. Submarine films can be hit or miss but this one worked just fine for me. Good Cold War story with good performances all around, including Mr. McGoohan! Well, except for maybe Ernie Borgnine who's about as Russkie as Jackie Chan is Italian. So yeah I enjoyed the film and would count it as one of my favorites from 1968 (just below ONCE UPON A TIME IN THE WEST and BULLITT) but no way would I ever watch it on a constant loop and it's nowhere near the brilliance of WHERE EAGLES DARE. Speaking of which, I use the line "Broadsword calling Danny Boy. Come in, Danny Boy" almost on a regular basis. I'll have to give AVALANCE EXPRESS a look-see. I've come across that title in the past. I know Mike Connors is in it and I'm a huge fan of both Lee Marvin and Bobby Shaw.

Your legacy script for MANNIX sounds fascinating. I'll be first in line at the cinema when the film comes out!

[Ornithologist]

"Thanks for the warm welcome and I'm, once again, glad to be here."
--Ornithologist

Great post, Ornithologist. I hope you become a regular here at Magnum Mania.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rupert of Hentzau(Douglas Fairbanks): "I see you let the drawbridge down. I just killed a man for that."
Rudolph Rassendyll(Ronald Colman): "An unarmed man of course."
Rupert of Hentzau: "Of course!"

From 1937's immortal Prisoner of Zenda.
It was remade in a 1952 color version, an exact scene for scene twin of the original but Stewart Granger was no Ronald Colman and James Mason's acting suffers
in comparison to possibly the most charismatic acting job in history, that by Douglas Fairbanks jr. as bad guy Rupert of Hentzau.

Thank you very much, my good fellow. I'm a huge Magnum, P.I. as well, so I should feel right at home, here.

Welcome to these boards, Ornithologist. Are you a lover of birds or does your name have anything to with James Bond and the birds of the west indies by Ian Fleming?

Hey, if you love classic television and especially the 60s then you've come to the right place. One of the best decades for film and television! Like you I am a huge James Bond fan, especially the Cubby Broccoli era (1962-1989) and especially the Connery and Moore films. Endlessly stylish and entertaining. Not the hum-drum that we get today. Films and television of today hold zero interest for me. The last "modern" television show that I was really into was "24" (with Kiefer Sutherland) and even that's already more than 20 years since it debuted. But TV shows of today in general are just dark, joyless, and depressing with story arcs that go on and on and needless subplots that distract from the main story. And then there's all those remakes of classics that can't hold a candle to the originals. So it's no wonder that most of us here (myself especially) basically live in the past when it comes to movies and television (and music too). It's a joy to watch a weekly show with self-contained plots that have no distracting subplots and that wrap things up nicely at the end and put a smile on your face. Old-school acting, old-school filming, story-telling, music all combine to create a mood that modern stuff can't give you. You mentioned Lalo Schifrin - he's a legend. Both on the small and big screen. They don't make 'em like they used to. Also Morton Stevens, Richard Shores, Don Ray all gave us some fantastic music for my all-time favorite HAWAII FIVE-O. The original, of course. Not the crappy remake. But yeah you can't beat the good old days, whether it's crime dramas like Five-O, Mannix, Streets of San Francisco, Columbo, Kojak, Rockford Files, Harry-O or my favorite westerns like Bonanza or The Big Valley or spy fare (Mission: Impossible being an absolute highlight) nothing today can compare.

And just going back to Bond in the 60s, man, I remember when I first saw Dr. No and Goldfinger (rented them from a local library on VHS in the summer of 2001) those two just made my imagination go wild. I thought Connery as Bond was the single coolest thing I had ever witnessed. To this day I think he's unsurpassed when it comes to the ultimate leading man/hero. Forget the spandex wearing superheroes of today. Bond WAS the man! Connery WAS the coolest! I think it was seeing those 2 films that not only made me an Anglophile for a while but just made me fall in love with 60s cinema and 60s television and the styles of the decade and just the whole spy genre. At that time I thought being a British spy had to be the coolest thing ever. I often think I was born in the wrong decade. I mean I was born in the 80s and love all things 60s, 70s, and 80s but I would sooner sit down and watch something in black and white from the 40s and 50s than something from today. I'm only about 10 years older than you so hardly an old geezer to be rewatching reruns of old shows and movies. Most folks my age and older are watching the latest stuff that's out today and not looking back at stuff from 50-60 years ago. But I am and have been doing it for pretty much as long as I can remember. As a young teen in the 90s I'd be rewatching reruns of The Andy Griffith Show and it didn't phase me a bit that I was watching something in black and white from the 60s instead of something like Seinfeld or Friends which was all the rage back then.

So yes, welcome to these boards. The coolest place to be.

You, sir, are definitely a man of culture. I do have fondness for birds, but they're not of the aves avitium species, if you do catch my drift, just like the namesake of the author who penned The Birds of the West Indies.

I have to agree with you regarding the 60s being the best decade of television - but then again, pop culture was at its peak in that one. Most people nowadays yearn for the geeky synth wave culture of the 1980s but they don't attract me in any sense or form. I'm cut from the cloth of the kind who'd rather watch suit-clad action heroes who eloquently express themselves while knocking you down like combat enforcers, attract the most beautiful women and pull them with their charm and one-liner quips, and listen to Jazz (everything else, like Mannix, is a take it or leave it situation). Regarding James Bond, to me, Sean Connery (but only in his first four films, he was replaced by someone else who bore his name and some resemblance but none of the attitude; a story of comedy that I'll explain later), Roger Moore, and Pierce Brosnan (I'm a very staunch defender of his and his era) are the holy trinity of the Bond franchise in my book. However, I'm very conflicted about calling myself a Bond fan since I'm no longer interested in the franchise in any shape or form, particularly with the fatal blasphemy that was the last film that forever poisoned the well in 2021 along with the rest of his (a certain blond fella) era that's nothing more than an insult to Fleming, Bond, and everything both stood for. But, anyhoo... Story for another day.

It's really nice to see that we millennials have people in our generation who are drawn to these kinds of stuff. I started cultivating myself with the stuff that I'm fairly informed about when I turned 18, starting with the Harry Palmer films with Michael Caine, continuing with Danger Man (Now, this, in my book, is the greatest spy series on television that is still unparalleled), later discovering that not only the show actually started off as "James Bond adaptations on TV" but in its final form (the half-hour episodes, which I refer to as Season 1) actually influenced the Bond series themselves, especially Dr. No and From Russia with Love. They borrowed a lot from the show. The rest is, of course, history. Fast forward from 2011 to 2024, I'm an avid lover of everything spy fiction and anything that resembles the Bond of old (1962-2004). If you haven't by now, you should check out some of the EuroSpy films that really made terrific substitutes for the Bond films of the 60s. I can even type up a list for you and DM them to you.

As for modern shows, boy oh boy, you hit the nail right on the head! And it isn't like I didn't try watching some of them, but Christ! I couldn't stand them. Overlong melodramas, no plot. What I loved about old shows is that the plot came first, characters came second, saving drama for last - Don't mind the drama if it's earned, but if it's not... An example: I attempted to watch The Blacklist with Spader not too long ago since the premise seemed interesting. But, ten episodes in, the melodrama stunk like a fish out of water. Knowing what I know from experience, I knew where it was all headed and I bailed out. However, there are three particularly great shows I can recommend you to see, but they do have subplots like most shows: Burn Notice is one show I was obsessed with as a teen and I still watch the show for a chunk till I know when to stop. Halfway into the fifth season, it loses its magic and becomes that very melodrama that I hate, thus ending up throwing its potential away like a bad habit, only difference is that it wasn't a bad habit. I do a marathon of it up to half of the fifth season and then, I stop, using the cliffhanger to imagine the rest of the show in my head the way I want it in my head-canon. And then, there's the 2010 version of Human Target that's really awesome. Only the first season. Forget the second. The third one is the 2010 reboot of La Femme Nikita, simply called Nikita that, in my opinion, is a vast improvement over the movie by Luc Besson as well as the melodramatic show with Peta Wilson that ran from 1997 to 2001. That's about it.

I've a lot of shows I cling to. Most of the ITC Entertainment series from the 1960s are in my top ten. Danger Man (known as Secret Agent in the US starting with Season 2; actually a retooling of the show serving as a departure from the half-hour episode format), The Saint, The Persuaders! (seventies, yeah), Man in a Suitcase (shame it ran for just one season!), The Baron, and many more. And you know which series they all stylistically bear a resemblance to.

And then, there was the likes of Peter Gunn, Mannix, Mission: Impossible (I stop after the fifth season, again, especially when they turn from spies into undercover cops, basically doing the police's work for them), Kojak, Hawaii Five-O and others. I have to admit that I like both versions of Five-O, but the reboot, like most modern shows, loses its way after killing off Wo Fat. What they did wrong, however, was rebooting the show rather than making legacy sequels. Now, I dream of making a legacy sequel to Mannix myself and have a script ready that I'm trying to shop around. While it's set in the present day, it's as though it wouldn't feel like it as I approach this kind of stuff very conservatively. I'm a traditionalist, what can I say? Not against updates as long as they retain the spirit and standards of what they're building up on. Fiercely. Five-O's reboot felt like NCIS: Hawaii (funnily enough, they actually did make a show with that name once the reboot series was cancelled; both exist in the same fictional universe). And then, there's the new Magnum, P.I. which, while not very offensive, is nothing but a pale shadow of the original. I would've approached a "reboot" project very differently. I'll discuss that on a different thread one of these days.

Like you, sir, I also feel like I was born in the wrong decade. I would've loved to enjoy my 30s in the 1960s where I can read the best books out there and feel the spirit of the adventure within, my favorite author being Alistair MacLean, I would have loved to have met the man one day. Thanks to three film adaptations of his novels (that he himself penned), I was introduced to his work. Say, some of them could have used exposure by Mannix who did adapt a couple of existing source materials (Venetian Bird being one of them) to an episode of the show, having Mannix replace the protagonists of these lesser known novels. One I could think of is Caravan to Vaccares (which itself is a great movie, I mean... Charlotte Rampling! Whistle! Now, you know why I'm an ornithologist. ) and another being Fear Is the Key. One thing I wish Mannix did not abandon was Intertect. One way or another, I would've loved to see Joseph Campanella return to the show NOT as a new character but as Lew Wickersham, who was Mannix's best friend, really, more than Lt. Tobias and Lt. Art Maclolm. A spy agency-like detective agency that trains its detectives and teaches them field tactics while keeping them in shape is a very novel idea. Didn't like that Mannix was simply phased into a traditional private investigator, but I still love the show in every aspect. For the sake of some continuity (I like continuities provided they don't get in the way of a good adventure), I would've loved to see Wickersham pop up every now and then and hire an independent Mannix as an outsider. Lots of ideas to explore.

I blabbed a lot, didn't I?

Thanks for the warm welcome and I'm, once again, glad to be here.

That was quite a mouthful there. A Die Another Day reference for you. And now that I think about it of course the ornithologist line comes from the same scene in the film. And predators coming out at night to feast and all that... It's been a while since I've revisited that one. Speaking of Brosnan, hey I'm with you. As a matter of fact when they used to have the James Bond board on IMDB about 10 years back (where you could post discussions) my signature was "Connery, Moore, and Brosnan. Accept no substitutes!" So when I say that for me the classic Bond era that I absolutely love is the Cubby era from '62 to '89 it's not because I'm discounting Brosnan (which was very fashionable when Craig took over) but because it's the era that I love the most - 60s, 70s, and 80s. Cubby was still onboard still supervising things and you could really feel his presence in those films and his vow to always entertain his audience above all else and to put the money up there on the screen. Also it was the era of practical effects, before CGI killed the fun of action in cinema. It was a less politically correct time which I love (even Moneypenny gives Bond a feminist mouthful in GoldenEye, as does 'M') and I just prefer an era with less Rambo-style gunplay and explosions which really took over in the 90s. I like my Bond to dispatch the baddies in a clever way with a cool quip, instead of just mowing them down with a machine gun. But that aside I think Brosnan was the perfect Bond for the 90s - he had some of that rough edge that Connery had but also the debonair and witty style of Roger Moore. So he was the best of both worlds. Plus GoldenEye is actually one of my favorite Bond films and probably the last truly great Bond film! And Tomorrow Never Dies has probably risen in my rankings more than any other Bond film over the years - I hated it when I first saw it way back when in the early 2000s. It was just such a huge departure from the cool 60s and 70s Bonds of Sir Sean and Sir Roger that I was constantly dieting on. The Rambo gunplay and John Woo style action went overboard and actually gave me a headache. I did not feel well after watching that film. I thought it was as far removed from the world of Bond as it could get. Boy, was I wrong. I had no idea what lay in store in the years to come LOL. Over the years revisiting TND I began to appreciate it more and more and now I look at it as truly the last Bond film that followed the traditional formula - a crisis is brewing, Bond is summoned by M, Bond gets his assignment, picks up his gadgets from Q, and goes on his merry mission. Faces a megalomaniac villain (brilliantly overplayed by Jonathan Pryce) and stops WWIII. Just like the good old days. Plus an excellent David Arnold score to boot! Unfortunately the next 2 films (despite a strong showing from Brosnan) have never won me over. TWINE had a lot of potential and a superb boat chase on the River Thames (backed by another stupendous piece of music by Arnold) but unfortunately the rest of the film never lived up to that and kind of petered out. The submarine climax was very underwhelming. And then Die Another Day, well, too many problems with that one LOL. Though honestly the invisible Aston Martin (which seems to give everyone an aneurysm) for me is actually one of the highlights. So go figure.

Then came Craig. Oh boy! He was supposed to be the second coming. Everyone got on board with the Brosnan bashing. Everyone was in love with Craig. Casino Royale was actually the first Bond film I saw in the theater with a buddy of mine. He absolutely loved it. I walked out confused by what I had just seen. I felt like I saw a good and entertaining film but not a Bond film. It took another viewing or two on DVD to really accept it as a Bond film. I accepted that it was a Bond film but just a very different one from the norm, I guess similar to how On Her Majesty's Secret Service and Licence to Kill bucked the norm (even though the former was written by Fleming himself, as was Casino Royale). But then came Quantum - a lame Jason Bourne knock-off and completely forgettable. With Skyfall I had the same reaction as Casino - I walked out feeling like I saw something really cool and beautiful (the Roger Deakins cinematography was a highlight!) but again I missed the Bond feel of the classics. But at least we got a really colorful villain in Javier Bardem and his own private island which hearkened back to the good old days. But again we get all that heavy-handed stuff that all the Craig films are laden with. All the "drama" that shouldn't even exist in a Bond film. This gets even worse with the next 2 films. Spectre is just a mess from beginning to end - when they turned the iconic Fleming creation that was Blofeld into Bond's half brother I thought it was the single stupidest idea in the history of EON. But then it's like they said to themselves "but wait, we can top even that!" and they go ahead and nuke Bond in the next one. So yeah, I've no interest in Bond at all at this point. Clearly the producers have no respect for the series or the fans and at this point their motto is that anything goes. Bond can die, resurrect, be black, female, gay, etc. etc. Bottom line - we have our classics that we love and everything else to me is irrelevant. For all intents and purposes the Bond series is over. Whew, okay, enough about Bond. Is there a James Bond thread on this site? Might need to create one if one doesn't exist.

Regarding television and plot coming first - agreed 100%. This is why I can watch virtually any old show with some level of interest. Because they all focused on plot first and foremost. And for me that's always the most important thing. What's the case to be solved today? I could care less about the personal lives of the characters. That's not why I'm tuning in. Occasionally you would get an episode that would focus more on the character where it would be something that would touch him/her personally. So when that came you felt it was earned. It would be a "special" episode. But this wasn't the case week to week. So when it happened it felt real, not forced. Mission: Impossible is one of the best shows of all time and that show is the ultimate example where we virtually knew NOTHING about the characters or their personal lives. Can you imagine what a disaster that show would have been if they started delving into their personal lives?? I shudder to think. Hey, speaking of M:I isn't it the first 3 seasons that are the classic spy/Cold War seasons? I've read that starting with season 4 (but more so with season 5) is when the IMF began focusing more on battling the Syndicate or home-grown organized crime. But you say it started with season 6. I only saw the first 3 seasons (rented the discs from Netflix several years back) and only recently purchased the newly released Blu-Ray of the entire series but haven't had the chance to delve into it yet. Gonna be a real treat. Speaking of Mannix and Intertect I'm also in agreement with you that it was a cool concept. I'm actually shocked when people say to skip season 1 because of it. They say it's not Mannix. Really?? Here he works for a detective agency and here he has his own office. That's the only difference. Same Joe Mannix that we all love. I don't get the hate for season 1 at all.

You mentioned Burn Notice. Never seen it but interestingly enough I think there's a Burn Notice thread here. There are some fans here so you're in good company. I guess it's got some similarities to Magnum. Regarding the Five-0 reboot yeah it's basically CSI: Hawaii or SWAT: Hawaii which is what they should have called it. There is ZERO in common with the old show, aside from the title, the opening theme song, the character names, and Hawaii itself. If you're not gonna honor the original why bother calling it a reboot? It's not. It's a totally different show shot in Hawaii. That's why you might as well just call it SWAT: Hawaii or Special Team: Hawaii or whatever. Come on, be original! Stop plagiarizing by using a recognized name and then just doing your own thing.

Alistair MacLean!! Boy, was there ever a better writer with a zest for adventure!? I haven't read anything by him but I've seen plenty of movies based on his work and they're the kinds of adventure films that we'll sadly never see again. Same as with the Bond films. WHERE EAGLES DARE is one of my all-time favorite films (definitely the best WWII adventure film) and every winter when the first snow falls I immediately pull out my DVD copy and enjoy the ride! I tell ya - it never gets old. There's just something about that first snowfall at night or as it begins to dusk that makes me snuggle into my easy chair and turn on this riveting adventure. I think the snow in that film is a major character in its own right! I've never seen a more beautiful snowy film. Yep, I love me some snow. And the Alpine scenery, the cable car, the scale up the side of the castle. That Ron Goodwin score!!!!!! You know, this film might even top all the Bonds of the 60s for me. There, I said it. Also by MacLean, big fan of THE GUNS OF NAVARONE and even FORCE 10 FROM NAVARONE. Also BREAKHEART PASS with Charlie Bronson - it's got trains and snow!

Ok, I think that's enough out of me for now. But once I start it's hard to stop. Fun topics of discussion here.

Touché. It's become one of my mottos to er... "Feast... Like there's no tomorrow." I honestly love Die Another Day in spite of its logical flaws, and like you, the invisible car doesn't bother me in the slightest because it's based on actual technology the US military was working on, at the time, which was also the topic of plot device used in the film adaptation of I-Spy. Now, this is one of the rarest instances where an adaptation uses the source material loosely that I tolerate, because the movie with Eddie Murphy and Owen Wilson is fun. The show was more of a straightforward spy thriller like Mission: Impossible, but this one was more of a comedy. I wish it did get a sequel. Another instance is The Man from UNCLE, but this is one of the instances where I think the movie is better than the show. However... I did have a lot of issues with the background of how the agency was formed which was very immaturely written. Being a Fleming aficionado as well as everything spy, I shudder to think most writers do not bother to do their research and actually spend time in developing their fictional organizations. As for the Brosnan era, what I love about it is that it very much remains true to the concept and structure of its predecessors. I'd only accuse Die Another Day of the constant use of Woo-isms (John Woo) but I can overlook it. I wouldn't say Bond went mindlessly Rambo everywhere but times were changing, you see? After all, "chocolate sailors" were no longer a thing, field tactics have changed, and Bond being an intelligence commando now was very fitting. After all, the newer the times, the newer the threats. He's the kind of man who'd lead a team of commandos on raids, and given his background, he must have been Special Boat Service and having earned his Commander rank rather than being given it without having to work for it, hence the "chocolate sailor" concept wouldn't have worked post-80s. As for Dench's "M", her grilling Bond for his mindset was sort of funny, because while she may have a jab at him, Bond remains unchanged. Come Tomorrow Never Dies, she was the one to insist Bond to resort to his usual tactics. "Pump her for information". Hardly the word of a feminist. Haha! They eventually learn. TND is my favorite Bond film alongside Dr. No and Thunderball. Regarding TWINE, let's just say, it was the prototype Barbara Broccoli movie and Pierce did object to Bond being a second banana when initially it was going to focus on Elektra King and be female-led while Bond takes a backseat (they achieved that with that 2021 blasphemy that I refer to as the atrocity known as 9/28 - the day it was released). So, Bruce Feirstein came on board at Pierce's insistence to fix the script by Neal Poncy and Robert Waste to put Bond back in the front and center of the story. For what it's worth, though, I still love the film as it enriched Bond's screen dimension a little more, exploring his detective side a little, making certain scenes feel like it's noir. Sorry, I keep jumping back and forth on the discussion. A little bit of inorganization on my part.

Regarding the personal lives of the characters, I'm one million percent in agreement with you. They don't need to be explored unless they're "special" episodes and they shouldn't happen for more than one episode per season... If that! Funnily enough, Bruce Geller hated and objected to exploring characters on Mission: Impossible, and yet they started going for it in the later seasons. One "personal matter" season that I did love though was the one where Cinnamon Carter was captured and Jim had to go out of his way to rescue her, going rogue and disobeying orders. Hardly the kind of man who'd murder his own team (the stupidity of the 1996 film!). I can assure you it was definitely Season 5 where they started doing cops' work for them. I mean, it still did have globetrotting espionage all over, but that was when they started losing their touch. Season 4 and 5 had Martin Landau replaced, but I can tell you... Leonard Nimoy was an amazing substitute and was even more of a "badass" version of Rollin Hand, called The Great Paris. Them fighting the Syndicate on a constant note felt very tiresome. Glad the movies actually gave "The Syndicate" a real purpose but making them a rogue black ops unit... An anti-IMF. By the way, I love the movies too, but they don't get M:I-like until Ghost Protocol, which is still the greatest installment in the series. Felt very much like a Brosnan era Bond film, except it was tailored for M:I. Christopher McQuarrie admitted publicly that he loves the era and his movies do pay several homages to the Brosnan films. Dead Reckoning Part One alone reuses ideas and concepts that were discarded with the original draft for Tomorrow Never Dies. My least favorite movies in the film series are those where Ethan Hunt's personal life comes into play. Most people love the third film (it's the worst in my book!) and worship Fallout (I find it overtly overrated), I do not. I have hopes that the atrocity they pulled in the first film is fixed, because Jim Phelps is no traitor, let alone killing his own team members for a reason any child would scoff at: "President running the country without your permission". Hah! Whoever wrote that movie did not watch the series nor knew Phelps. I have several ways of fixing it and posted my concept someplace else even, which most people liked. Bottom line: Jon Voight did NOT play Jim Phelps. More like Jim Fakelps.

Back to Mannix: Never knew people hated Season 1. How is it not considered Mannix? It very much is Mannix and the only difference is that he doesn't have Peggy around and that he's working for an agency rather than being independent. It perfectly serves as an "origins" arc if anything else, considering Mannix always wanted to be fired because he "hates the system" and "doesn't fit in", so Mannix finally got his wish and left. Heck, Peggy even goes to Intertect for help in the first episode of Season 2, to which Mannix reacts badly. You're 100% correct on it being Mannix precisely as is!

I think you will love Burn Notice. At least the first four and half seasons, since your views regarding these subjects are very much like mine. Most even referred to it as an old school show trapped in the body of a new one. It's Man in a Suitcase, Mission: Impossible and The A-Team rolled into one. Jeffrey Donovan is an amazing actor and the role of Michael Westen really allowed him to take on different guises and disguises to demonstrate his acting skills. Honestly, if anybody had to make an Archer movie, there's no one more suited to the role than Donovan!

Boy oh boy! It's like I'm talking to my alter ego! Where Eagles Dare is the greatest WWII film AND spy film in my book, period! More than all the Bonds combined! The novel is just as thrilling, if you haven't read it. In fact, I love this movie so much that I gave the codename "Broadsword" to my very own literary character. Ron Goodwin's score for the film is nothing short of amazing and I have both releases of the soundtrack (the score and the source music used in the film) which I constantly listen to when I write my own novels. Like you, I never get tired of this film. One I do recommend to you is When Eight Bells Toll. It's more like a For Your Eyes Only-like spy film, but Anthony Hopkins just carries the whole thing so brilliantly. Have to admit, though, I felt very underwhelmed with the Navarones. The novels were infinitely better and they should've stuck to them. Then again, outside of Caravan to Vaccares and The Satan Bug, the only adaptations of MacLean's works that really work are those whose scripts MacLean himself penned. I also really wanted to like Ice Station Zebra but it suffers from the same problem as the first Navarone - it prolongs the plot and provides unnecessary additions to the plot that don't help the events advance forward. Shame, really, because as a huge fan of Patrick McGoohan (Danger Man and The Prisoner), I was let down by it. Where Eagles Dare perfectly balances all of this. It's just brilliant to a tee! I heard Christopher McQuarrie is attached to a remake project... Well, just another adaptation, really, and I trust he can perfectly provide a better take on the subject than John Sturges. Regarding MacLean... and Mannix... The Last Frontier (adapted to film starring Richard Widmark) could have very much worked as a Mannix episode. A lot of them would have been. As for MacLean, snow, and shootouts, since you mentioned Breakheart Pass, I heavily recommend seeing Avalanche Express starring Lee Marvin, Robert Shaw (I'm a die-hard fan of that guy, and not because of FRWL nor Jaws), and our very own Mike Connors! It's very much like an Alistair MacLean-style adventure, even though it's based on someone else's novel.

We've strafed too far away from the topic of discussion, haven't we? Always a treat to talk to likeminded folks, though.

As I said, since this is a Mannix thread and -I'll be honest- it's why I came here. I truly hope the legacy sequel script I'm working on does prevail and does not disappoint Mannix fans. Obviously, since it is a legacy sequel, it won't be centered on the Joe Mannix that we know but his grandson, who's very much like his grandfather but also his own man. All things considered, Mannix was too kind a fella despite being knocked out 55 times throughout the series, my take on the new character would be smugger and a smart aleck with a rich intelligence background, very similar to Mike Connors' unnamed Tightrope! character (yeah, they say he's named Nick Stone, but I don't buy it). References to a lot of other Mike Connors films will also be made throughout. I'm listening to Lalo Schifrin, Henry Mancini, John Barry, Johnny Mandel, Ron Goodwin, John Cacavas, Don Ellis, Elmer Bernstein, David Shire (I'm crazy about the theme from The Taking of Pelham 123!) and many others as I'm penning them. Let's just say that I intend this movie, which would serve as a pilot episode, to be shot and edited exactly like a 1960s/1970s film and using music that are exactly like soundtracks from that period. It's set in the present time, smartphones and all, but this Mannix would be sort of like a walking anachronism with the way he wears his suits (very 60s-like, early Sean Connery style) and speaks with a mid-Atlantic accent, like Connors in his earlier works from the 50s. He listens to Jazz, Bossa Nova, Blues, and all else he either takes it or leaves it, like his ol' grandad. For the sake of continuity, I also intend to find a way to bring back Toby Fair (Peggy's son) who'd be played by Mark Stewart, thus reprising his role. Now, I won't go into the details, but I'm just giving the key notes to what I intend to do, so, God willing, if it ever gets picked up, Mannix fans have nothing to worry about.

P.S. If you want a cross between Mannix and Bond, well... I highly recommend watching Kiss the Girls and Make Them Die where Connors essentially plays a Bond-like secret agent, albeit American. The movie is more or less a spoof, but it's very entertaining. The plot is similar to the film version of Moonraker in a way. This is a funny one because not a long ago, I found a newspaper article archived by the CIA (yes, the CIA archived this page!) where Connors was talking about this film, having shot the Mannix pilot episode a year prior to the release of this EuroSpy spoof, saying something like it wasn't getting picked up and didn't seem enthusiastic about it. The newspaper speculated if Connors was going to be forever associated with this secret agent character like Sean Connery was with Bond and Michael Caine was with Harry Palmer, and that more sequels could be coming. What could have been, huh?

Hi ornithologist, sorry, got side tracked on some things.

Yes I agree with you that by TND Judi Dench's M is the M of old - pimping Bond out to accomplish his mission. They did want to have their cake and eat it too. Trying to stay current but then also be faithful to who 007 really is. I have no complaints with that whatsoever. I love both GE and TND (GE more of course) so none of these things bother me. It's just that I think the series in the 90s (probably because of Babs and Michael taking over from Cubby - more Babs than Michael I think) tried to be more current with the changing times (which included being more PC, plus Bond not smoking though he then lights up in DAD) whereas in the previous 3 decades under Cubby Bond seemed to be a more unchanging character in a changing world, which is something that to me was always a major plus. Of course to criticize a changing Bond in the 90s is so unfair when compared to what they've done with him during the Craig tenure. So that's why ultimately the 90s was still a safe place for the 007 series compared to where we are now. Very sad what's happened.

It's funny that you mentioned your love for the MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE film series. I'm with you 100%! That series is now doing successfully what the Bond series used to do - thrill and entertain! Bond is all about moping and wallowing in self pity these days with too much "personal" angst and baggage. The M:I series has some of that but the spectacle and the creativity of the set pieces and the plot comes first which is what draws me to these films. 100% agreed that GHOST PROTOCOL was the turning point for the series where it basically shot to the next level. It finally founds its identity. I remember once watching the first one on VHS years ago (this was long before I ever saw a single episode of the TV series) and being confused and underwhelmed by it. Then I saw the second one on VHS and was surprisingly entertained by it - it was basically a high-octane John Woo actioner with a pretty straightforward plot that was easy to follow so it pleased me just fine. But let's be honest - it hardly feels like M:I. Then I saw the third one on DVD and again was underwhelmed by it. Like you I thought the personal soap opera baggage was too much and quite frankly the film lacked a big budget feel to it. It felt like an extended episode of ALIAS (J.J. Abrams was behind both). But now the 4th one I actually went to the theater to see with a buddy of mine and I honestly didn't expect much (based on the previous 3 films) and was mainly looking forward to the Burj Khalifa scene which was so heavily promoted. But man, I was totally blown away!! Every part of that film just clicked for me, every set piece was amazing. Maybe things slowed a bit when they got to India but then there was the cool car park scene (very creative!!) to cap it all off. Even the score by Michael Giacchino had a cool 60s retro feel to it, including the first usage of Schifrin's famous "The Plot" theme from the TV series. Man, that brought a smile to my face. Anyhoo, I thought the film was a fluke (they got lucky) and the next one couldn't possibly be this good. Imagine my surprise when I walked out of the theater in 2015 after seeing ROGUE NATION and being blown away yet again. Honestly, I think it even surpasses GHOST PROTOCOL. Just a perfect film, not one scene wasted, not one misstep. Plus the addition of Rebecca Ferguson was a major asset! Imagine how disappointing it was later in 2015 to watch SPECTRE on the big screen (another spy film about a secret shadowy organization controlling things - Syndicate vs Spectre). Boy, what a difference between the 2 films. Big fan of Sean Harris too as the creepy Solomon Lane. Probably my favorite M:I villain (along with Henry Cavill). Which takes us to 2018's FALLOUT. This is where we may disagree because to me it's the perfect M:I film and quite possibly the greatest action film of all time. I literally had to hold on to my seat because the action was so visceral and so intense!! That helicopter vs helicopter battle at the end amongst those cliffs in Norway is probably the most insane thing I ever saw, followed by the Hunt vs. Henry Cavill battle to the death. Amazing film!! I can't believe that there's someone out there (McQuarrie and Cruise) who seem to have some secret formula on how to create the perfect film. Again and again and again. This type of thing isn't supposed to happen with sequels. But somehow they managed to find a way to top each one. The last one DEAD RECKONING was another fantastic film but I've only seen it once unlike the others so I still need to see it again to figure out where it ranks. It's definitely near the top. Can't wait for PART 2.

Speaking of the M:I TV series I think the episode you mentioned where Cinnamon is captured (and tortured too, or at least sleep deprived) is season 3's "The Exchange", correct? John Vernon is the main baddie in that one, as he always is. Our guys are trying to do an exchange to get Cinnamon by giving up some foreign agent. It was a very good episode. Back to the first M:I film - I don't think any of the TV cast liked that film. I think Martin Landau had some negative things to say (not sure about Peter Graves) and as for Greg Morris he walked out of the film after about 20 minutes (long before the Phelps as bad guy reveal) and basically called it a piece of sh!t. I'm sure the killing of the whole IMF team at the start rubbed a lot of folks the wrong way. Folks walked in to expect something resembling the old series and got something completely different - a major subversion of the series. It's like if you walked in to see a traditional Bond film (back in the day, because anything goes these days) and expected Bond to get his mission from M and go on his merry way to complete his assignment.... instead Bond shows up at the Mi6 headquarters and finds M, Moneypenny, Q, Minister of Defence, Bill Tanner, and other staff all assassinated and he himself framed for the murders. Now he has to spend the rest of the film on the run and try to figure out whodunit. Oh, and at the end M turns out to be alive and turns out he/she killed everyone. Hey, I'm surprised Babsie hasn't tried this yet with the current Bond films. Maybe we'll get it in the next one... Anything goes, right?

As for the film version of THE MAN FROM U.N.C.L.E. it actually just popped up recently on my Netflix account - it's on my to-watch list. I heard good things about it from a buddy of mine who's a big Bond fan. Wasn't too big on the old TV series. A bit too out-there for me, and this is coming from someone who enjoys the outrageous Bond films like YOLT and MOONRAKER. But I think the TV series often went too far into the fantastical realm. It's okay from time to time. But on a weekly basis it gets to be too much. And too cheesy. Fun for the kids though. It becomes too much like THE WILD WILD WEST (the TV show, never saw the film) where it's basically science fiction/fantasy. I prefer more grounded TV spy fare like M:I or even I SPY. Though some of the earlier B&W episodes of U.N.C.L.E. are pretty good. "The Iowa-Scuba Affair" comes to mind. Mostly for the casting of Slim Pickens as a rural good ol' boy type who's apparently the head of a Commie spy ring bent on overthrowing the leadership of some Banana Republic. Now that's a hoot!

Regarding Alistair MacLean, I completely forgot about ICE STATION ZEBRA. You probably know that Howard Hughes was absolutely obsessed with this film and played it constantly almost on a loop. Weird chap, eh? I did finally see the film some years back and enjoyed it quite a bit. Submarine films can be hit or miss but this one worked just fine for me. Good Cold War story with good performances all around, including Mr. McGoohan! Well, except for maybe Ernie Borgnine who's about as Russkie as Jackie Chan is Italian. So yeah I enjoyed the film and would count it as one of my favorites from 1968 (just below ONCE UPON A TIME IN THE WEST and BULLITT) but no way would I ever watch it on a constant loop and it's nowhere near the brilliance of WHERE EAGLES DARE. Speaking of which, I use the line "Broadsword calling Danny Boy. Come in, Danny Boy" almost on a regular basis. I'll have to give AVALANCE EXPRESS a look-see. I've come across that title in the past. I know Mike Connors is in it and I'm a huge fan of both Lee Marvin and Bobby Shaw.

Your legacy script for MANNIX sounds fascinating. I'll be first in line at the cinema when the film comes out!

Welcome back, my friend! No worries, I understand. I got a little tied up myself!

You've hit the nail right on the head regarding the franchise that was great once, the so-called "trendsetter" of them all. Nothing to add, really, except that... Whatever you said regarding "anything goes", that already has happened after the atrocity of 2021. Ian Fleming Publications commissioned a book that did all of that: Bond is gone, preachy stuff about "minority" 00s, M dead, Tanner commits suicide (they planned that originally for the 2015 idiocy ), and the topping on the cake... Moneypenny - a mere secretary in the 1960s - becomes M.

The trouble with the first three M:I films is that they focus on one character as opposed to a team of agents: Ethan Hunt takes the lead while the rest of the team takes a backseat. It doesn't work like that. I was watching an interview of Tom Cruise the other day from the 90s where he basically said he got the series because he liked the theme and not much else, which is exactly what I perceived he would've done, turning the M:I theme into The Ethan Hunt Theme. Reminds me of the Spy Hunter video game series where they blatantly stole Peter Gunn's Theme and claimed it as the theme of their own series. Any person without an OCD would develop one because of it. Imagine...

"That's a cool theme. What's it called?"
"The Peter Gunn Theme."
"Nice, so the hero is called Peter Gunn?"
"No. He's called Alec Sects. Later, Alex Decker."
"Erm... Then, who's Peter Gunn?"
"Some guy from some TV show."
"Is that in the game?"
"No."
"Then, why is the series using a theme from a TV show named after the hero of that series?"
"Dunno, sounded cool. We couldn't have come up with our own theme, so we snatched another one."

Head-scratching!

But, yeah... The M:I film series found its identity by Ghost Protocol because they actually followed the formula of the show where Hunt wasn't the main focus but the team was. The whole team was given equal screen time and importance. Of course, Ethan Hunt still leads the team like Jim Phelps had done it for six seasons and Dan Briggs a season before him. This actually would lead us to an interesting conversation since I observe all of this rather closely. Since Rogue Nation, they tightened the connections to the TV show even more by producing prop documents for onscreen use where Ethan Hunt, Luther Stickell and Benji Dunn were all recruited by a certain Lt. Commander Briggs, which indicates that this is Dan Briggs and he was still in the IMF by the 90s, while the first film infers that Fakelps introduced Ethan Hunt to a lot of the good stuff. Funnily enough, none of the stuff Fakelps claimed to have been present in his background were present with the Jim Phelps of the show, meaning the writers had no bloody idea what they were yapping about. And you're correct, Landau and Morris both dismissed the first film as an embarrassment, with Landau basically saying "Our team was going to commit suicide one by one", laughing at whoever came up with that story. But, Greg Morris... Now, he was disgusted by the way they mistreated Phelps! Now, that's a friend! He walked out of the cinema and correctly called it a "piece of s**t". Peter Graves turned down the offer to reprise his role given the context, but publicly remained diplomatic about it. I heard he was greatly upset, though. The character meant a lot to him. As you've seen in "The Exchange", he essentially went rogue like Ethan always does, and moved heaven and earth to bring back Cinnamon without compromising the mission. Is this the kind of man who'd kill his own team for his own benefit? I hope they're reading this! However... Apparently, the character of Willy Armitage was present in the earlier versions of M:I-2 (post-Oliver Stone; that was a complete different M:I-2), but they let go of that, quite possibly to keep the series fresh and not risk a reboot. Continuity and all. But, like you said, while it's an entertaining action film (and a damn good one at that), it's nothing like an M:I film. You just hear a hard rock version of the M:I theme cued when Ethan Hunt does "something cool" the way The James Bond Theme would've played if Bond did something cool during an action scene, hence my argument above regarding the misuse of the theme. The third film retained the M:I feel after Woo-ifying the previous one, but to this day, it remains the weakest one in my book. The one I ignore every time I do a marathon. One pointless film that goes nowhere, copying The Bourne Supremacy like most action films between 2004 and 2011 (woeful times!). Cruise, apparently, wanted Martin Landau to cameo as Rollin Hand in the third film but Landau refused. Then, by 2009, when Jim Abrams was still attached to direct the fourth film (thankfully, he did not), he wanted Peter Graves to come back. They were probably attempting to fix the issue from the first film. They even entertained the idea of a prequel for the third film. However, when Graves passed away, those plans fell apart. But, IMO, they can still fix this. Let me tell you how...

Christmas Eve, 1991 - the night before the Soviet Union dissolved:

A team sent by the IMF and led by veteran spymaster Jim Phelps succeeds in orchestrating the end of the Cold War by pulling a mission heavily deemed impossible for years. The team, with the help of spies on both sides of the Bloc, contribute to the cause and making it to the clear. Despite the dissolution of everything embodied within the Soviet Union, the KGB recognized Jim and thus sent one of their most formidable assassins to kill him and dispose of him. A rogue faction inside the Kremlin vows revenge on those organized this operation and they carefully place that very assassin inside what they identified years ago as IMF due to traitorous moles inside the Pentagon or the US Intelligence community (could be CIA, NSA, National Intelligence, any of them), thus revealing the face of the man Ethan Hunt knew as "Jim Phelps" (Jon Voight) - The man who never was.

Just imagine the whole thing ending with the team heading out in a truck per the ending of every episode, the Soviet Union is about to fall and people are excited that the Cold War is ending. "Have Yourself A Very Little Christmas" is playing during the scene, cut to Jim walking under the snow in Moscow as the team scatters to head for their specific exit routes, happy, and as the song approaches its ending, an assassin shows up with a silenced CZ 82 and shoots Jim abruptly once he turns to a backalley and drops dead (reminiscent of Sidney Reilly's death), then the assassin steps out as the alley light reveals his face, it's the character played by Jon Voight. As he pulls Jim's corpse away, the blood on the snowy floor is painted away, the song ends and the screen fades to black.

The IMF got downsized and rebranded as a wing of the CIA (like Special Activities Division), its budget slashed, because those in power deemed the agency unnecessary given the Cold War was over now and the tension between the East and the West got reduced - but that was all superficial. Most of the IMF personnel were sacked, including agents from an era of relics and thus new faces were needed. A man identifying himself as "Jim Phelps" one day reports to duty after months of going MIA and he had all the answers to regain his clearance, thus re-establishing his identity with the agency. After all, there was no one to dispute his claims. Inside men replaced the required information working for the enemy the way IMF used to do back in the old days, so archived information was unreliable to identify the impostor.

Then-director of the CIA, Eugene Kittridge got wind of a traffic of smuggled information going out from Langley to enemy nations and independent enterprises in the same business and decided to play along, but it cost him dearly, losing multiple agents and important personnel in the long run, so clearing the name of Jim Phelps after the incident surrounding the NOC list in '96 was irrelevant to him, thus sweeping this under the rug to preserve his own career. Kittridge was always a career opportunist - The truth never mattered to him.

So, how do we exonerate a man who's dead and his corpse is nowhere to be found, either? Somebody knows the truth and since we're dealing with awakening the demons of the past, the past itself will take care of the future and the truth will come out to serve the ongoing mission in the depths of the Bering ice cap."

So, why would Ethan Hunt care about a man he never knew? Because the man he knew was the man that he is. A man of honor who would put others before himself and, in Ethan's own words, the lives of others will matter more than his own. This was the man that Jim Phelps - the real Jim Phelps - was, and this is the man Ethan Hunt himself is. Both would've torn the universe in half to save innocent lives as well as members of their respective teams. Many times, Jim disobeyed orders (in other words, "went rogue") to save a colleague and they did the same for him. Ethan understands that all too well, so he'd do anything to exonerate a man whose name has been shamelessly desecrated in spite of his loyalty, patriotism and contribution to the preservation of all that is good and pure.

"For Jim," Ethan Hunt will say.

Years later, after Ethan completes the Sevastopol mission, he stops by the residence of the Phelps family, leaves a medal of honor Jim Phelps received posthumously on the porch, breaks out a slight smile - somewhat saddened, somewhat relieved - and walks away. His phone rings as in Ghost Protocol and he starts getting briefed about a new mission that's left incomplete to the audiences, the credits roll in. New day, new threat. "Theme from Mission: Impossible" explodes.

Courtesy of Ornithologist from a Discord server, 08/03/2023

This is how I would have done it. Quite possibly even involving Stefan Miklos, who, in my opinion, is the best antagonist of the TV show (the '88 revival included), who'd order the killing of Jim Phelps. The real Jim Phelps. And as he was embarrassed by the IMF years prior and now losing the Cold War, why not embarrass the IMF in return by having his own "Jim Phelps" inside the IMF?

Anyway...

Regarding Fallout, unfortunately we'll have to disagree there. I highly regard it as a great action film, and, if the movies in between the first and this wouldn't exist, this would indeed be a great sequel to that film. But, as an M:I film, it's a very big miss for me because it essentially undoes everything Rogue Nation worked for, undermining that film like it never mattered. Sean Harris was alright, I suppose, but for an anti-Ethan Hunt, I would've gotten someone else for that role, Christian Bale to be precise, as an inside joke. You know the connection. Solomon Lane should have been frightening, depicting an Ethan Hunt who's just evil. As for Cavill as August Walker, I thought he was an overglorified henchman. Not a bad character and even more so not a bad actor. I love Cavill, he's a great chap and I'd cast him in a lot of Bond-like roles. Even Thomas Crown. He's the second coming of Pierce Brosnan, IMO. But, Walker is someone I wouldn't see as a leading villain type but a henchman. Fallout was just M:I-3 done better. A lot better. Great action film, but not a faithful M:I film. They made the mistake of Ethan Hunt taking the sole focus again and involved his personal life, too. Nightmares, frights and anxieties that are unearned. A case of "show, don't tell". It didn't "show". Long story. We'll have to discuss that some other time. But, I'd also have to affirm that Rebecca Ferguson was a beautiful addition to the team. Cruise has an idea for things like these and he definitely paid the homages to the stuff he associated with Becky. She looked like Ingrid Bergman, and he called her Ilsa Faust (named after Ilsa Lund), set the movie in Casablanca, and made her rather mischievous in a lovable way like Ilsa Lund was in Casablanca. And "Faust", well... Because she essentially made a deal with the devil (Faustus and Mephistopheles), the latter allegorically being both Lane and Atlee (wasn't elaborated whether he was an MI6 officer or "C" himself).

As for Dead Reckoning Part One, I'll have to start a whole new thread for it. Lots to discuss. It's one genius film building up to how ingenious Part Two is going to be. I hope they deliver, because like you said... McQ and Cruise found a formula that worked for that... other franchise. Gee, why would that work? (The Higgins emoji. I love it. )

Re: The Man from UNCLE, you're right about everything you said about the show. The first season is outstanding, the second... is alright. But, the third one and onwards... Not for me. Too "out there", like you said. That's why I prefer the film over the show, and this comes from a purist and a traditionalist. Only bad thing about the film is the way the agency was handled. Afterthought. But, I can overlook it. As I said, though, do watch Kiss the Girls and Make Them Die. You'll like it.

And really, for my own take on Mannix (I decided not to call it just Mannix, but want to give each entry its own title, like the Bond films, and I already have a great title named after a Lalo Schifrin track), I'm glad you see the potential. I'm drawing a lot of inspiration from Harper (1966) and Marlowe (1969) to make the character a bit more robust characteristically and less kind like the Joe Mannix that we know is. Given today's world, it would make sense for a descendant to be slightly more smug and sarcastic when interacting with people who have no respect for anything. But, he's not cold-hearted. He'd pretty much be like his ol' grandad, helping those who really are in need, and definitely isn't uncaring.

[ZelenskyTheValiant (Ivan)]

"Thanks for the warm welcome and I'm, once again, glad to be here."
--Ornithologist

Great post, Ornithologist. I hope you become a regular here at Magnum Mania.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rupert of Hentzau(Douglas Fairbanks): "I see you let the drawbridge down. I just killed a man for that."
Rudolph Rassendyll(Ronald Colman): "An unarmed man of course."
Rupert of Hentzau: "Of course!"

From 1937's immortal Prisoner of Zenda.
It was remade in a 1952 color version, an exact scene for scene twin of the original but Stewart Granger was no Ronald Colman and James Mason's acting suffers
in comparison to possibly the most charismatic acting job in history, that by Douglas Fairbanks jr. as bad guy Rupert of Hentzau.

Thank you very much, my good fellow. I'm a huge Magnum, P.I. as well, so I should feel right at home, here.

You, sir, are definitely a man of culture. I do have fondness for birds, but they're not of the aves avitium species, if you do catch my drift, just like the namesake of the author who penned The Birds of the West Indies.

I have to agree with you regarding the 60s being the best decade of television - but then again, pop culture was at its peak in that one. Most people nowadays yearn for the geeky synth wave culture of the 1980s but they don't attract me in any sense or form. I'm cut from the cloth of the kind who'd rather watch suit-clad action heroes who eloquently express themselves while knocking you down like combat enforcers, attract the most beautiful women and pull them with their charm and one-liner quips, and listen to Jazz (everything else, like Mannix, is a take it or leave it situation). Regarding James Bond, to me, Sean Connery (but only in his first four films, he was replaced by someone else who bore his name and some resemblance but none of the attitude; a story of comedy that I'll explain later), Roger Moore, and Pierce Brosnan (I'm a very staunch defender of his and his era) are the holy trinity of the Bond franchise in my book. However, I'm very conflicted about calling myself a Bond fan since I'm no longer interested in the franchise in any shape or form, particularly with the fatal blasphemy that was the last film that forever poisoned the well in 2021 along with the rest of his (a certain blond fella) era that's nothing more than an insult to Fleming, Bond, and everything both stood for. But, anyhoo... Story for another day.

It's really nice to see that we millennials have people in our generation who are drawn to these kinds of stuff. I started cultivating myself with the stuff that I'm fairly informed about when I turned 18, starting with the Harry Palmer films with Michael Caine, continuing with Danger Man (Now, this, in my book, is the greatest spy series on television that is still unparalleled), later discovering that not only the show actually started off as "James Bond adaptations on TV" but in its final form (the half-hour episodes, which I refer to as Season 1) actually influenced the Bond series themselves, especially Dr. No and From Russia with Love. They borrowed a lot from the show. The rest is, of course, history. Fast forward from 2011 to 2024, I'm an avid lover of everything spy fiction and anything that resembles the Bond of old (1962-2004). If you haven't by now, you should check out some of the EuroSpy films that really made terrific substitutes for the Bond films of the 60s. I can even type up a list for you and DM them to you.

As for modern shows, boy oh boy, you hit the nail right on the head! And it isn't like I didn't try watching some of them, but Christ! I couldn't stand them. Overlong melodramas, no plot. What I loved about old shows is that the plot came first, characters came second, saving drama for last - Don't mind the drama if it's earned, but if it's not... An example: I attempted to watch The Blacklist with Spader not too long ago since the premise seemed interesting. But, ten episodes in, the melodrama stunk like a fish out of water. Knowing what I know from experience, I knew where it was all headed and I bailed out. However, there are three particularly great shows I can recommend you to see, but they do have subplots like most shows: Burn Notice is one show I was obsessed with as a teen and I still watch the show for a chunk till I know when to stop. Halfway into the fifth season, it loses its magic and becomes that very melodrama that I hate, thus ending up throwing its potential away like a bad habit, only difference is that it wasn't a bad habit. I do a marathon of it up to half of the fifth season and then, I stop, using the cliffhanger to imagine the rest of the show in my head the way I want it in my head-canon. And then, there's the 2010 version of Human Target that's really awesome. Only the first season. Forget the second. The third one is the 2010 reboot of La Femme Nikita, simply called Nikita that, in my opinion, is a vast improvement over the movie by Luc Besson as well as the melodramatic show with Peta Wilson that ran from 1997 to 2001. That's about it.

I've a lot of shows I cling to. Most of the ITC Entertainment series from the 1960s are in my top ten. Danger Man (known as Secret Agent in the US starting with Season 2; actually a retooling of the show serving as a departure from the half-hour episode format), The Saint, The Persuaders! (seventies, yeah), Man in a Suitcase (shame it ran for just one season!), The Baron, and many more. And you know which series they all stylistically bear a resemblance to.

And then, there was the likes of Peter Gunn, Mannix, Mission: Impossible (I stop after the fifth season, again, especially when they turn from spies into undercover cops, basically doing the police's work for them), Kojak, Hawaii Five-O and others. I have to admit that I like both versions of Five-O, but the reboot, like most modern shows, loses its way after killing off Wo Fat. What they did wrong, however, was rebooting the show rather than making legacy sequels. Now, I dream of making a legacy sequel to Mannix myself and have a script ready that I'm trying to shop around. While it's set in the present day, it's as though it wouldn't feel like it as I approach this kind of stuff very conservatively. I'm a traditionalist, what can I say? Not against updates as long as they retain the spirit and standards of what they're building up on. Fiercely. Five-O's reboot felt like NCIS: Hawaii (funnily enough, they actually did make a show with that name once the reboot series was cancelled; both exist in the same fictional universe). And then, there's the new Magnum, P.I. which, while not very offensive, is nothing but a pale shadow of the original. I would've approached a "reboot" project very differently. I'll discuss that on a different thread one of these days.

Like you, sir, I also feel like I was born in the wrong decade. I would've loved to enjoy my 30s in the 1960s where I can read the best books out there and feel the spirit of the adventure within, my favorite author being Alistair MacLean, I would have loved to have met the man one day. Thanks to three film adaptations of his novels (that he himself penned), I was introduced to his work. Say, some of them could have used exposure by Mannix who did adapt a couple of existing source materials (Venetian Bird being one of them) to an episode of the show, having Mannix replace the protagonists of these lesser known novels. One I could think of is Caravan to Vaccares (which itself is a great movie, I mean... Charlotte Rampling! Whistle! Now, you know why I'm an ornithologist. ) and another being Fear Is the Key. One thing I wish Mannix did not abandon was Intertect. One way or another, I would've loved to see Joseph Campanella return to the show NOT as a new character but as Lew Wickersham, who was Mannix's best friend, really, more than Lt. Tobias and Lt. Art Maclolm. A spy agency-like detective agency that trains its detectives and teaches them field tactics while keeping them in shape is a very novel idea. Didn't like that Mannix was simply phased into a traditional private investigator, but I still love the show in every aspect. For the sake of some continuity (I like continuities provided they don't get in the way of a good adventure), I would've loved to see Wickersham pop up every now and then and hire an independent Mannix as an outsider. Lots of ideas to explore.

I blabbed a lot, didn't I?

Thanks for the warm welcome and I'm, once again, glad to be here.

That was quite a mouthful there. A Die Another Day reference for you. And now that I think about it of course the ornithologist line comes from the same scene in the film. And predators coming out at night to feast and all that... It's been a while since I've revisited that one. Speaking of Brosnan, hey I'm with you. As a matter of fact when they used to have the James Bond board on IMDB about 10 years back (where you could post discussions) my signature was "Connery, Moore, and Brosnan. Accept no substitutes!" So when I say that for me the classic Bond era that I absolutely love is the Cubby era from '62 to '89 it's not because I'm discounting Brosnan (which was very fashionable when Craig took over) but because it's the era that I love the most - 60s, 70s, and 80s. Cubby was still onboard still supervising things and you could really feel his presence in those films and his vow to always entertain his audience above all else and to put the money up there on the screen. Also it was the era of practical effects, before CGI killed the fun of action in cinema. It was a less politically correct time which I love (even Moneypenny gives Bond a feminist mouthful in GoldenEye, as does 'M') and I just prefer an era with less Rambo-style gunplay and explosions which really took over in the 90s. I like my Bond to dispatch the baddies in a clever way with a cool quip, instead of just mowing them down with a machine gun. But that aside I think Brosnan was the perfect Bond for the 90s - he had some of that rough edge that Connery had but also the debonair and witty style of Roger Moore. So he was the best of both worlds. Plus GoldenEye is actually one of my favorite Bond films and probably the last truly great Bond film! And Tomorrow Never Dies has probably risen in my rankings more than any other Bond film over the years - I hated it when I first saw it way back when in the early 2000s. It was just such a huge departure from the cool 60s and 70s Bonds of Sir Sean and Sir Roger that I was constantly dieting on. The Rambo gunplay and John Woo style action went overboard and actually gave me a headache. I did not feel well after watching that film. I thought it was as far removed from the world of Bond as it could get. Boy, was I wrong. I had no idea what lay in store in the years to come LOL. Over the years revisiting TND I began to appreciate it more and more and now I look at it as truly the last Bond film that followed the traditional formula - a crisis is brewing, Bond is summoned by M, Bond gets his assignment, picks up his gadgets from Q, and goes on his merry mission. Faces a megalomaniac villain (brilliantly overplayed by Jonathan Pryce) and stops WWIII. Just like the good old days. Plus an excellent David Arnold score to boot! Unfortunately the next 2 films (despite a strong showing from Brosnan) have never won me over. TWINE had a lot of potential and a superb boat chase on the River Thames (backed by another stupendous piece of music by Arnold) but unfortunately the rest of the film never lived up to that and kind of petered out. The submarine climax was very underwhelming. And then Die Another Day, well, too many problems with that one LOL. Though honestly the invisible Aston Martin (which seems to give everyone an aneurysm) for me is actually one of the highlights. So go figure.

Then came Craig. Oh boy! He was supposed to be the second coming. Everyone got on board with the Brosnan bashing. Everyone was in love with Craig. Casino Royale was actually the first Bond film I saw in the theater with a buddy of mine. He absolutely loved it. I walked out confused by what I had just seen. I felt like I saw a good and entertaining film but not a Bond film. It took another viewing or two on DVD to really accept it as a Bond film. I accepted that it was a Bond film but just a very different one from the norm, I guess similar to how On Her Majesty's Secret Service and Licence to Kill bucked the norm (even though the former was written by Fleming himself, as was Casino Royale). But then came Quantum - a lame Jason Bourne knock-off and completely forgettable. With Skyfall I had the same reaction as Casino - I walked out feeling like I saw something really cool and beautiful (the Roger Deakins cinematography was a highlight!) but again I missed the Bond feel of the classics. But at least we got a really colorful villain in Javier Bardem and his own private island which hearkened back to the good old days. But again we get all that heavy-handed stuff that all the Craig films are laden with. All the "drama" that shouldn't even exist in a Bond film. This gets even worse with the next 2 films. Spectre is just a mess from beginning to end - when they turned the iconic Fleming creation that was Blofeld into Bond's half brother I thought it was the single stupidest idea in the history of EON. But then it's like they said to themselves "but wait, we can top even that!" and they go ahead and nuke Bond in the next one. So yeah, I've no interest in Bond at all at this point. Clearly the producers have no respect for the series or the fans and at this point their motto is that anything goes. Bond can die, resurrect, be black, female, gay, etc. etc. Bottom line - we have our classics that we love and everything else to me is irrelevant. For all intents and purposes the Bond series is over. Whew, okay, enough about Bond. Is there a James Bond thread on this site? Might need to create one if one doesn't exist.

Regarding television and plot coming first - agreed 100%. This is why I can watch virtually any old show with some level of interest. Because they all focused on plot first and foremost. And for me that's always the most important thing. What's the case to be solved today? I could care less about the personal lives of the characters. That's not why I'm tuning in. Occasionally you would get an episode that would focus more on the character where it would be something that would touch him/her personally. So when that came you felt it was earned. It would be a "special" episode. But this wasn't the case week to week. So when it happened it felt real, not forced. Mission: Impossible is one of the best shows of all time and that show is the ultimate example where we virtually knew NOTHING about the characters or their personal lives. Can you imagine what a disaster that show would have been if they started delving into their personal lives?? I shudder to think. Hey, speaking of M:I isn't it the first 3 seasons that are the classic spy/Cold War seasons? I've read that starting with season 4 (but more so with season 5) is when the IMF began focusing more on battling the Syndicate or home-grown organized crime. But you say it started with season 6. I only saw the first 3 seasons (rented the discs from Netflix several years back) and only recently purchased the newly released Blu-Ray of the entire series but haven't had the chance to delve into it yet. Gonna be a real treat. Speaking of Mannix and Intertect I'm also in agreement with you that it was a cool concept. I'm actually shocked when people say to skip season 1 because of it. They say it's not Mannix. Really?? Here he works for a detective agency and here he has his own office. That's the only difference. Same Joe Mannix that we all love. I don't get the hate for season 1 at all.

You mentioned Burn Notice. Never seen it but interestingly enough I think there's a Burn Notice thread here. There are some fans here so you're in good company. I guess it's got some similarities to Magnum. Regarding the Five-0 reboot yeah it's basically CSI: Hawaii or SWAT: Hawaii which is what they should have called it. There is ZERO in common with the old show, aside from the title, the opening theme song, the character names, and Hawaii itself. If you're not gonna honor the original why bother calling it a reboot? It's not. It's a totally different show shot in Hawaii. That's why you might as well just call it SWAT: Hawaii or Special Team: Hawaii or whatever. Come on, be original! Stop plagiarizing by using a recognized name and then just doing your own thing.

Alistair MacLean!! Boy, was there ever a better writer with a zest for adventure!? I haven't read anything by him but I've seen plenty of movies based on his work and they're the kinds of adventure films that we'll sadly never see again. Same as with the Bond films. WHERE EAGLES DARE is one of my all-time favorite films (definitely the best WWII adventure film) and every winter when the first snow falls I immediately pull out my DVD copy and enjoy the ride! I tell ya - it never gets old. There's just something about that first snowfall at night or as it begins to dusk that makes me snuggle into my easy chair and turn on this riveting adventure. I think the snow in that film is a major character in its own right! I've never seen a more beautiful snowy film. Yep, I love me some snow. And the Alpine scenery, the cable car, the scale up the side of the castle. That Ron Goodwin score!!!!!! You know, this film might even top all the Bonds of the 60s for me. There, I said it. Also by MacLean, big fan of THE GUNS OF NAVARONE and even FORCE 10 FROM NAVARONE. Also BREAKHEART PASS with Charlie Bronson - it's got trains and snow!

Ok, I think that's enough out of me for now. But once I start it's hard to stop. Fun topics of discussion here.

Touché. It's become one of my mottos to er... "Feast... Like there's no tomorrow." I honestly love Die Another Day in spite of its logical flaws, and like you, the invisible car doesn't bother me in the slightest because it's based on actual technology the US military was working on, at the time, which was also the topic of plot device used in the film adaptation of I-Spy. Now, this is one of the rarest instances where an adaptation uses the source material loosely that I tolerate, because the movie with Eddie Murphy and Owen Wilson is fun. The show was more of a straightforward spy thriller like Mission: Impossible, but this one was more of a comedy. I wish it did get a sequel. Another instance is The Man from UNCLE, but this is one of the instances where I think the movie is better than the show. However... I did have a lot of issues with the background of how the agency was formed which was very immaturely written. Being a Fleming aficionado as well as everything spy, I shudder to think most writers do not bother to do their research and actually spend time in developing their fictional organizations. As for the Brosnan era, what I love about it is that it very much remains true to the concept and structure of its predecessors. I'd only accuse Die Another Day of the constant use of Woo-isms (John Woo) but I can overlook it. I wouldn't say Bond went mindlessly Rambo everywhere but times were changing, you see? After all, "chocolate sailors" were no longer a thing, field tactics have changed, and Bond being an intelligence commando now was very fitting. After all, the newer the times, the newer the threats. He's the kind of man who'd lead a team of commandos on raids, and given his background, he must have been Special Boat Service and having earned his Commander rank rather than being given it without having to work for it, hence the "chocolate sailor" concept wouldn't have worked post-80s. As for Dench's "M", her grilling Bond for his mindset was sort of funny, because while she may have a jab at him, Bond remains unchanged. Come Tomorrow Never Dies, she was the one to insist Bond to resort to his usual tactics. "Pump her for information". Hardly the word of a feminist. Haha! They eventually learn. TND is my favorite Bond film alongside Dr. No and Thunderball. Regarding TWINE, let's just say, it was the prototype Barbara Broccoli movie and Pierce did object to Bond being a second banana when initially it was going to focus on Elektra King and be female-led while Bond takes a backseat (they achieved that with that 2021 blasphemy that I refer to as the atrocity known as 9/28 - the day it was released). So, Bruce Feirstein came on board at Pierce's insistence to fix the script by Neal Poncy and Robert Waste to put Bond back in the front and center of the story. For what it's worth, though, I still love the film as it enriched Bond's screen dimension a little more, exploring his detective side a little, making certain scenes feel like it's noir. Sorry, I keep jumping back and forth on the discussion. A little bit of inorganization on my part.

Regarding the personal lives of the characters, I'm one million percent in agreement with you. They don't need to be explored unless they're "special" episodes and they shouldn't happen for more than one episode per season... If that! Funnily enough, Bruce Geller hated and objected to exploring characters on Mission: Impossible, and yet they started going for it in the later seasons. One "personal matter" season that I did love though was the one where Cinnamon Carter was captured and Jim had to go out of his way to rescue her, going rogue and disobeying orders. Hardly the kind of man who'd murder his own team (the stupidity of the 1996 film!). I can assure you it was definitely Season 5 where they started doing cops' work for them. I mean, it still did have globetrotting espionage all over, but that was when they started losing their touch. Season 4 and 5 had Martin Landau replaced, but I can tell you... Leonard Nimoy was an amazing substitute and was even more of a "badass" version of Rollin Hand, called The Great Paris. Them fighting the Syndicate on a constant note felt very tiresome. Glad the movies actually gave "The Syndicate" a real purpose but making them a rogue black ops unit... An anti-IMF. By the way, I love the movies too, but they don't get M:I-like until Ghost Protocol, which is still the greatest installment in the series. Felt very much like a Brosnan era Bond film, except it was tailored for M:I. Christopher McQuarrie admitted publicly that he loves the era and his movies do pay several homages to the Brosnan films. Dead Reckoning Part One alone reuses ideas and concepts that were discarded with the original draft for Tomorrow Never Dies. My least favorite movies in the film series are those where Ethan Hunt's personal life comes into play. Most people love the third film (it's the worst in my book!) and worship Fallout (I find it overtly overrated), I do not. I have hopes that the atrocity they pulled in the first film is fixed, because Jim Phelps is no traitor, let alone killing his own team members for a reason any child would scoff at: "President running the country without your permission". Hah! Whoever wrote that movie did not watch the series nor knew Phelps. I have several ways of fixing it and posted my concept someplace else even, which most people liked. Bottom line: Jon Voight did NOT play Jim Phelps. More like Jim Fakelps.

Back to Mannix: Never knew people hated Season 1. How is it not considered Mannix? It very much is Mannix and the only difference is that he doesn't have Peggy around and that he's working for an agency rather than being independent. It perfectly serves as an "origins" arc if anything else, considering Mannix always wanted to be fired because he "hates the system" and "doesn't fit in", so Mannix finally got his wish and left. Heck, Peggy even goes to Intertect for help in the first episode of Season 2, to which Mannix reacts badly. You're 100% correct on it being Mannix precisely as is!

I think you will love Burn Notice. At least the first four and half seasons, since your views regarding these subjects are very much like mine. Most even referred to it as an old school show trapped in the body of a new one. It's Man in a Suitcase, Mission: Impossible and The A-Team rolled into one. Jeffrey Donovan is an amazing actor and the role of Michael Westen really allowed him to take on different guises and disguises to demonstrate his acting skills. Honestly, if anybody had to make an Archer movie, there's no one more suited to the role than Donovan!

Boy oh boy! It's like I'm talking to my alter ego! Where Eagles Dare is the greatest WWII film AND spy film in my book, period! More than all the Bonds combined! The novel is just as thrilling, if you haven't read it. In fact, I love this movie so much that I gave the codename "Broadsword" to my very own literary character. Ron Goodwin's score for the film is nothing short of amazing and I have both releases of the soundtrack (the score and the source music used in the film) which I constantly listen to when I write my own novels. Like you, I never get tired of this film. One I do recommend to you is When Eight Bells Toll. It's more like a For Your Eyes Only-like spy film, but Anthony Hopkins just carries the whole thing so brilliantly. Have to admit, though, I felt very underwhelmed with the Navarones. The novels were infinitely better and they should've stuck to them. Then again, outside of Caravan to Vaccares and The Satan Bug, the only adaptations of MacLean's works that really work are those whose scripts MacLean himself penned. I also really wanted to like Ice Station Zebra but it suffers from the same problem as the first Navarone - it prolongs the plot and provides unnecessary additions to the plot that don't help the events advance forward. Shame, really, because as a huge fan of Patrick McGoohan (Danger Man and The Prisoner), I was let down by it. Where Eagles Dare perfectly balances all of this. It's just brilliant to a tee! I heard Christopher McQuarrie is attached to a remake project... Well, just another adaptation, really, and I trust he can perfectly provide a better take on the subject than John Sturges. Regarding MacLean... and Mannix... The Last Frontier (adapted to film starring Richard Widmark) could have very much worked as a Mannix episode. A lot of them would have been. As for MacLean, snow, and shootouts, since you mentioned Breakheart Pass, I heavily recommend seeing Avalanche Express starring Lee Marvin, Robert Shaw (I'm a die-hard fan of that guy, and not because of FRWL nor Jaws), and our very own Mike Connors! It's very much like an Alistair MacLean-style adventure, even though it's based on someone else's novel.

We've strafed too far away from the topic of discussion, haven't we? Always a treat to talk to likeminded folks, though.

As I said, since this is a Mannix thread and -I'll be honest- it's why I came here. I truly hope the legacy sequel script I'm working on does prevail and does not disappoint Mannix fans. Obviously, since it is a legacy sequel, it won't be centered on the Joe Mannix that we know but his grandson, who's very much like his grandfather but also his own man. All things considered, Mannix was too kind a fella despite being knocked out 55 times throughout the series, my take on the new character would be smugger and a smart aleck with a rich intelligence background, very similar to Mike Connors' unnamed Tightrope! character (yeah, they say he's named Nick Stone, but I don't buy it). References to a lot of other Mike Connors films will also be made throughout. I'm listening to Lalo Schifrin, Henry Mancini, John Barry, Johnny Mandel, Ron Goodwin, John Cacavas, Don Ellis, Elmer Bernstein, David Shire (I'm crazy about the theme from The Taking of Pelham 123!) and many others as I'm penning them. Let's just say that I intend this movie, which would serve as a pilot episode, to be shot and edited exactly like a 1960s/1970s film and using music that are exactly like soundtracks from that period. It's set in the present time, smartphones and all, but this Mannix would be sort of like a walking anachronism with the way he wears his suits (very 60s-like, early Sean Connery style) and speaks with a mid-Atlantic accent, like Connors in his earlier works from the 50s. He listens to Jazz, Bossa Nova, Blues, and all else he either takes it or leaves it, like his ol' grandad. For the sake of continuity, I also intend to find a way to bring back Toby Fair (Peggy's son) who'd be played by Mark Stewart, thus reprising his role. Now, I won't go into the details, but I'm just giving the key notes to what I intend to do, so, God willing, if it ever gets picked up, Mannix fans have nothing to worry about.

P.S. If you want a cross between Mannix and Bond, well... I highly recommend watching Kiss the Girls and Make Them Die where Connors essentially plays a Bond-like secret agent, albeit American. The movie is more or less a spoof, but it's very entertaining. The plot is similar to the film version of Moonraker in a way. This is a funny one because not a long ago, I found a newspaper article archived by the CIA (yes, the CIA archived this page!) where Connors was talking about this film, having shot the Mannix pilot episode a year prior to the release of this EuroSpy spoof, saying something like it wasn't getting picked up and didn't seem enthusiastic about it. The newspaper speculated if Connors was going to be forever associated with this secret agent character like Sean Connery was with Bond and Michael Caine was with Harry Palmer, and that more sequels could be coming. What could have been, huh?

Hi ornithologist, sorry, got side tracked on some things.

Yes I agree with you that by TND Judi Dench's M is the M of old - pimping Bond out to accomplish his mission. They did want to have their cake and eat it too. Trying to stay current but then also be faithful to who 007 really is. I have no complaints with that whatsoever. I love both GE and TND (GE more of course) so none of these things bother me. It's just that I think the series in the 90s (probably because of Babs and Michael taking over from Cubby - more Babs than Michael I think) tried to be more current with the changing times (which included being more PC, plus Bond not smoking though he then lights up in DAD) whereas in the previous 3 decades under Cubby Bond seemed to be a more unchanging character in a changing world, which is something that to me was always a major plus. Of course to criticize a changing Bond in the 90s is so unfair when compared to what they've done with him during the Craig tenure. So that's why ultimately the 90s was still a safe place for the 007 series compared to where we are now. Very sad what's happened.

It's funny that you mentioned your love for the MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE film series. I'm with you 100%! That series is now doing successfully what the Bond series used to do - thrill and entertain! Bond is all about moping and wallowing in self pity these days with too much "personal" angst and baggage. The M:I series has some of that but the spectacle and the creativity of the set pieces and the plot comes first which is what draws me to these films. 100% agreed that GHOST PROTOCOL was the turning point for the series where it basically shot to the next level. It finally founds its identity. I remember once watching the first one on VHS years ago (this was long before I ever saw a single episode of the TV series) and being confused and underwhelmed by it. Then I saw the second one on VHS and was surprisingly entertained by it - it was basically a high-octane John Woo actioner with a pretty straightforward plot that was easy to follow so it pleased me just fine. But let's be honest - it hardly feels like M:I. Then I saw the third one on DVD and again was underwhelmed by it. Like you I thought the personal soap opera baggage was too much and quite frankly the film lacked a big budget feel to it. It felt like an extended episode of ALIAS (J.J. Abrams was behind both). But now the 4th one I actually went to the theater to see with a buddy of mine and I honestly didn't expect much (based on the previous 3 films) and was mainly looking forward to the Burj Khalifa scene which was so heavily promoted. But man, I was totally blown away!! Every part of that film just clicked for me, every set piece was amazing. Maybe things slowed a bit when they got to India but then there was the cool car park scene (very creative!!) to cap it all off. Even the score by Michael Giacchino had a cool 60s retro feel to it, including the first usage of Schifrin's famous "The Plot" theme from the TV series. Man, that brought a smile to my face. Anyhoo, I thought the film was a fluke (they got lucky) and the next one couldn't possibly be this good. Imagine my surprise when I walked out of the theater in 2015 after seeing ROGUE NATION and being blown away yet again. Honestly, I think it even surpasses GHOST PROTOCOL. Just a perfect film, not one scene wasted, not one misstep. Plus the addition of Rebecca Ferguson was a major asset! Imagine how disappointing it was later in 2015 to watch SPECTRE on the big screen (another spy film about a secret shadowy organization controlling things - Syndicate vs Spectre). Boy, what a difference between the 2 films. Big fan of Sean Harris too as the creepy Solomon Lane. Probably my favorite M:I villain (along with Henry Cavill). Which takes us to 2018's FALLOUT. This is where we may disagree because to me it's the perfect M:I film and quite possibly the greatest action film of all time. I literally had to hold on to my seat because the action was so visceral and so intense!! That helicopter vs helicopter battle at the end amongst those cliffs in Norway is probably the most insane thing I ever saw, followed by the Hunt vs. Henry Cavill battle to the death. Amazing film!! I can't believe that there's someone out there (McQuarrie and Cruise) who seem to have some secret formula on how to create the perfect film. Again and again and again. This type of thing isn't supposed to happen with sequels. But somehow they managed to find a way to top each one. The last one DEAD RECKONING was another fantastic film but I've only seen it once unlike the others so I still need to see it again to figure out where it ranks. It's definitely near the top. Can't wait for PART 2.

Speaking of the M:I TV series I think the episode you mentioned where Cinnamon is captured (and tortured too, or at least sleep deprived) is season 3's "The Exchange", correct? John Vernon is the main baddie in that one, as he always is. Our guys are trying to do an exchange to get Cinnamon by giving up some foreign agent. It was a very good episode. Back to the first M:I film - I don't think any of the TV cast liked that film. I think Martin Landau had some negative things to say (not sure about Peter Graves) and as for Greg Morris he walked out of the film after about 20 minutes (long before the Phelps as bad guy reveal) and basically called it a piece of sh!t. I'm sure the killing of the whole IMF team at the start rubbed a lot of folks the wrong way. Folks walked in to expect something resembling the old series and got something completely different - a major subversion of the series. It's like if you walked in to see a traditional Bond film (back in the day, because anything goes these days) and expected Bond to get his mission from M and go on his merry way to complete his assignment.... instead Bond shows up at the Mi6 headquarters and finds M, Moneypenny, Q, Minister of Defence, Bill Tanner, and other staff all assassinated and he himself framed for the murders. Now he has to spend the rest of the film on the run and try to figure out whodunit. Oh, and at the end M turns out to be alive and turns out he/she killed everyone. Hey, I'm surprised Babsie hasn't tried this yet with the current Bond films. Maybe we'll get it in the next one... Anything goes, right?

As for the film version of THE MAN FROM U.N.C.L.E. it actually just popped up recently on my Netflix account - it's on my to-watch list. I heard good things about it from a buddy of mine who's a big Bond fan. Wasn't too big on the old TV series. A bit too out-there for me, and this is coming from someone who enjoys the outrageous Bond films like YOLT and MOONRAKER. But I think the TV series often went too far into the fantastical realm. It's okay from time to time. But on a weekly basis it gets to be too much. And too cheesy. Fun for the kids though. It becomes too much like THE WILD WILD WEST (the TV show, never saw the film) where it's basically science fiction/fantasy. I prefer more grounded TV spy fare like M:I or even I SPY. Though some of the earlier B&W episodes of U.N.C.L.E. are pretty good. "The Iowa-Scuba Affair" comes to mind. Mostly for the casting of Slim Pickens as a rural good ol' boy type who's apparently the head of a Commie spy ring bent on overthrowing the leadership of some Banana Republic. Now that's a hoot!

Regarding Alistair MacLean, I completely forgot about ICE STATION ZEBRA. You probably know that Howard Hughes was absolutely obsessed with this film and played it constantly almost on a loop. Weird chap, eh? I did finally see the film some years back and enjoyed it quite a bit. Submarine films can be hit or miss but this one worked just fine for me. Good Cold War story with good performances all around, including Mr. McGoohan! Well, except for maybe Ernie Borgnine who's about as Russkie as Jackie Chan is Italian. So yeah I enjoyed the film and would count it as one of my favorites from 1968 (just below ONCE UPON A TIME IN THE WEST and BULLITT) but no way would I ever watch it on a constant loop and it's nowhere near the brilliance of WHERE EAGLES DARE. Speaking of which, I use the line "Broadsword calling Danny Boy. Come in, Danny Boy" almost on a regular basis. I'll have to give AVALANCE EXPRESS a look-see. I've come across that title in the past. I know Mike Connors is in it and I'm a huge fan of both Lee Marvin and Bobby Shaw.

Your legacy script for MANNIX sounds fascinating. I'll be first in line at the cinema when the film comes out!

Welcome back, my friend! No worries, I understand. I got a little tied up myself!

You've hit the nail right on the head regarding the franchise that was great once, the so-called "trendsetter" of them all. Nothing to add, really, except that... Whatever you said regarding "anything goes", that already has happened after the atrocity of 2021. Ian Fleming Publications commissioned a book that did all of that: Bond is gone, preachy stuff about "minority" 00s, M dead, Tanner commits suicide (they planned that originally for the 2015 idiocy ), and the topping on the cake... Moneypenny - a mere secretary in the 1960s - becomes M.

The trouble with the first three M:I films is that they focus on one character as opposed to a team of agents: Ethan Hunt takes the lead while the rest of the team takes a backseat. It doesn't work like that. I was watching an interview of Tom Cruise the other day from the 90s where he basically said he got the series because he liked the theme and not much else, which is exactly what I perceived he would've done, turning the M:I theme into The Ethan Hunt Theme. Reminds me of the Spy Hunter video game series where they blatantly stole Peter Gunn's Theme and claimed it as the theme of their own series. Any person without an OCD would develop one because of it. Imagine...

"That's a cool theme. What's it called?"
"The Peter Gunn Theme."
"Nice, so the hero is called Peter Gunn?"
"No. He's called Alec Sects. Later, Alex Decker."
"Erm... Then, who's Peter Gunn?"
"Some guy from some TV show."
"Is that in the game?"
"No."
"Then, why is the series using a theme from a TV show named after the hero of that series?"
"Dunno, sounded cool. We couldn't have come up with our own theme, so we snatched another one."

Head-scratching!

But, yeah... The M:I film series found its identity by Ghost Protocol because they actually followed the formula of the show where Hunt wasn't the main focus but the team was. The whole team was given equal screen time and importance. Of course, Ethan Hunt still leads the team like Jim Phelps had done it for six seasons and Dan Briggs a season before him. This actually would lead us to an interesting conversation since I observe all of this rather closely. Since Rogue Nation, they tightened the connections to the TV show even more by producing prop documents for onscreen use where Ethan Hunt, Luther Stickell and Benji Dunn were all recruited by a certain Lt. Commander Briggs, which indicates that this is Dan Briggs and he was still in the IMF by the 90s, while the first film infers that Fakelps introduced Ethan Hunt to a lot of the good stuff. Funnily enough, none of the stuff Fakelps claimed to have been present in his background were present with the Jim Phelps of the show, meaning the writers had no bloody idea what they were yapping about. And you're correct, Landau and Morris both dismissed the first film as an embarrassment, with Landau basically saying "Our team was going to commit suicide one by one", laughing at whoever came up with that story. But, Greg Morris... Now, he was disgusted by the way they mistreated Phelps! Now, that's a friend! He walked out of the cinema and correctly called it a "piece of s**t". Peter Graves turned down the offer to reprise his role given the context, but publicly remained diplomatic about it. I heard he was greatly upset, though. The character meant a lot to him. As you've seen in "The Exchange", he essentially went rogue like Ethan always does, and moved heaven and earth to bring back Cinnamon without compromising the mission. Is this the kind of man who'd kill his own team for his own benefit? I hope they're reading this! However... Apparently, the character of Willy Armitage was present in the earlier versions of M:I-2 (post-Oliver Stone; that was a complete different M:I-2), but they let go of that, quite possibly to keep the series fresh and not risk a reboot. Continuity and all. But, like you said, while it's an entertaining action film (and a damn good one at that), it's nothing like an M:I film. You just hear a hard rock version of the M:I theme cued when Ethan Hunt does "something cool" the way The James Bond Theme would've played if Bond did something cool during an action scene, hence my argument above regarding the misuse of the theme. The third film retained the M:I feel after Woo-ifying the previous one, but to this day, it remains the weakest one in my book. The one I ignore every time I do a marathon. One pointless film that goes nowhere, copying The Bourne Supremacy like most action films between 2004 and 2011 (woeful times!). Cruise, apparently, wanted Martin Landau to cameo as Rollin Hand in the third film but Landau refused. Then, by 2009, when Jim Abrams was still attached to direct the fourth film (thankfully, he did not), he wanted Peter Graves to come back. They were probably attempting to fix the issue from the first film. They even entertained the idea of a prequel for the third film. However, when Graves passed away, those plans fell apart. But, IMO, they can still fix this. Let me tell you how...

Christmas Eve, 1991 - the night before the Soviet Union dissolved:

A team sent by the IMF and led by veteran spymaster Jim Phelps succeeds in orchestrating the end of the Cold War by pulling a mission heavily deemed impossible for years. The team, with the help of spies on both sides of the Bloc, contribute to the cause and making it to the clear. Despite the dissolution of everything embodied within the Soviet Union, the KGB recognized Jim and thus sent one of their most formidable assassins to kill him and dispose of him. A rogue faction inside the Kremlin vows revenge on those organized this operation and they carefully place that very assassin inside what they identified years ago as IMF due to traitorous moles inside the Pentagon or the US Intelligence community (could be CIA, NSA, National Intelligence, any of them), thus revealing the face of the man Ethan Hunt knew as "Jim Phelps" (Jon Voight) - The man who never was.

Just imagine the whole thing ending with the team heading out in a truck per the ending of every episode, the Soviet Union is about to fall and people are excited that the Cold War is ending. "Have Yourself A Very Little Christmas" is playing during the scene, cut to Jim walking under the snow in Moscow as the team scatters to head for their specific exit routes, happy, and as the song approaches its ending, an assassin shows up with a silenced CZ 82 and shoots Jim abruptly once he turns to a backalley and drops dead (reminiscent of Sidney Reilly's death), then the assassin steps out as the alley light reveals his face, it's the character played by Jon Voight. As he pulls Jim's corpse away, the blood on the snowy floor is painted away, the song ends and the screen fades to black.

The IMF got downsized and rebranded as a wing of the CIA (like Special Activities Division), its budget slashed, because those in power deemed the agency unnecessary given the Cold War was over now and the tension between the East and the West got reduced - but that was all superficial. Most of the IMF personnel were sacked, including agents from an era of relics and thus new faces were needed. A man identifying himself as "Jim Phelps" one day reports to duty after months of going MIA and he had all the answers to regain his clearance, thus re-establishing his identity with the agency. After all, there was no one to dispute his claims. Inside men replaced the required information working for the enemy the way IMF used to do back in the old days, so archived information was unreliable to identify the impostor.

Then-director of the CIA, Eugene Kittridge got wind of a traffic of smuggled information going out from Langley to enemy nations and independent enterprises in the same business and decided to play along, but it cost him dearly, losing multiple agents and important personnel in the long run, so clearing the name of Jim Phelps after the incident surrounding the NOC list in '96 was irrelevant to him, thus sweeping this under the rug to preserve his own career. Kittridge was always a career opportunist - The truth never mattered to him.

So, how do we exonerate a man who's dead and his corpse is nowhere to be found, either? Somebody knows the truth and since we're dealing with awakening the demons of the past, the past itself will take care of the future and the truth will come out to serve the ongoing mission in the depths of the Bering ice cap."

So, why would Ethan Hunt care about a man he never knew? Because the man he knew was the man that he is. A man of honor who would put others before himself and, in Ethan's own words, the lives of others will matter more than his own. This was the man that Jim Phelps - the real Jim Phelps - was, and this is the man Ethan Hunt himself is. Both would've torn the universe in half to save innocent lives as well as members of their respective teams. Many times, Jim disobeyed orders (in other words, "went rogue") to save a colleague and they did the same for him. Ethan understands that all too well, so he'd do anything to exonerate a man whose name has been shamelessly desecrated in spite of his loyalty, patriotism and contribution to the preservation of all that is good and pure.

"For Jim," Ethan Hunt will say.

Years later, after Ethan completes the Sevastopol mission, he stops by the residence of the Phelps family, leaves a medal of honor Jim Phelps received posthumously on the porch, breaks out a slight smile - somewhat saddened, somewhat relieved - and walks away. His phone rings as in Ghost Protocol and he starts getting briefed about a new mission that's left incomplete to the audiences, the credits roll in. New day, new threat. "Theme from Mission: Impossible" explodes.

Courtesy of Ornithologist from a Discord server, 08/03/2023

This is how I would have done it. Quite possibly even involving Stefan Miklos, who, in my opinion, is the best antagonist of the TV show (the '88 revival included), who'd order the killing of Jim Phelps. The real Jim Phelps. And as he was embarrassed by the IMF years prior and now losing the Cold War, why not embarrass the IMF in return by having his own "Jim Phelps" inside the IMF?

Anyway...

Regarding Fallout, unfortunately we'll have to disagree there. I highly regard it as a great action film, and, if the movies in between the first and this wouldn't exist, this would indeed be a great sequel to that film. But, as an M:I film, it's a very big miss for me because it essentially undoes everything Rogue Nation worked for, undermining that film like it never mattered. Sean Harris was alright, I suppose, but for an anti-Ethan Hunt, I would've gotten someone else for that role, Christian Bale to be precise, as an inside joke. You know the connection. Solomon Lane should have been frightening, depicting an Ethan Hunt who's just evil. As for Cavill as August Walker, I thought he was an overglorified henchman. Not a bad character and even more so not a bad actor. I love Cavill, he's a great chap and I'd cast him in a lot of Bond-like roles. Even Thomas Crown. He's the second coming of Pierce Brosnan, IMO. But, Walker is someone I wouldn't see as a leading villain type but a henchman. Fallout was just M:I-3 done better. A lot better. Great action film, but not a faithful M:I film. They made the mistake of Ethan Hunt taking the sole focus again and involved his personal life, too. Nightmares, frights and anxieties that are unearned. A case of "show, don't tell". It didn't "show". Long story. We'll have to discuss that some other time. But, I'd also have to affirm that Rebecca Ferguson was a beautiful addition to the team. Cruise has an idea for things like these and he definitely paid the homages to the stuff he associated with Becky. She looked like Ingrid Bergman, and he called her Ilsa Faust (named after Ilsa Lund), set the movie in Casablanca, and made her rather mischievous in a lovable way like Ilsa Lund was in Casablanca. And "Faust", well... Because she essentially made a deal with the devil (Faustus and Mephistopheles), the latter allegorically being both Lane and Atlee (wasn't elaborated whether he was an MI6 officer or "C" himself).

As for Dead Reckoning Part One, I'll have to start a whole new thread for it. Lots to discuss. It's one genius film building up to how ingenious Part Two is going to be. I hope they deliver, because like you said... McQ and Cruise found a formula that worked for that... other franchise. Gee, why would that work? (The Higgins emoji. I love it. )

Re: The Man from UNCLE, you're right about everything you said about the show. The first season is outstanding, the second... is alright. But, the third one and onwards... Not for me. Too "out there", like you said. That's why I prefer the film over the show, and this comes from a purist and a traditionalist. Only bad thing about the film is the way the agency was handled. Afterthought. But, I can overlook it. As I said, though, do watch Kiss the Girls and Make Them Die. You'll like it.

And really, for my own take on Mannix (I decided not to call it just Mannix, but want to give each entry its own title, like the Bond films, and I already have a great title named after a Lalo Schifrin track), I'm glad you see the potential. I'm drawing a lot of inspiration from Harper (1966) and Marlowe (1969) to make the character a bit more robust characteristically and less kind like the Joe Mannix that we know is. Given today's world, it would make sense for a descendant to be slightly more smug and sarcastic when interacting with people who have no respect for anything. But, he's not cold-hearted. He'd pretty much be like his ol' grandad, helping those who really are in need, and definitely isn't uncaring.

Wow, buddy, that is one amazing script idea for your M:I Fakelps correction! Are you sure you're not an actual Hollywood writer that's lurking around here? No wait, strike that!! If you were an actual Hollywood writer your ideas wouldn't be nearly this good. Seriously, Hollywood unfortunately has a lack of good writers these days. Either that or they're forced to write "by committee" and sacrifice their good ideas to please what the studio execs want to see. I could never work in such a system. So yeah, what you have right there is not just a proper understanding of the M:I series (tone and feel) but a really awesome premise of how to fix that whole Fakelps debacle. If I were McQuarrie I'd definitely hire you, man! Great job!!

I think you hinted at some connection with Christian Bale and the M:I series? I'm afraid I'm not familiar with it. Unless you're referring to his one-time rant (meltdown?) at some film crew member several years back and then Cruise did the same thing during the Covid epidemic at one of his crew members? Maybe that's it lol.

Yeah I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on FALLOUT. I mean yes I do see that there is more emotional baggage with Hunt in that film (dreams, flashbacks, nightmares) but for me it doesn't really detract because the film is such a well-oiled machine and such an excellent piece of grand entertainment. I agree that Cavill who I guess is supposed to be the main baddie comes across more as a henchman but I'm fine with that because he's such a physical screen presence (from that amazing bathroom fight to the showdown in Norway helicopter vs helicopter) that I can't really find any faults with him. His twist and reveal is great as well so I've no complaints. Sean Harris as Lane is more of a creepy background villain this time around but again since Cavill is front and center I have no issues with that. I preferred Lane without the beard in ROGUE NATION where he didn't look like an Old Testament prophet lol. But hey maybe that's the point - the Prophets, right? He's one of them. Speaking of the bathroom fight - man, that was intense!! I thought I saw the greatest bathroom fight in movie history a long time ago when I saw James Cameron's TRUE LIES but after seeing this one the former pales in comparison. This is on a whole other level!

You mentioned Stefan Miklos... am I safe in assuming that "The Mind of Stefan Miklos" is your favorite episode of the original series? Apparently this is a fan favorite. I have to be honest that first time I saw it I was completely confused. I just wasn't prepared for an episode like this. Definitely a deviation from the norm. Sure, you typically had to pay attention while watching previous episodes but it's not like you had to take notes and carefully follow every move and countermove on the screen. Most episodes were pretty easy to follow and definitely not taxing on your brain. But this one was definitely different. I remember scratching my head afterwards and thinking did Christopher Nolan's dad write this??? Seriously, that's how I felt after seeing Nolan's INCEPTION. Utter confusion! I don't care for Nolan by the way. He seems too preoccupied with trying to be smarter than the audience and to be confusing for the sake of confusion - as a way to generate more buzz for his films. Not my thing. Anyway, I digressed. So then I went back and rewatched "Stefan Miklos" immediately a second time and this time paid VERY close attention to every detail and then it made much more sense and was a much more satisfactory viewing experience. Like I said, I wasn't ready for something this labyrinthine in a M:I episode. Well done indeed. But maybe it should have come with a warning at the beginning to pay very very close attention.

[Ornithologist]

"Thanks for the warm welcome and I'm, once again, glad to be here."
--Ornithologist

Great post, Ornithologist. I hope you become a regular here at Magnum Mania.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rupert of Hentzau(Douglas Fairbanks): "I see you let the drawbridge down. I just killed a man for that."
Rudolph Rassendyll(Ronald Colman): "An unarmed man of course."
Rupert of Hentzau: "Of course!"

From 1937's immortal Prisoner of Zenda.
It was remade in a 1952 color version, an exact scene for scene twin of the original but Stewart Granger was no Ronald Colman and James Mason's acting suffers
in comparison to possibly the most charismatic acting job in history, that by Douglas Fairbanks jr. as bad guy Rupert of Hentzau.

Thank you very much, my good fellow. I'm a huge Magnum, P.I. as well, so I should feel right at home, here.

That was quite a mouthful there. A Die Another Day reference for you. And now that I think about it of course the ornithologist line comes from the same scene in the film. And predators coming out at night to feast and all that... It's been a while since I've revisited that one. Speaking of Brosnan, hey I'm with you. As a matter of fact when they used to have the James Bond board on IMDB about 10 years back (where you could post discussions) my signature was "Connery, Moore, and Brosnan. Accept no substitutes!" So when I say that for me the classic Bond era that I absolutely love is the Cubby era from '62 to '89 it's not because I'm discounting Brosnan (which was very fashionable when Craig took over) but because it's the era that I love the most - 60s, 70s, and 80s. Cubby was still onboard still supervising things and you could really feel his presence in those films and his vow to always entertain his audience above all else and to put the money up there on the screen. Also it was the era of practical effects, before CGI killed the fun of action in cinema. It was a less politically correct time which I love (even Moneypenny gives Bond a feminist mouthful in GoldenEye, as does 'M') and I just prefer an era with less Rambo-style gunplay and explosions which really took over in the 90s. I like my Bond to dispatch the baddies in a clever way with a cool quip, instead of just mowing them down with a machine gun. But that aside I think Brosnan was the perfect Bond for the 90s - he had some of that rough edge that Connery had but also the debonair and witty style of Roger Moore. So he was the best of both worlds. Plus GoldenEye is actually one of my favorite Bond films and probably the last truly great Bond film! And Tomorrow Never Dies has probably risen in my rankings more than any other Bond film over the years - I hated it when I first saw it way back when in the early 2000s. It was just such a huge departure from the cool 60s and 70s Bonds of Sir Sean and Sir Roger that I was constantly dieting on. The Rambo gunplay and John Woo style action went overboard and actually gave me a headache. I did not feel well after watching that film. I thought it was as far removed from the world of Bond as it could get. Boy, was I wrong. I had no idea what lay in store in the years to come LOL. Over the years revisiting TND I began to appreciate it more and more and now I look at it as truly the last Bond film that followed the traditional formula - a crisis is brewing, Bond is summoned by M, Bond gets his assignment, picks up his gadgets from Q, and goes on his merry mission. Faces a megalomaniac villain (brilliantly overplayed by Jonathan Pryce) and stops WWIII. Just like the good old days. Plus an excellent David Arnold score to boot! Unfortunately the next 2 films (despite a strong showing from Brosnan) have never won me over. TWINE had a lot of potential and a superb boat chase on the River Thames (backed by another stupendous piece of music by Arnold) but unfortunately the rest of the film never lived up to that and kind of petered out. The submarine climax was very underwhelming. And then Die Another Day, well, too many problems with that one LOL. Though honestly the invisible Aston Martin (which seems to give everyone an aneurysm) for me is actually one of the highlights. So go figure.

Then came Craig. Oh boy! He was supposed to be the second coming. Everyone got on board with the Brosnan bashing. Everyone was in love with Craig. Casino Royale was actually the first Bond film I saw in the theater with a buddy of mine. He absolutely loved it. I walked out confused by what I had just seen. I felt like I saw a good and entertaining film but not a Bond film. It took another viewing or two on DVD to really accept it as a Bond film. I accepted that it was a Bond film but just a very different one from the norm, I guess similar to how On Her Majesty's Secret Service and Licence to Kill bucked the norm (even though the former was written by Fleming himself, as was Casino Royale). But then came Quantum - a lame Jason Bourne knock-off and completely forgettable. With Skyfall I had the same reaction as Casino - I walked out feeling like I saw something really cool and beautiful (the Roger Deakins cinematography was a highlight!) but again I missed the Bond feel of the classics. But at least we got a really colorful villain in Javier Bardem and his own private island which hearkened back to the good old days. But again we get all that heavy-handed stuff that all the Craig films are laden with. All the "drama" that shouldn't even exist in a Bond film. This gets even worse with the next 2 films. Spectre is just a mess from beginning to end - when they turned the iconic Fleming creation that was Blofeld into Bond's half brother I thought it was the single stupidest idea in the history of EON. But then it's like they said to themselves "but wait, we can top even that!" and they go ahead and nuke Bond in the next one. So yeah, I've no interest in Bond at all at this point. Clearly the producers have no respect for the series or the fans and at this point their motto is that anything goes. Bond can die, resurrect, be black, female, gay, etc. etc. Bottom line - we have our classics that we love and everything else to me is irrelevant. For all intents and purposes the Bond series is over. Whew, okay, enough about Bond. Is there a James Bond thread on this site? Might need to create one if one doesn't exist.

Regarding television and plot coming first - agreed 100%. This is why I can watch virtually any old show with some level of interest. Because they all focused on plot first and foremost. And for me that's always the most important thing. What's the case to be solved today? I could care less about the personal lives of the characters. That's not why I'm tuning in. Occasionally you would get an episode that would focus more on the character where it would be something that would touch him/her personally. So when that came you felt it was earned. It would be a "special" episode. But this wasn't the case week to week. So when it happened it felt real, not forced. Mission: Impossible is one of the best shows of all time and that show is the ultimate example where we virtually knew NOTHING about the characters or their personal lives. Can you imagine what a disaster that show would have been if they started delving into their personal lives?? I shudder to think. Hey, speaking of M:I isn't it the first 3 seasons that are the classic spy/Cold War seasons? I've read that starting with season 4 (but more so with season 5) is when the IMF began focusing more on battling the Syndicate or home-grown organized crime. But you say it started with season 6. I only saw the first 3 seasons (rented the discs from Netflix several years back) and only recently purchased the newly released Blu-Ray of the entire series but haven't had the chance to delve into it yet. Gonna be a real treat. Speaking of Mannix and Intertect I'm also in agreement with you that it was a cool concept. I'm actually shocked when people say to skip season 1 because of it. They say it's not Mannix. Really?? Here he works for a detective agency and here he has his own office. That's the only difference. Same Joe Mannix that we all love. I don't get the hate for season 1 at all.

You mentioned Burn Notice. Never seen it but interestingly enough I think there's a Burn Notice thread here. There are some fans here so you're in good company. I guess it's got some similarities to Magnum. Regarding the Five-0 reboot yeah it's basically CSI: Hawaii or SWAT: Hawaii which is what they should have called it. There is ZERO in common with the old show, aside from the title, the opening theme song, the character names, and Hawaii itself. If you're not gonna honor the original why bother calling it a reboot? It's not. It's a totally different show shot in Hawaii. That's why you might as well just call it SWAT: Hawaii or Special Team: Hawaii or whatever. Come on, be original! Stop plagiarizing by using a recognized name and then just doing your own thing.

Alistair MacLean!! Boy, was there ever a better writer with a zest for adventure!? I haven't read anything by him but I've seen plenty of movies based on his work and they're the kinds of adventure films that we'll sadly never see again. Same as with the Bond films. WHERE EAGLES DARE is one of my all-time favorite films (definitely the best WWII adventure film) and every winter when the first snow falls I immediately pull out my DVD copy and enjoy the ride! I tell ya - it never gets old. There's just something about that first snowfall at night or as it begins to dusk that makes me snuggle into my easy chair and turn on this riveting adventure. I think the snow in that film is a major character in its own right! I've never seen a more beautiful snowy film. Yep, I love me some snow. And the Alpine scenery, the cable car, the scale up the side of the castle. That Ron Goodwin score!!!!!! You know, this film might even top all the Bonds of the 60s for me. There, I said it. Also by MacLean, big fan of THE GUNS OF NAVARONE and even FORCE 10 FROM NAVARONE. Also BREAKHEART PASS with Charlie Bronson - it's got trains and snow!

Ok, I think that's enough out of me for now. But once I start it's hard to stop. Fun topics of discussion here.

Touché. It's become one of my mottos to er... "Feast... Like there's no tomorrow." I honestly love Die Another Day in spite of its logical flaws, and like you, the invisible car doesn't bother me in the slightest because it's based on actual technology the US military was working on, at the time, which was also the topic of plot device used in the film adaptation of I-Spy. Now, this is one of the rarest instances where an adaptation uses the source material loosely that I tolerate, because the movie with Eddie Murphy and Owen Wilson is fun. The show was more of a straightforward spy thriller like Mission: Impossible, but this one was more of a comedy. I wish it did get a sequel. Another instance is The Man from UNCLE, but this is one of the instances where I think the movie is better than the show. However... I did have a lot of issues with the background of how the agency was formed which was very immaturely written. Being a Fleming aficionado as well as everything spy, I shudder to think most writers do not bother to do their research and actually spend time in developing their fictional organizations. As for the Brosnan era, what I love about it is that it very much remains true to the concept and structure of its predecessors. I'd only accuse Die Another Day of the constant use of Woo-isms (John Woo) but I can overlook it. I wouldn't say Bond went mindlessly Rambo everywhere but times were changing, you see? After all, "chocolate sailors" were no longer a thing, field tactics have changed, and Bond being an intelligence commando now was very fitting. After all, the newer the times, the newer the threats. He's the kind of man who'd lead a team of commandos on raids, and given his background, he must have been Special Boat Service and having earned his Commander rank rather than being given it without having to work for it, hence the "chocolate sailor" concept wouldn't have worked post-80s. As for Dench's "M", her grilling Bond for his mindset was sort of funny, because while she may have a jab at him, Bond remains unchanged. Come Tomorrow Never Dies, she was the one to insist Bond to resort to his usual tactics. "Pump her for information". Hardly the word of a feminist. Haha! They eventually learn. TND is my favorite Bond film alongside Dr. No and Thunderball. Regarding TWINE, let's just say, it was the prototype Barbara Broccoli movie and Pierce did object to Bond being a second banana when initially it was going to focus on Elektra King and be female-led while Bond takes a backseat (they achieved that with that 2021 blasphemy that I refer to as the atrocity known as 9/28 - the day it was released). So, Bruce Feirstein came on board at Pierce's insistence to fix the script by Neal Poncy and Robert Waste to put Bond back in the front and center of the story. For what it's worth, though, I still love the film as it enriched Bond's screen dimension a little more, exploring his detective side a little, making certain scenes feel like it's noir. Sorry, I keep jumping back and forth on the discussion. A little bit of inorganization on my part.

Regarding the personal lives of the characters, I'm one million percent in agreement with you. They don't need to be explored unless they're "special" episodes and they shouldn't happen for more than one episode per season... If that! Funnily enough, Bruce Geller hated and objected to exploring characters on Mission: Impossible, and yet they started going for it in the later seasons. One "personal matter" season that I did love though was the one where Cinnamon Carter was captured and Jim had to go out of his way to rescue her, going rogue and disobeying orders. Hardly the kind of man who'd murder his own team (the stupidity of the 1996 film!). I can assure you it was definitely Season 5 where they started doing cops' work for them. I mean, it still did have globetrotting espionage all over, but that was when they started losing their touch. Season 4 and 5 had Martin Landau replaced, but I can tell you... Leonard Nimoy was an amazing substitute and was even more of a "badass" version of Rollin Hand, called The Great Paris. Them fighting the Syndicate on a constant note felt very tiresome. Glad the movies actually gave "The Syndicate" a real purpose but making them a rogue black ops unit... An anti-IMF. By the way, I love the movies too, but they don't get M:I-like until Ghost Protocol, which is still the greatest installment in the series. Felt very much like a Brosnan era Bond film, except it was tailored for M:I. Christopher McQuarrie admitted publicly that he loves the era and his movies do pay several homages to the Brosnan films. Dead Reckoning Part One alone reuses ideas and concepts that were discarded with the original draft for Tomorrow Never Dies. My least favorite movies in the film series are those where Ethan Hunt's personal life comes into play. Most people love the third film (it's the worst in my book!) and worship Fallout (I find it overtly overrated), I do not. I have hopes that the atrocity they pulled in the first film is fixed, because Jim Phelps is no traitor, let alone killing his own team members for a reason any child would scoff at: "President running the country without your permission". Hah! Whoever wrote that movie did not watch the series nor knew Phelps. I have several ways of fixing it and posted my concept someplace else even, which most people liked. Bottom line: Jon Voight did NOT play Jim Phelps. More like Jim Fakelps.

Back to Mannix: Never knew people hated Season 1. How is it not considered Mannix? It very much is Mannix and the only difference is that he doesn't have Peggy around and that he's working for an agency rather than being independent. It perfectly serves as an "origins" arc if anything else, considering Mannix always wanted to be fired because he "hates the system" and "doesn't fit in", so Mannix finally got his wish and left. Heck, Peggy even goes to Intertect for help in the first episode of Season 2, to which Mannix reacts badly. You're 100% correct on it being Mannix precisely as is!

I think you will love Burn Notice. At least the first four and half seasons, since your views regarding these subjects are very much like mine. Most even referred to it as an old school show trapped in the body of a new one. It's Man in a Suitcase, Mission: Impossible and The A-Team rolled into one. Jeffrey Donovan is an amazing actor and the role of Michael Westen really allowed him to take on different guises and disguises to demonstrate his acting skills. Honestly, if anybody had to make an Archer movie, there's no one more suited to the role than Donovan!

Boy oh boy! It's like I'm talking to my alter ego! Where Eagles Dare is the greatest WWII film AND spy film in my book, period! More than all the Bonds combined! The novel is just as thrilling, if you haven't read it. In fact, I love this movie so much that I gave the codename "Broadsword" to my very own literary character. Ron Goodwin's score for the film is nothing short of amazing and I have both releases of the soundtrack (the score and the source music used in the film) which I constantly listen to when I write my own novels. Like you, I never get tired of this film. One I do recommend to you is When Eight Bells Toll. It's more like a For Your Eyes Only-like spy film, but Anthony Hopkins just carries the whole thing so brilliantly. Have to admit, though, I felt very underwhelmed with the Navarones. The novels were infinitely better and they should've stuck to them. Then again, outside of Caravan to Vaccares and The Satan Bug, the only adaptations of MacLean's works that really work are those whose scripts MacLean himself penned. I also really wanted to like Ice Station Zebra but it suffers from the same problem as the first Navarone - it prolongs the plot and provides unnecessary additions to the plot that don't help the events advance forward. Shame, really, because as a huge fan of Patrick McGoohan (Danger Man and The Prisoner), I was let down by it. Where Eagles Dare perfectly balances all of this. It's just brilliant to a tee! I heard Christopher McQuarrie is attached to a remake project... Well, just another adaptation, really, and I trust he can perfectly provide a better take on the subject than John Sturges. Regarding MacLean... and Mannix... The Last Frontier (adapted to film starring Richard Widmark) could have very much worked as a Mannix episode. A lot of them would have been. As for MacLean, snow, and shootouts, since you mentioned Breakheart Pass, I heavily recommend seeing Avalanche Express starring Lee Marvin, Robert Shaw (I'm a die-hard fan of that guy, and not because of FRWL nor Jaws), and our very own Mike Connors! It's very much like an Alistair MacLean-style adventure, even though it's based on someone else's novel.

We've strafed too far away from the topic of discussion, haven't we? Always a treat to talk to likeminded folks, though.

As I said, since this is a Mannix thread and -I'll be honest- it's why I came here. I truly hope the legacy sequel script I'm working on does prevail and does not disappoint Mannix fans. Obviously, since it is a legacy sequel, it won't be centered on the Joe Mannix that we know but his grandson, who's very much like his grandfather but also his own man. All things considered, Mannix was too kind a fella despite being knocked out 55 times throughout the series, my take on the new character would be smugger and a smart aleck with a rich intelligence background, very similar to Mike Connors' unnamed Tightrope! character (yeah, they say he's named Nick Stone, but I don't buy it). References to a lot of other Mike Connors films will also be made throughout. I'm listening to Lalo Schifrin, Henry Mancini, John Barry, Johnny Mandel, Ron Goodwin, John Cacavas, Don Ellis, Elmer Bernstein, David Shire (I'm crazy about the theme from The Taking of Pelham 123!) and many others as I'm penning them. Let's just say that I intend this movie, which would serve as a pilot episode, to be shot and edited exactly like a 1960s/1970s film and using music that are exactly like soundtracks from that period. It's set in the present time, smartphones and all, but this Mannix would be sort of like a walking anachronism with the way he wears his suits (very 60s-like, early Sean Connery style) and speaks with a mid-Atlantic accent, like Connors in his earlier works from the 50s. He listens to Jazz, Bossa Nova, Blues, and all else he either takes it or leaves it, like his ol' grandad. For the sake of continuity, I also intend to find a way to bring back Toby Fair (Peggy's son) who'd be played by Mark Stewart, thus reprising his role. Now, I won't go into the details, but I'm just giving the key notes to what I intend to do, so, God willing, if it ever gets picked up, Mannix fans have nothing to worry about.

P.S. If you want a cross between Mannix and Bond, well... I highly recommend watching Kiss the Girls and Make Them Die where Connors essentially plays a Bond-like secret agent, albeit American. The movie is more or less a spoof, but it's very entertaining. The plot is similar to the film version of Moonraker in a way. This is a funny one because not a long ago, I found a newspaper article archived by the CIA (yes, the CIA archived this page!) where Connors was talking about this film, having shot the Mannix pilot episode a year prior to the release of this EuroSpy spoof, saying something like it wasn't getting picked up and didn't seem enthusiastic about it. The newspaper speculated if Connors was going to be forever associated with this secret agent character like Sean Connery was with Bond and Michael Caine was with Harry Palmer, and that more sequels could be coming. What could have been, huh?

Hi ornithologist, sorry, got side tracked on some things.

Yes I agree with you that by TND Judi Dench's M is the M of old - pimping Bond out to accomplish his mission. They did want to have their cake and eat it too. Trying to stay current but then also be faithful to who 007 really is. I have no complaints with that whatsoever. I love both GE and TND (GE more of course) so none of these things bother me. It's just that I think the series in the 90s (probably because of Babs and Michael taking over from Cubby - more Babs than Michael I think) tried to be more current with the changing times (which included being more PC, plus Bond not smoking though he then lights up in DAD) whereas in the previous 3 decades under Cubby Bond seemed to be a more unchanging character in a changing world, which is something that to me was always a major plus. Of course to criticize a changing Bond in the 90s is so unfair when compared to what they've done with him during the Craig tenure. So that's why ultimately the 90s was still a safe place for the 007 series compared to where we are now. Very sad what's happened.

It's funny that you mentioned your love for the MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE film series. I'm with you 100%! That series is now doing successfully what the Bond series used to do - thrill and entertain! Bond is all about moping and wallowing in self pity these days with too much "personal" angst and baggage. The M:I series has some of that but the spectacle and the creativity of the set pieces and the plot comes first which is what draws me to these films. 100% agreed that GHOST PROTOCOL was the turning point for the series where it basically shot to the next level. It finally founds its identity. I remember once watching the first one on VHS years ago (this was long before I ever saw a single episode of the TV series) and being confused and underwhelmed by it. Then I saw the second one on VHS and was surprisingly entertained by it - it was basically a high-octane John Woo actioner with a pretty straightforward plot that was easy to follow so it pleased me just fine. But let's be honest - it hardly feels like M:I. Then I saw the third one on DVD and again was underwhelmed by it. Like you I thought the personal soap opera baggage was too much and quite frankly the film lacked a big budget feel to it. It felt like an extended episode of ALIAS (J.J. Abrams was behind both). But now the 4th one I actually went to the theater to see with a buddy of mine and I honestly didn't expect much (based on the previous 3 films) and was mainly looking forward to the Burj Khalifa scene which was so heavily promoted. But man, I was totally blown away!! Every part of that film just clicked for me, every set piece was amazing. Maybe things slowed a bit when they got to India but then there was the cool car park scene (very creative!!) to cap it all off. Even the score by Michael Giacchino had a cool 60s retro feel to it, including the first usage of Schifrin's famous "The Plot" theme from the TV series. Man, that brought a smile to my face. Anyhoo, I thought the film was a fluke (they got lucky) and the next one couldn't possibly be this good. Imagine my surprise when I walked out of the theater in 2015 after seeing ROGUE NATION and being blown away yet again. Honestly, I think it even surpasses GHOST PROTOCOL. Just a perfect film, not one scene wasted, not one misstep. Plus the addition of Rebecca Ferguson was a major asset! Imagine how disappointing it was later in 2015 to watch SPECTRE on the big screen (another spy film about a secret shadowy organization controlling things - Syndicate vs Spectre). Boy, what a difference between the 2 films. Big fan of Sean Harris too as the creepy Solomon Lane. Probably my favorite M:I villain (along with Henry Cavill). Which takes us to 2018's FALLOUT. This is where we may disagree because to me it's the perfect M:I film and quite possibly the greatest action film of all time. I literally had to hold on to my seat because the action was so visceral and so intense!! That helicopter vs helicopter battle at the end amongst those cliffs in Norway is probably the most insane thing I ever saw, followed by the Hunt vs. Henry Cavill battle to the death. Amazing film!! I can't believe that there's someone out there (McQuarrie and Cruise) who seem to have some secret formula on how to create the perfect film. Again and again and again. This type of thing isn't supposed to happen with sequels. But somehow they managed to find a way to top each one. The last one DEAD RECKONING was another fantastic film but I've only seen it once unlike the others so I still need to see it again to figure out where it ranks. It's definitely near the top. Can't wait for PART 2.

Speaking of the M:I TV series I think the episode you mentioned where Cinnamon is captured (and tortured too, or at least sleep deprived) is season 3's "The Exchange", correct? John Vernon is the main baddie in that one, as he always is. Our guys are trying to do an exchange to get Cinnamon by giving up some foreign agent. It was a very good episode. Back to the first M:I film - I don't think any of the TV cast liked that film. I think Martin Landau had some negative things to say (not sure about Peter Graves) and as for Greg Morris he walked out of the film after about 20 minutes (long before the Phelps as bad guy reveal) and basically called it a piece of sh!t. I'm sure the killing of the whole IMF team at the start rubbed a lot of folks the wrong way. Folks walked in to expect something resembling the old series and got something completely different - a major subversion of the series. It's like if you walked in to see a traditional Bond film (back in the day, because anything goes these days) and expected Bond to get his mission from M and go on his merry way to complete his assignment.... instead Bond shows up at the Mi6 headquarters and finds M, Moneypenny, Q, Minister of Defence, Bill Tanner, and other staff all assassinated and he himself framed for the murders. Now he has to spend the rest of the film on the run and try to figure out whodunit. Oh, and at the end M turns out to be alive and turns out he/she killed everyone. Hey, I'm surprised Babsie hasn't tried this yet with the current Bond films. Maybe we'll get it in the next one... Anything goes, right?

As for the film version of THE MAN FROM U.N.C.L.E. it actually just popped up recently on my Netflix account - it's on my to-watch list. I heard good things about it from a buddy of mine who's a big Bond fan. Wasn't too big on the old TV series. A bit too out-there for me, and this is coming from someone who enjoys the outrageous Bond films like YOLT and MOONRAKER. But I think the TV series often went too far into the fantastical realm. It's okay from time to time. But on a weekly basis it gets to be too much. And too cheesy. Fun for the kids though. It becomes too much like THE WILD WILD WEST (the TV show, never saw the film) where it's basically science fiction/fantasy. I prefer more grounded TV spy fare like M:I or even I SPY. Though some of the earlier B&W episodes of U.N.C.L.E. are pretty good. "The Iowa-Scuba Affair" comes to mind. Mostly for the casting of Slim Pickens as a rural good ol' boy type who's apparently the head of a Commie spy ring bent on overthrowing the leadership of some Banana Republic. Now that's a hoot!

Regarding Alistair MacLean, I completely forgot about ICE STATION ZEBRA. You probably know that Howard Hughes was absolutely obsessed with this film and played it constantly almost on a loop. Weird chap, eh? I did finally see the film some years back and enjoyed it quite a bit. Submarine films can be hit or miss but this one worked just fine for me. Good Cold War story with good performances all around, including Mr. McGoohan! Well, except for maybe Ernie Borgnine who's about as Russkie as Jackie Chan is Italian. So yeah I enjoyed the film and would count it as one of my favorites from 1968 (just below ONCE UPON A TIME IN THE WEST and BULLITT) but no way would I ever watch it on a constant loop and it's nowhere near the brilliance of WHERE EAGLES DARE. Speaking of which, I use the line "Broadsword calling Danny Boy. Come in, Danny Boy" almost on a regular basis. I'll have to give AVALANCE EXPRESS a look-see. I've come across that title in the past. I know Mike Connors is in it and I'm a huge fan of both Lee Marvin and Bobby Shaw.

Your legacy script for MANNIX sounds fascinating. I'll be first in line at the cinema when the film comes out!

Welcome back, my friend! No worries, I understand. I got a little tied up myself!

You've hit the nail right on the head regarding the franchise that was great once, the so-called "trendsetter" of them all. Nothing to add, really, except that... Whatever you said regarding "anything goes", that already has happened after the atrocity of 2021. Ian Fleming Publications commissioned a book that did all of that: Bond is gone, preachy stuff about "minority" 00s, M dead, Tanner commits suicide (they planned that originally for the 2015 idiocy ), and the topping on the cake... Moneypenny - a mere secretary in the 1960s - becomes M.

The trouble with the first three M:I films is that they focus on one character as opposed to a team of agents: Ethan Hunt takes the lead while the rest of the team takes a backseat. It doesn't work like that. I was watching an interview of Tom Cruise the other day from the 90s where he basically said he got the series because he liked the theme and not much else, which is exactly what I perceived he would've done, turning the M:I theme into The Ethan Hunt Theme. Reminds me of the Spy Hunter video game series where they blatantly stole Peter Gunn's Theme and claimed it as the theme of their own series. Any person without an OCD would develop one because of it. Imagine...

"That's a cool theme. What's it called?"
"The Peter Gunn Theme."
"Nice, so the hero is called Peter Gunn?"
"No. He's called Alec Sects. Later, Alex Decker."
"Erm... Then, who's Peter Gunn?"
"Some guy from some TV show."
"Is that in the game?"
"No."
"Then, why is the series using a theme from a TV show named after the hero of that series?"
"Dunno, sounded cool. We couldn't have come up with our own theme, so we snatched another one."

Head-scratching!

But, yeah... The M:I film series found its identity by Ghost Protocol because they actually followed the formula of the show where Hunt wasn't the main focus but the team was. The whole team was given equal screen time and importance. Of course, Ethan Hunt still leads the team like Jim Phelps had done it for six seasons and Dan Briggs a season before him. This actually would lead us to an interesting conversation since I observe all of this rather closely. Since Rogue Nation, they tightened the connections to the TV show even more by producing prop documents for onscreen use where Ethan Hunt, Luther Stickell and Benji Dunn were all recruited by a certain Lt. Commander Briggs, which indicates that this is Dan Briggs and he was still in the IMF by the 90s, while the first film infers that Fakelps introduced Ethan Hunt to a lot of the good stuff. Funnily enough, none of the stuff Fakelps claimed to have been present in his background were present with the Jim Phelps of the show, meaning the writers had no bloody idea what they were yapping about. And you're correct, Landau and Morris both dismissed the first film as an embarrassment, with Landau basically saying "Our team was going to commit suicide one by one", laughing at whoever came up with that story. But, Greg Morris... Now, he was disgusted by the way they mistreated Phelps! Now, that's a friend! He walked out of the cinema and correctly called it a "piece of s**t". Peter Graves turned down the offer to reprise his role given the context, but publicly remained diplomatic about it. I heard he was greatly upset, though. The character meant a lot to him. As you've seen in "The Exchange", he essentially went rogue like Ethan always does, and moved heaven and earth to bring back Cinnamon without compromising the mission. Is this the kind of man who'd kill his own team for his own benefit? I hope they're reading this! However... Apparently, the character of Willy Armitage was present in the earlier versions of M:I-2 (post-Oliver Stone; that was a complete different M:I-2), but they let go of that, quite possibly to keep the series fresh and not risk a reboot. Continuity and all. But, like you said, while it's an entertaining action film (and a damn good one at that), it's nothing like an M:I film. You just hear a hard rock version of the M:I theme cued when Ethan Hunt does "something cool" the way The James Bond Theme would've played if Bond did something cool during an action scene, hence my argument above regarding the misuse of the theme. The third film retained the M:I feel after Woo-ifying the previous one, but to this day, it remains the weakest one in my book. The one I ignore every time I do a marathon. One pointless film that goes nowhere, copying The Bourne Supremacy like most action films between 2004 and 2011 (woeful times!). Cruise, apparently, wanted Martin Landau to cameo as Rollin Hand in the third film but Landau refused. Then, by 2009, when Jim Abrams was still attached to direct the fourth film (thankfully, he did not), he wanted Peter Graves to come back. They were probably attempting to fix the issue from the first film. They even entertained the idea of a prequel for the third film. However, when Graves passed away, those plans fell apart. But, IMO, they can still fix this. Let me tell you how...

Christmas Eve, 1991 - the night before the Soviet Union dissolved:

A team sent by the IMF and led by veteran spymaster Jim Phelps succeeds in orchestrating the end of the Cold War by pulling a mission heavily deemed impossible for years. The team, with the help of spies on both sides of the Bloc, contribute to the cause and making it to the clear. Despite the dissolution of everything embodied within the Soviet Union, the KGB recognized Jim and thus sent one of their most formidable assassins to kill him and dispose of him. A rogue faction inside the Kremlin vows revenge on those organized this operation and they carefully place that very assassin inside what they identified years ago as IMF due to traitorous moles inside the Pentagon or the US Intelligence community (could be CIA, NSA, National Intelligence, any of them), thus revealing the face of the man Ethan Hunt knew as "Jim Phelps" (Jon Voight) - The man who never was.

Just imagine the whole thing ending with the team heading out in a truck per the ending of every episode, the Soviet Union is about to fall and people are excited that the Cold War is ending. "Have Yourself A Very Little Christmas" is playing during the scene, cut to Jim walking under the snow in Moscow as the team scatters to head for their specific exit routes, happy, and as the song approaches its ending, an assassin shows up with a silenced CZ 82 and shoots Jim abruptly once he turns to a backalley and drops dead (reminiscent of Sidney Reilly's death), then the assassin steps out as the alley light reveals his face, it's the character played by Jon Voight. As he pulls Jim's corpse away, the blood on the snowy floor is painted away, the song ends and the screen fades to black.

The IMF got downsized and rebranded as a wing of the CIA (like Special Activities Division), its budget slashed, because those in power deemed the agency unnecessary given the Cold War was over now and the tension between the East and the West got reduced - but that was all superficial. Most of the IMF personnel were sacked, including agents from an era of relics and thus new faces were needed. A man identifying himself as "Jim Phelps" one day reports to duty after months of going MIA and he had all the answers to regain his clearance, thus re-establishing his identity with the agency. After all, there was no one to dispute his claims. Inside men replaced the required information working for the enemy the way IMF used to do back in the old days, so archived information was unreliable to identify the impostor.

Then-director of the CIA, Eugene Kittridge got wind of a traffic of smuggled information going out from Langley to enemy nations and independent enterprises in the same business and decided to play along, but it cost him dearly, losing multiple agents and important personnel in the long run, so clearing the name of Jim Phelps after the incident surrounding the NOC list in '96 was irrelevant to him, thus sweeping this under the rug to preserve his own career. Kittridge was always a career opportunist - The truth never mattered to him.

So, how do we exonerate a man who's dead and his corpse is nowhere to be found, either? Somebody knows the truth and since we're dealing with awakening the demons of the past, the past itself will take care of the future and the truth will come out to serve the ongoing mission in the depths of the Bering ice cap."

So, why would Ethan Hunt care about a man he never knew? Because the man he knew was the man that he is. A man of honor who would put others before himself and, in Ethan's own words, the lives of others will matter more than his own. This was the man that Jim Phelps - the real Jim Phelps - was, and this is the man Ethan Hunt himself is. Both would've torn the universe in half to save innocent lives as well as members of their respective teams. Many times, Jim disobeyed orders (in other words, "went rogue") to save a colleague and they did the same for him. Ethan understands that all too well, so he'd do anything to exonerate a man whose name has been shamelessly desecrated in spite of his loyalty, patriotism and contribution to the preservation of all that is good and pure.

"For Jim," Ethan Hunt will say.

Years later, after Ethan completes the Sevastopol mission, he stops by the residence of the Phelps family, leaves a medal of honor Jim Phelps received posthumously on the porch, breaks out a slight smile - somewhat saddened, somewhat relieved - and walks away. His phone rings as in Ghost Protocol and he starts getting briefed about a new mission that's left incomplete to the audiences, the credits roll in. New day, new threat. "Theme from Mission: Impossible" explodes.

Courtesy of Ornithologist from a Discord server, 08/03/2023

This is how I would have done it. Quite possibly even involving Stefan Miklos, who, in my opinion, is the best antagonist of the TV show (the '88 revival included), who'd order the killing of Jim Phelps. The real Jim Phelps. And as he was embarrassed by the IMF years prior and now losing the Cold War, why not embarrass the IMF in return by having his own "Jim Phelps" inside the IMF?

Anyway...

Regarding Fallout, unfortunately we'll have to disagree there. I highly regard it as a great action film, and, if the movies in between the first and this wouldn't exist, this would indeed be a great sequel to that film. But, as an M:I film, it's a very big miss for me because it essentially undoes everything Rogue Nation worked for, undermining that film like it never mattered. Sean Harris was alright, I suppose, but for an anti-Ethan Hunt, I would've gotten someone else for that role, Christian Bale to be precise, as an inside joke. You know the connection. Solomon Lane should have been frightening, depicting an Ethan Hunt who's just evil. As for Cavill as August Walker, I thought he was an overglorified henchman. Not a bad character and even more so not a bad actor. I love Cavill, he's a great chap and I'd cast him in a lot of Bond-like roles. Even Thomas Crown. He's the second coming of Pierce Brosnan, IMO. But, Walker is someone I wouldn't see as a leading villain type but a henchman. Fallout was just M:I-3 done better. A lot better. Great action film, but not a faithful M:I film. They made the mistake of Ethan Hunt taking the sole focus again and involved his personal life, too. Nightmares, frights and anxieties that are unearned. A case of "show, don't tell". It didn't "show". Long story. We'll have to discuss that some other time. But, I'd also have to affirm that Rebecca Ferguson was a beautiful addition to the team. Cruise has an idea for things like these and he definitely paid the homages to the stuff he associated with Becky. She looked like Ingrid Bergman, and he called her Ilsa Faust (named after Ilsa Lund), set the movie in Casablanca, and made her rather mischievous in a lovable way like Ilsa Lund was in Casablanca. And "Faust", well... Because she essentially made a deal with the devil (Faustus and Mephistopheles), the latter allegorically being both Lane and Atlee (wasn't elaborated whether he was an MI6 officer or "C" himself).

As for Dead Reckoning Part One, I'll have to start a whole new thread for it. Lots to discuss. It's one genius film building up to how ingenious Part Two is going to be. I hope they deliver, because like you said... McQ and Cruise found a formula that worked for that... other franchise. Gee, why would that work? (The Higgins emoji. I love it. )

Re: The Man from UNCLE, you're right about everything you said about the show. The first season is outstanding, the second... is alright. But, the third one and onwards... Not for me. Too "out there", like you said. That's why I prefer the film over the show, and this comes from a purist and a traditionalist. Only bad thing about the film is the way the agency was handled. Afterthought. But, I can overlook it. As I said, though, do watch Kiss the Girls and Make Them Die. You'll like it.

And really, for my own take on Mannix (I decided not to call it just Mannix, but want to give each entry its own title, like the Bond films, and I already have a great title named after a Lalo Schifrin track), I'm glad you see the potential. I'm drawing a lot of inspiration from Harper (1966) and Marlowe (1969) to make the character a bit more robust characteristically and less kind like the Joe Mannix that we know is. Given today's world, it would make sense for a descendant to be slightly more smug and sarcastic when interacting with people who have no respect for anything. But, he's not cold-hearted. He'd pretty much be like his ol' grandad, helping those who really are in need, and definitely isn't uncaring.

Wow, buddy, that is one amazing script idea for your M:I Fakelps correction! Are you sure you're not an actual Hollywood writer that's lurking around here? No wait, strike that!! If you were an actual Hollywood writer your ideas wouldn't be nearly this good. Seriously, Hollywood unfortunately has a lack of good writers these days. Either that or they're forced to write "by committee" and sacrifice their good ideas to please what the studio execs want to see. I could never work in such a system. So yeah, what you have right there is not just a proper understanding of the M:I series (tone and feel) but a really awesome premise of how to fix that whole Fakelps debacle. If I were McQuarrie I'd definitely hire you, man! Great job!!

I think you hinted at some connection with Christian Bale and the M:I series? I'm afraid I'm not familiar with it. Unless you're referring to his one-time rant (meltdown?) at some film crew member several years back and then Cruise did the same thing during the Covid epidemic at one of his crew members? Maybe that's it lol.

Yeah I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on FALLOUT. I mean yes I do see that there is more emotional baggage with Hunt in that film (dreams, flashbacks, nightmares) but for me it doesn't really detract because the film is such a well-oiled machine and such an excellent piece of grand entertainment. I agree that Cavill who I guess is supposed to be the main baddie comes across more as a henchman but I'm fine with that because he's such a physical screen presence (from that amazing bathroom fight to the showdown in Norway helicopter vs helicopter) that I can't really find any faults with him. His twist and reveal is great as well so I've no complaints. Sean Harris as Lane is more of a creepy background villain this time around but again since Cavill is front and center I have no issues with that. I preferred Lane without the beard in ROGUE NATION where he didn't look like an Old Testament prophet lol. But hey maybe that's the point - the Prophets, right? He's one of them. Speaking of the bathroom fight - man, that was intense!! I thought I saw the greatest bathroom fight in movie history a long time ago when I saw James Cameron's TRUE LIES but after seeing this one the former pales in comparison. This is on a whole other level!

You mentioned Stefan Miklos... am I safe in assuming that "The Mind of Stefan Miklos" is your favorite episode of the original series? Apparently this is a fan favorite. I have to be honest that first time I saw it I was completely confused. I just wasn't prepared for an episode like this. Definitely a deviation from the norm. Sure, you typically had to pay attention while watching previous episodes but it's not like you had to take notes and carefully follow every move and countermove on the screen. Most episodes were pretty easy to follow and definitely not taxing on your brain. But this one was definitely different. I remember scratching my head afterwards and thinking did Christopher Nolan's dad write this??? Seriously, that's how I felt after seeing Nolan's INCEPTION. Utter confusion! I don't care for Nolan by the way. He seems too preoccupied with trying to be smarter than the audience and to be confusing for the sake of confusion - as a way to generate more buzz for his films. Not my thing. Anyway, I digressed. So then I went back and rewatched "Stefan Miklos" immediately a second time and this time paid VERY close attention to every detail and then it made much more sense and was a much more satisfactory viewing experience. Like I said, I wasn't ready for something this labyrinthine in a M:I episode. Well done indeed. But maybe it should have come with a warning at the beginning to pay very very close attention.

I'm deeply touched by the heartfelt compliment, my friend. Thank you. What I wouldn't give to have been a writer and filmmaker in an era where Hollywood was at the top of its game, producing and making films and television shows that were unmatched - Quite the golden era it was! But, yes, I also couldn't work in that very system you mentioned that keep besmirching the name of a once great industry. It would be illogical to think there are no good creatives out there who couldn't deliver, it's just that those in power don't want them around rather deliberately, like a certain contemporary show I heard based on a book series made today whose current writers are ones who have no respect for the source material nor any love for it, and the studio wants it that way. Goes to show where the blame should be directed to. But, yeah... Same thing applies to the world of literature and comic books. Saddening to see the pendulum swing to the opposite side too far and for too long. Hopefully, we'll see it swinging back in the right direction in my lifetime.

The Christian Bale connection comes from the fact that he was greatly inspired by Tom Cruise to portray the sadistic, "soulless" villain in American Psycho based on an interview Cruise did with David Letterman. Apparently, Cruise at one point was also considered for the role that Bale played. So, why not have Bale play the villain opposite Cruise's hero? Both are eccentric, pedantic (Bale even more so, I think Cruise mellowed down a lot since the Oprah incident) and still very energetic. I would have loved to see that happen; it would be great revenge on Cruise's part.

The thing is that I am not against emotional baggage, but it just wasn't warranted in the slightest, in my opinion. I would have kept the action sequences as they are in the film but would have sacked the whole overlong epilogue to Rogue Nation that shouldn't have been. Or rather... prevent the fifth film from being an uneventful prologue to Fallout, thus really undermining its impact. Mind you, I don't hate the film. This may sound like I hate it, but I don't. Because it introduced The Black Widow (Vanessa Kirby) who's just marvelous in it! But, certain things the way they turned out and got repeated to death bother me, like how Alan Hunley, the IMF Secretary, had to be there and got killed. That's one gag they repeated two films ago, makes you think Hollywood has really run out of ideas. Why would the Secretary be out there in the field? It made sense in Ghost Protocol, but really not here. Great setpieces, great action, but the story and the way it involved Lane as Hunt's worst nightmare without showing the impact disappointed me. I just hope Dead Reckoning Part Two doesn't deliver a half-baked result like that, because I really and truly did enjoy Part One. They took their time with it, even though it's been three years now since Part Two has already been in production (shooting and rewriting on the fly, which, in the long run, could prove drastic). Knowing the lore, I just don't want them to handle it like teens handle online fan fiction. Or perhaps my way of thinking is boomer-like, which I take great pride in.

First time I'm hearing this from someone who found "The Mind of Stefan Miklos" complicated. Perhaps it's a matter of perspective, but I didn't find it that different from the rest of the M:I episodes, only a bit more hefty in its execution since M:I is supposed to be all mind games and manipulation of the enemy through deception, only that they were set out to do it against a very Hans Lada-like opponent whose wit and intellect did give Phelps a run for his money. Another one that provided this kind of weight is "The Interrogator" with Henry Silva - another great episode that I thoroughly enjoyed. But, yes, you're quite right that both ooze the same ideas as Inception. But, then again, Nolan may have written that albeit not on his own but by aping it from other sources, particularly Japanese animes and mangas. I, too, have a disdain for him and his likes - directors who really try to be "intellectual" and pretend they invented Rubik's Cube. But, their audiences are worse, convincing themselves they "have better understanding of a think-machine philosophy" than the rest of us. I'd rather get my champagne and caviar as is than mix it with cyanide and kool aid.

I just picked up where I left off with Tightrope! right now, and it's amazing how they fit in a compelling way of adapting a Yojimbo/Red Harvest-like story in a 20-minute episode. And this was broadcast on TV in 1959, which says a lot about talent that got appreciated back in the day. Amazing writing, terrific acting and direction. Mike Connors should have made more stuff like this after he was done with Mannix. I know they attempted to make Ohanian (based on his real last name) that's closer to his persona than Mannix, but that didn't work. However, I really would have loved to see a suave and a rogue-ish hero that he played in Tightrope!. He did make another pilot episode inspired by Mr. Lucky, though, which I haven't had the chance to see yet, but I will. One thing they keep making a large disservice to Tightrope! is by not releasing it on home media in any shape or form. Some episodes have been made for VHS tapes quite possibly, given the way the transfer looks from back in the 80s, some others they outright recorded with cameras from reel projections, and then, they bundled them all in bootleg DVDs where you can find them online, with one episode completely missing. Bryan Cranston is executive producing a parody of the show that's to star Ty Burrell, apparently, likely to spoof the technical limitations, the screen attitudes and narratives of that time, which could pave the way for the original show to get some exposure. No Mike Connors fan should be left without this show, because it's swell from what I've seen, and I'm already halfway through the season. And what a banger theme it has! I spoke with a lot of boomers who actually watched the show in their youth and they praised it to heaven and back, which is a testament to its popularity over the course of the year it was on television.



(Fan art, but with the help of AI, which I personally have edited myself and added the text, along with other modifications. I made sure the art was done in the style of Robert McGinnis's illustrations, whose work is out of this world. Him, Renato Casaro, Fay Dalton, Frank McCarthy, Montyne - an unusual choice, but I'm a big fan of his work on the Tarzan view-master reels - and last but not least, the modern-day Paul Mann.)

[ZelenskyTheValiant (Ivan)]

Thank you very much, my good fellow. I'm a huge Magnum, P.I. as well, so I should feel right at home, here.


Touché. It's become one of my mottos to er... "Feast... Like there's no tomorrow." I honestly love Die Another Day in spite of its logical flaws, and like you, the invisible car doesn't bother me in the slightest because it's based on actual technology the US military was working on, at the time, which was also the topic of plot device used in the film adaptation of I-Spy. Now, this is one of the rarest instances where an adaptation uses the source material loosely that I tolerate, because the movie with Eddie Murphy and Owen Wilson is fun. The show was more of a straightforward spy thriller like Mission: Impossible, but this one was more of a comedy. I wish it did get a sequel. Another instance is The Man from UNCLE, but this is one of the instances where I think the movie is better than the show. However... I did have a lot of issues with the background of how the agency was formed which was very immaturely written. Being a Fleming aficionado as well as everything spy, I shudder to think most writers do not bother to do their research and actually spend time in developing their fictional organizations. As for the Brosnan era, what I love about it is that it very much remains true to the concept and structure of its predecessors. I'd only accuse Die Another Day of the constant use of Woo-isms (John Woo) but I can overlook it. I wouldn't say Bond went mindlessly Rambo everywhere but times were changing, you see? After all, "chocolate sailors" were no longer a thing, field tactics have changed, and Bond being an intelligence commando now was very fitting. After all, the newer the times, the newer the threats. He's the kind of man who'd lead a team of commandos on raids, and given his background, he must have been Special Boat Service and having earned his Commander rank rather than being given it without having to work for it, hence the "chocolate sailor" concept wouldn't have worked post-80s. As for Dench's "M", her grilling Bond for his mindset was sort of funny, because while she may have a jab at him, Bond remains unchanged. Come Tomorrow Never Dies, she was the one to insist Bond to resort to his usual tactics. "Pump her for information". Hardly the word of a feminist. Haha! They eventually learn. TND is my favorite Bond film alongside Dr. No and Thunderball. Regarding TWINE, let's just say, it was the prototype Barbara Broccoli movie and Pierce did object to Bond being a second banana when initially it was going to focus on Elektra King and be female-led while Bond takes a backseat (they achieved that with that 2021 blasphemy that I refer to as the atrocity known as 9/28 - the day it was released). So, Bruce Feirstein came on board at Pierce's insistence to fix the script by Neal Poncy and Robert Waste to put Bond back in the front and center of the story. For what it's worth, though, I still love the film as it enriched Bond's screen dimension a little more, exploring his detective side a little, making certain scenes feel like it's noir. Sorry, I keep jumping back and forth on the discussion. A little bit of inorganization on my part.

Regarding the personal lives of the characters, I'm one million percent in agreement with you. They don't need to be explored unless they're "special" episodes and they shouldn't happen for more than one episode per season... If that! Funnily enough, Bruce Geller hated and objected to exploring characters on Mission: Impossible, and yet they started going for it in the later seasons. One "personal matter" season that I did love though was the one where Cinnamon Carter was captured and Jim had to go out of his way to rescue her, going rogue and disobeying orders. Hardly the kind of man who'd murder his own team (the stupidity of the 1996 film!). I can assure you it was definitely Season 5 where they started doing cops' work for them. I mean, it still did have globetrotting espionage all over, but that was when they started losing their touch. Season 4 and 5 had Martin Landau replaced, but I can tell you... Leonard Nimoy was an amazing substitute and was even more of a "badass" version of Rollin Hand, called The Great Paris. Them fighting the Syndicate on a constant note felt very tiresome. Glad the movies actually gave "The Syndicate" a real purpose but making them a rogue black ops unit... An anti-IMF. By the way, I love the movies too, but they don't get M:I-like until Ghost Protocol, which is still the greatest installment in the series. Felt very much like a Brosnan era Bond film, except it was tailored for M:I. Christopher McQuarrie admitted publicly that he loves the era and his movies do pay several homages to the Brosnan films. Dead Reckoning Part One alone reuses ideas and concepts that were discarded with the original draft for Tomorrow Never Dies. My least favorite movies in the film series are those where Ethan Hunt's personal life comes into play. Most people love the third film (it's the worst in my book!) and worship Fallout (I find it overtly overrated), I do not. I have hopes that the atrocity they pulled in the first film is fixed, because Jim Phelps is no traitor, let alone killing his own team members for a reason any child would scoff at: "President running the country without your permission". Hah! Whoever wrote that movie did not watch the series nor knew Phelps. I have several ways of fixing it and posted my concept someplace else even, which most people liked. Bottom line: Jon Voight did NOT play Jim Phelps. More like Jim Fakelps.

Back to Mannix: Never knew people hated Season 1. How is it not considered Mannix? It very much is Mannix and the only difference is that he doesn't have Peggy around and that he's working for an agency rather than being independent. It perfectly serves as an "origins" arc if anything else, considering Mannix always wanted to be fired because he "hates the system" and "doesn't fit in", so Mannix finally got his wish and left. Heck, Peggy even goes to Intertect for help in the first episode of Season 2, to which Mannix reacts badly. You're 100% correct on it being Mannix precisely as is!

I think you will love Burn Notice. At least the first four and half seasons, since your views regarding these subjects are very much like mine. Most even referred to it as an old school show trapped in the body of a new one. It's Man in a Suitcase, Mission: Impossible and The A-Team rolled into one. Jeffrey Donovan is an amazing actor and the role of Michael Westen really allowed him to take on different guises and disguises to demonstrate his acting skills. Honestly, if anybody had to make an Archer movie, there's no one more suited to the role than Donovan!

Boy oh boy! It's like I'm talking to my alter ego! Where Eagles Dare is the greatest WWII film AND spy film in my book, period! More than all the Bonds combined! The novel is just as thrilling, if you haven't read it. In fact, I love this movie so much that I gave the codename "Broadsword" to my very own literary character. Ron Goodwin's score for the film is nothing short of amazing and I have both releases of the soundtrack (the score and the source music used in the film) which I constantly listen to when I write my own novels. Like you, I never get tired of this film. One I do recommend to you is When Eight Bells Toll. It's more like a For Your Eyes Only-like spy film, but Anthony Hopkins just carries the whole thing so brilliantly. Have to admit, though, I felt very underwhelmed with the Navarones. The novels were infinitely better and they should've stuck to them. Then again, outside of Caravan to Vaccares and The Satan Bug, the only adaptations of MacLean's works that really work are those whose scripts MacLean himself penned. I also really wanted to like Ice Station Zebra but it suffers from the same problem as the first Navarone - it prolongs the plot and provides unnecessary additions to the plot that don't help the events advance forward. Shame, really, because as a huge fan of Patrick McGoohan (Danger Man and The Prisoner), I was let down by it. Where Eagles Dare perfectly balances all of this. It's just brilliant to a tee! I heard Christopher McQuarrie is attached to a remake project... Well, just another adaptation, really, and I trust he can perfectly provide a better take on the subject than John Sturges. Regarding MacLean... and Mannix... The Last Frontier (adapted to film starring Richard Widmark) could have very much worked as a Mannix episode. A lot of them would have been. As for MacLean, snow, and shootouts, since you mentioned Breakheart Pass, I heavily recommend seeing Avalanche Express starring Lee Marvin, Robert Shaw (I'm a die-hard fan of that guy, and not because of FRWL nor Jaws), and our very own Mike Connors! It's very much like an Alistair MacLean-style adventure, even though it's based on someone else's novel.

We've strafed too far away from the topic of discussion, haven't we? Always a treat to talk to likeminded folks, though.

As I said, since this is a Mannix thread and -I'll be honest- it's why I came here. I truly hope the legacy sequel script I'm working on does prevail and does not disappoint Mannix fans. Obviously, since it is a legacy sequel, it won't be centered on the Joe Mannix that we know but his grandson, who's very much like his grandfather but also his own man. All things considered, Mannix was too kind a fella despite being knocked out 55 times throughout the series, my take on the new character would be smugger and a smart aleck with a rich intelligence background, very similar to Mike Connors' unnamed Tightrope! character (yeah, they say he's named Nick Stone, but I don't buy it). References to a lot of other Mike Connors films will also be made throughout. I'm listening to Lalo Schifrin, Henry Mancini, John Barry, Johnny Mandel, Ron Goodwin, John Cacavas, Don Ellis, Elmer Bernstein, David Shire (I'm crazy about the theme from The Taking of Pelham 123!) and many others as I'm penning them. Let's just say that I intend this movie, which would serve as a pilot episode, to be shot and edited exactly like a 1960s/1970s film and using music that are exactly like soundtracks from that period. It's set in the present time, smartphones and all, but this Mannix would be sort of like a walking anachronism with the way he wears his suits (very 60s-like, early Sean Connery style) and speaks with a mid-Atlantic accent, like Connors in his earlier works from the 50s. He listens to Jazz, Bossa Nova, Blues, and all else he either takes it or leaves it, like his ol' grandad. For the sake of continuity, I also intend to find a way to bring back Toby Fair (Peggy's son) who'd be played by Mark Stewart, thus reprising his role. Now, I won't go into the details, but I'm just giving the key notes to what I intend to do, so, God willing, if it ever gets picked up, Mannix fans have nothing to worry about.

P.S. If you want a cross between Mannix and Bond, well... I highly recommend watching Kiss the Girls and Make Them Die where Connors essentially plays a Bond-like secret agent, albeit American. The movie is more or less a spoof, but it's very entertaining. The plot is similar to the film version of Moonraker in a way. This is a funny one because not a long ago, I found a newspaper article archived by the CIA (yes, the CIA archived this page!) where Connors was talking about this film, having shot the Mannix pilot episode a year prior to the release of this EuroSpy spoof, saying something like it wasn't getting picked up and didn't seem enthusiastic about it. The newspaper speculated if Connors was going to be forever associated with this secret agent character like Sean Connery was with Bond and Michael Caine was with Harry Palmer, and that more sequels could be coming. What could have been, huh?

Hi ornithologist, sorry, got side tracked on some things.

Yes I agree with you that by TND Judi Dench's M is the M of old - pimping Bond out to accomplish his mission. They did want to have their cake and eat it too. Trying to stay current but then also be faithful to who 007 really is. I have no complaints with that whatsoever. I love both GE and TND (GE more of course) so none of these things bother me. It's just that I think the series in the 90s (probably because of Babs and Michael taking over from Cubby - more Babs than Michael I think) tried to be more current with the changing times (which included being more PC, plus Bond not smoking though he then lights up in DAD) whereas in the previous 3 decades under Cubby Bond seemed to be a more unchanging character in a changing world, which is something that to me was always a major plus. Of course to criticize a changing Bond in the 90s is so unfair when compared to what they've done with him during the Craig tenure. So that's why ultimately the 90s was still a safe place for the 007 series compared to where we are now. Very sad what's happened.

It's funny that you mentioned your love for the MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE film series. I'm with you 100%! That series is now doing successfully what the Bond series used to do - thrill and entertain! Bond is all about moping and wallowing in self pity these days with too much "personal" angst and baggage. The M:I series has some of that but the spectacle and the creativity of the set pieces and the plot comes first which is what draws me to these films. 100% agreed that GHOST PROTOCOL was the turning point for the series where it basically shot to the next level. It finally founds its identity. I remember once watching the first one on VHS years ago (this was long before I ever saw a single episode of the TV series) and being confused and underwhelmed by it. Then I saw the second one on VHS and was surprisingly entertained by it - it was basically a high-octane John Woo actioner with a pretty straightforward plot that was easy to follow so it pleased me just fine. But let's be honest - it hardly feels like M:I. Then I saw the third one on DVD and again was underwhelmed by it. Like you I thought the personal soap opera baggage was too much and quite frankly the film lacked a big budget feel to it. It felt like an extended episode of ALIAS (J.J. Abrams was behind both). But now the 4th one I actually went to the theater to see with a buddy of mine and I honestly didn't expect much (based on the previous 3 films) and was mainly looking forward to the Burj Khalifa scene which was so heavily promoted. But man, I was totally blown away!! Every part of that film just clicked for me, every set piece was amazing. Maybe things slowed a bit when they got to India but then there was the cool car park scene (very creative!!) to cap it all off. Even the score by Michael Giacchino had a cool 60s retro feel to it, including the first usage of Schifrin's famous "The Plot" theme from the TV series. Man, that brought a smile to my face. Anyhoo, I thought the film was a fluke (they got lucky) and the next one couldn't possibly be this good. Imagine my surprise when I walked out of the theater in 2015 after seeing ROGUE NATION and being blown away yet again. Honestly, I think it even surpasses GHOST PROTOCOL. Just a perfect film, not one scene wasted, not one misstep. Plus the addition of Rebecca Ferguson was a major asset! Imagine how disappointing it was later in 2015 to watch SPECTRE on the big screen (another spy film about a secret shadowy organization controlling things - Syndicate vs Spectre). Boy, what a difference between the 2 films. Big fan of Sean Harris too as the creepy Solomon Lane. Probably my favorite M:I villain (along with Henry Cavill). Which takes us to 2018's FALLOUT. This is where we may disagree because to me it's the perfect M:I film and quite possibly the greatest action film of all time. I literally had to hold on to my seat because the action was so visceral and so intense!! That helicopter vs helicopter battle at the end amongst those cliffs in Norway is probably the most insane thing I ever saw, followed by the Hunt vs. Henry Cavill battle to the death. Amazing film!! I can't believe that there's someone out there (McQuarrie and Cruise) who seem to have some secret formula on how to create the perfect film. Again and again and again. This type of thing isn't supposed to happen with sequels. But somehow they managed to find a way to top each one. The last one DEAD RECKONING was another fantastic film but I've only seen it once unlike the others so I still need to see it again to figure out where it ranks. It's definitely near the top. Can't wait for PART 2.

Speaking of the M:I TV series I think the episode you mentioned where Cinnamon is captured (and tortured too, or at least sleep deprived) is season 3's "The Exchange", correct? John Vernon is the main baddie in that one, as he always is. Our guys are trying to do an exchange to get Cinnamon by giving up some foreign agent. It was a very good episode. Back to the first M:I film - I don't think any of the TV cast liked that film. I think Martin Landau had some negative things to say (not sure about Peter Graves) and as for Greg Morris he walked out of the film after about 20 minutes (long before the Phelps as bad guy reveal) and basically called it a piece of sh!t. I'm sure the killing of the whole IMF team at the start rubbed a lot of folks the wrong way. Folks walked in to expect something resembling the old series and got something completely different - a major subversion of the series. It's like if you walked in to see a traditional Bond film (back in the day, because anything goes these days) and expected Bond to get his mission from M and go on his merry way to complete his assignment.... instead Bond shows up at the Mi6 headquarters and finds M, Moneypenny, Q, Minister of Defence, Bill Tanner, and other staff all assassinated and he himself framed for the murders. Now he has to spend the rest of the film on the run and try to figure out whodunit. Oh, and at the end M turns out to be alive and turns out he/she killed everyone. Hey, I'm surprised Babsie hasn't tried this yet with the current Bond films. Maybe we'll get it in the next one... Anything goes, right?

As for the film version of THE MAN FROM U.N.C.L.E. it actually just popped up recently on my Netflix account - it's on my to-watch list. I heard good things about it from a buddy of mine who's a big Bond fan. Wasn't too big on the old TV series. A bit too out-there for me, and this is coming from someone who enjoys the outrageous Bond films like YOLT and MOONRAKER. But I think the TV series often went too far into the fantastical realm. It's okay from time to time. But on a weekly basis it gets to be too much. And too cheesy. Fun for the kids though. It becomes too much like THE WILD WILD WEST (the TV show, never saw the film) where it's basically science fiction/fantasy. I prefer more grounded TV spy fare like M:I or even I SPY. Though some of the earlier B&W episodes of U.N.C.L.E. are pretty good. "The Iowa-Scuba Affair" comes to mind. Mostly for the casting of Slim Pickens as a rural good ol' boy type who's apparently the head of a Commie spy ring bent on overthrowing the leadership of some Banana Republic. Now that's a hoot!

Regarding Alistair MacLean, I completely forgot about ICE STATION ZEBRA. You probably know that Howard Hughes was absolutely obsessed with this film and played it constantly almost on a loop. Weird chap, eh? I did finally see the film some years back and enjoyed it quite a bit. Submarine films can be hit or miss but this one worked just fine for me. Good Cold War story with good performances all around, including Mr. McGoohan! Well, except for maybe Ernie Borgnine who's about as Russkie as Jackie Chan is Italian. So yeah I enjoyed the film and would count it as one of my favorites from 1968 (just below ONCE UPON A TIME IN THE WEST and BULLITT) but no way would I ever watch it on a constant loop and it's nowhere near the brilliance of WHERE EAGLES DARE. Speaking of which, I use the line "Broadsword calling Danny Boy. Come in, Danny Boy" almost on a regular basis. I'll have to give AVALANCE EXPRESS a look-see. I've come across that title in the past. I know Mike Connors is in it and I'm a huge fan of both Lee Marvin and Bobby Shaw.

Your legacy script for MANNIX sounds fascinating. I'll be first in line at the cinema when the film comes out!

Welcome back, my friend! No worries, I understand. I got a little tied up myself!

You've hit the nail right on the head regarding the franchise that was great once, the so-called "trendsetter" of them all. Nothing to add, really, except that... Whatever you said regarding "anything goes", that already has happened after the atrocity of 2021. Ian Fleming Publications commissioned a book that did all of that: Bond is gone, preachy stuff about "minority" 00s, M dead, Tanner commits suicide (they planned that originally for the 2015 idiocy ), and the topping on the cake... Moneypenny - a mere secretary in the 1960s - becomes M.

The trouble with the first three M:I films is that they focus on one character as opposed to a team of agents: Ethan Hunt takes the lead while the rest of the team takes a backseat. It doesn't work like that. I was watching an interview of Tom Cruise the other day from the 90s where he basically said he got the series because he liked the theme and not much else, which is exactly what I perceived he would've done, turning the M:I theme into The Ethan Hunt Theme. Reminds me of the Spy Hunter video game series where they blatantly stole Peter Gunn's Theme and claimed it as the theme of their own series. Any person without an OCD would develop one because of it. Imagine...

"That's a cool theme. What's it called?"
"The Peter Gunn Theme."
"Nice, so the hero is called Peter Gunn?"
"No. He's called Alec Sects. Later, Alex Decker."
"Erm... Then, who's Peter Gunn?"
"Some guy from some TV show."
"Is that in the game?"
"No."
"Then, why is the series using a theme from a TV show named after the hero of that series?"
"Dunno, sounded cool. We couldn't have come up with our own theme, so we snatched another one."

Head-scratching!

But, yeah... The M:I film series found its identity by Ghost Protocol because they actually followed the formula of the show where Hunt wasn't the main focus but the team was. The whole team was given equal screen time and importance. Of course, Ethan Hunt still leads the team like Jim Phelps had done it for six seasons and Dan Briggs a season before him. This actually would lead us to an interesting conversation since I observe all of this rather closely. Since Rogue Nation, they tightened the connections to the TV show even more by producing prop documents for onscreen use where Ethan Hunt, Luther Stickell and Benji Dunn were all recruited by a certain Lt. Commander Briggs, which indicates that this is Dan Briggs and he was still in the IMF by the 90s, while the first film infers that Fakelps introduced Ethan Hunt to a lot of the good stuff. Funnily enough, none of the stuff Fakelps claimed to have been present in his background were present with the Jim Phelps of the show, meaning the writers had no bloody idea what they were yapping about. And you're correct, Landau and Morris both dismissed the first film as an embarrassment, with Landau basically saying "Our team was going to commit suicide one by one", laughing at whoever came up with that story. But, Greg Morris... Now, he was disgusted by the way they mistreated Phelps! Now, that's a friend! He walked out of the cinema and correctly called it a "piece of s**t". Peter Graves turned down the offer to reprise his role given the context, but publicly remained diplomatic about it. I heard he was greatly upset, though. The character meant a lot to him. As you've seen in "The Exchange", he essentially went rogue like Ethan always does, and moved heaven and earth to bring back Cinnamon without compromising the mission. Is this the kind of man who'd kill his own team for his own benefit? I hope they're reading this! However... Apparently, the character of Willy Armitage was present in the earlier versions of M:I-2 (post-Oliver Stone; that was a complete different M:I-2), but they let go of that, quite possibly to keep the series fresh and not risk a reboot. Continuity and all. But, like you said, while it's an entertaining action film (and a damn good one at that), it's nothing like an M:I film. You just hear a hard rock version of the M:I theme cued when Ethan Hunt does "something cool" the way The James Bond Theme would've played if Bond did something cool during an action scene, hence my argument above regarding the misuse of the theme. The third film retained the M:I feel after Woo-ifying the previous one, but to this day, it remains the weakest one in my book. The one I ignore every time I do a marathon. One pointless film that goes nowhere, copying The Bourne Supremacy like most action films between 2004 and 2011 (woeful times!). Cruise, apparently, wanted Martin Landau to cameo as Rollin Hand in the third film but Landau refused. Then, by 2009, when Jim Abrams was still attached to direct the fourth film (thankfully, he did not), he wanted Peter Graves to come back. They were probably attempting to fix the issue from the first film. They even entertained the idea of a prequel for the third film. However, when Graves passed away, those plans fell apart. But, IMO, they can still fix this. Let me tell you how...

Christmas Eve, 1991 - the night before the Soviet Union dissolved:

A team sent by the IMF and led by veteran spymaster Jim Phelps succeeds in orchestrating the end of the Cold War by pulling a mission heavily deemed impossible for years. The team, with the help of spies on both sides of the Bloc, contribute to the cause and making it to the clear. Despite the dissolution of everything embodied within the Soviet Union, the KGB recognized Jim and thus sent one of their most formidable assassins to kill him and dispose of him. A rogue faction inside the Kremlin vows revenge on those organized this operation and they carefully place that very assassin inside what they identified years ago as IMF due to traitorous moles inside the Pentagon or the US Intelligence community (could be CIA, NSA, National Intelligence, any of them), thus revealing the face of the man Ethan Hunt knew as "Jim Phelps" (Jon Voight) - The man who never was.

Just imagine the whole thing ending with the team heading out in a truck per the ending of every episode, the Soviet Union is about to fall and people are excited that the Cold War is ending. "Have Yourself A Very Little Christmas" is playing during the scene, cut to Jim walking under the snow in Moscow as the team scatters to head for their specific exit routes, happy, and as the song approaches its ending, an assassin shows up with a silenced CZ 82 and shoots Jim abruptly once he turns to a backalley and drops dead (reminiscent of Sidney Reilly's death), then the assassin steps out as the alley light reveals his face, it's the character played by Jon Voight. As he pulls Jim's corpse away, the blood on the snowy floor is painted away, the song ends and the screen fades to black.

The IMF got downsized and rebranded as a wing of the CIA (like Special Activities Division), its budget slashed, because those in power deemed the agency unnecessary given the Cold War was over now and the tension between the East and the West got reduced - but that was all superficial. Most of the IMF personnel were sacked, including agents from an era of relics and thus new faces were needed. A man identifying himself as "Jim Phelps" one day reports to duty after months of going MIA and he had all the answers to regain his clearance, thus re-establishing his identity with the agency. After all, there was no one to dispute his claims. Inside men replaced the required information working for the enemy the way IMF used to do back in the old days, so archived information was unreliable to identify the impostor.

Then-director of the CIA, Eugene Kittridge got wind of a traffic of smuggled information going out from Langley to enemy nations and independent enterprises in the same business and decided to play along, but it cost him dearly, losing multiple agents and important personnel in the long run, so clearing the name of Jim Phelps after the incident surrounding the NOC list in '96 was irrelevant to him, thus sweeping this under the rug to preserve his own career. Kittridge was always a career opportunist - The truth never mattered to him.

So, how do we exonerate a man who's dead and his corpse is nowhere to be found, either? Somebody knows the truth and since we're dealing with awakening the demons of the past, the past itself will take care of the future and the truth will come out to serve the ongoing mission in the depths of the Bering ice cap."

So, why would Ethan Hunt care about a man he never knew? Because the man he knew was the man that he is. A man of honor who would put others before himself and, in Ethan's own words, the lives of others will matter more than his own. This was the man that Jim Phelps - the real Jim Phelps - was, and this is the man Ethan Hunt himself is. Both would've torn the universe in half to save innocent lives as well as members of their respective teams. Many times, Jim disobeyed orders (in other words, "went rogue") to save a colleague and they did the same for him. Ethan understands that all too well, so he'd do anything to exonerate a man whose name has been shamelessly desecrated in spite of his loyalty, patriotism and contribution to the preservation of all that is good and pure.

"For Jim," Ethan Hunt will say.

Years later, after Ethan completes the Sevastopol mission, he stops by the residence of the Phelps family, leaves a medal of honor Jim Phelps received posthumously on the porch, breaks out a slight smile - somewhat saddened, somewhat relieved - and walks away. His phone rings as in Ghost Protocol and he starts getting briefed about a new mission that's left incomplete to the audiences, the credits roll in. New day, new threat. "Theme from Mission: Impossible" explodes.

Courtesy of Ornithologist from a Discord server, 08/03/2023

This is how I would have done it. Quite possibly even involving Stefan Miklos, who, in my opinion, is the best antagonist of the TV show (the '88 revival included), who'd order the killing of Jim Phelps. The real Jim Phelps. And as he was embarrassed by the IMF years prior and now losing the Cold War, why not embarrass the IMF in return by having his own "Jim Phelps" inside the IMF?

Anyway...

Regarding Fallout, unfortunately we'll have to disagree there. I highly regard it as a great action film, and, if the movies in between the first and this wouldn't exist, this would indeed be a great sequel to that film. But, as an M:I film, it's a very big miss for me because it essentially undoes everything Rogue Nation worked for, undermining that film like it never mattered. Sean Harris was alright, I suppose, but for an anti-Ethan Hunt, I would've gotten someone else for that role, Christian Bale to be precise, as an inside joke. You know the connection. Solomon Lane should have been frightening, depicting an Ethan Hunt who's just evil. As for Cavill as August Walker, I thought he was an overglorified henchman. Not a bad character and even more so not a bad actor. I love Cavill, he's a great chap and I'd cast him in a lot of Bond-like roles. Even Thomas Crown. He's the second coming of Pierce Brosnan, IMO. But, Walker is someone I wouldn't see as a leading villain type but a henchman. Fallout was just M:I-3 done better. A lot better. Great action film, but not a faithful M:I film. They made the mistake of Ethan Hunt taking the sole focus again and involved his personal life, too. Nightmares, frights and anxieties that are unearned. A case of "show, don't tell". It didn't "show". Long story. We'll have to discuss that some other time. But, I'd also have to affirm that Rebecca Ferguson was a beautiful addition to the team. Cruise has an idea for things like these and he definitely paid the homages to the stuff he associated with Becky. She looked like Ingrid Bergman, and he called her Ilsa Faust (named after Ilsa Lund), set the movie in Casablanca, and made her rather mischievous in a lovable way like Ilsa Lund was in Casablanca. And "Faust", well... Because she essentially made a deal with the devil (Faustus and Mephistopheles), the latter allegorically being both Lane and Atlee (wasn't elaborated whether he was an MI6 officer or "C" himself).

As for Dead Reckoning Part One, I'll have to start a whole new thread for it. Lots to discuss. It's one genius film building up to how ingenious Part Two is going to be. I hope they deliver, because like you said... McQ and Cruise found a formula that worked for that... other franchise. Gee, why would that work? (The Higgins emoji. I love it. )

Re: The Man from UNCLE, you're right about everything you said about the show. The first season is outstanding, the second... is alright. But, the third one and onwards... Not for me. Too "out there", like you said. That's why I prefer the film over the show, and this comes from a purist and a traditionalist. Only bad thing about the film is the way the agency was handled. Afterthought. But, I can overlook it. As I said, though, do watch Kiss the Girls and Make Them Die. You'll like it.

And really, for my own take on Mannix (I decided not to call it just Mannix, but want to give each entry its own title, like the Bond films, and I already have a great title named after a Lalo Schifrin track), I'm glad you see the potential. I'm drawing a lot of inspiration from Harper (1966) and Marlowe (1969) to make the character a bit more robust characteristically and less kind like the Joe Mannix that we know is. Given today's world, it would make sense for a descendant to be slightly more smug and sarcastic when interacting with people who have no respect for anything. But, he's not cold-hearted. He'd pretty much be like his ol' grandad, helping those who really are in need, and definitely isn't uncaring.

Wow, buddy, that is one amazing script idea for your M:I Fakelps correction! Are you sure you're not an actual Hollywood writer that's lurking around here? No wait, strike that!! If you were an actual Hollywood writer your ideas wouldn't be nearly this good. Seriously, Hollywood unfortunately has a lack of good writers these days. Either that or they're forced to write "by committee" and sacrifice their good ideas to please what the studio execs want to see. I could never work in such a system. So yeah, what you have right there is not just a proper understanding of the M:I series (tone and feel) but a really awesome premise of how to fix that whole Fakelps debacle. If I were McQuarrie I'd definitely hire you, man! Great job!!

I think you hinted at some connection with Christian Bale and the M:I series? I'm afraid I'm not familiar with it. Unless you're referring to his one-time rant (meltdown?) at some film crew member several years back and then Cruise did the same thing during the Covid epidemic at one of his crew members? Maybe that's it lol.

Yeah I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on FALLOUT. I mean yes I do see that there is more emotional baggage with Hunt in that film (dreams, flashbacks, nightmares) but for me it doesn't really detract because the film is such a well-oiled machine and such an excellent piece of grand entertainment. I agree that Cavill who I guess is supposed to be the main baddie comes across more as a henchman but I'm fine with that because he's such a physical screen presence (from that amazing bathroom fight to the showdown in Norway helicopter vs helicopter) that I can't really find any faults with him. His twist and reveal is great as well so I've no complaints. Sean Harris as Lane is more of a creepy background villain this time around but again since Cavill is front and center I have no issues with that. I preferred Lane without the beard in ROGUE NATION where he didn't look like an Old Testament prophet lol. But hey maybe that's the point - the Prophets, right? He's one of them. Speaking of the bathroom fight - man, that was intense!! I thought I saw the greatest bathroom fight in movie history a long time ago when I saw James Cameron's TRUE LIES but after seeing this one the former pales in comparison. This is on a whole other level!

You mentioned Stefan Miklos... am I safe in assuming that "The Mind of Stefan Miklos" is your favorite episode of the original series? Apparently this is a fan favorite. I have to be honest that first time I saw it I was completely confused. I just wasn't prepared for an episode like this. Definitely a deviation from the norm. Sure, you typically had to pay attention while watching previous episodes but it's not like you had to take notes and carefully follow every move and countermove on the screen. Most episodes were pretty easy to follow and definitely not taxing on your brain. But this one was definitely different. I remember scratching my head afterwards and thinking did Christopher Nolan's dad write this??? Seriously, that's how I felt after seeing Nolan's INCEPTION. Utter confusion! I don't care for Nolan by the way. He seems too preoccupied with trying to be smarter than the audience and to be confusing for the sake of confusion - as a way to generate more buzz for his films. Not my thing. Anyway, I digressed. So then I went back and rewatched "Stefan Miklos" immediately a second time and this time paid VERY close attention to every detail and then it made much more sense and was a much more satisfactory viewing experience. Like I said, I wasn't ready for something this labyrinthine in a M:I episode. Well done indeed. But maybe it should have come with a warning at the beginning to pay very very close attention.

I'm deeply touched by the heartfelt compliment, my friend. Thank you. What I wouldn't give to have been a writer and filmmaker in an era where Hollywood was at the top of its game, producing and making films and television shows that were unmatched - Quite the golden era it was! But, yes, I also couldn't work in that very system you mentioned that keep besmirching the name of a once great industry. It would be illogical to think there are no good creatives out there who couldn't deliver, it's just that those in power don't want them around rather deliberately, like a certain contemporary show I heard based on a book series made today whose current writers are ones who have no respect for the source material nor any love for it, and the studio wants it that way. Goes to show where the blame should be directed to. But, yeah... Same thing applies to the world of literature and comic books. Saddening to see the pendulum swing to the opposite side too far and for too long. Hopefully, we'll see it swinging back in the right direction in my lifetime.

The Christian Bale connection comes from the fact that he was greatly inspired by Tom Cruise to portray the sadistic, "soulless" villain in American Psycho based on an interview Cruise did with David Letterman. Apparently, Cruise at one point was also considered for the role that Bale played. So, why not have Bale play the villain opposite Cruise's hero? Both are eccentric, pedantic (Bale even more so, I think Cruise mellowed down a lot since the Oprah incident) and still very energetic. I would have loved to see that happen; it would be great revenge on Cruise's part.

The thing is that I am not against emotional baggage, but it just wasn't warranted in the slightest, in my opinion. I would have kept the action sequences as they are in the film but would have sacked the whole overlong epilogue to Rogue Nation that shouldn't have been. Or rather... prevent the fifth film from being an uneventful prologue to Fallout, thus really undermining its impact. Mind you, I don't hate the film. This may sound like I hate it, but I don't. Because it introduced The Black Widow (Vanessa Kirby) who's just marvelous in it! But, certain things the way they turned out and got repeated to death bother me, like how Alan Hunley, the IMF Secretary, had to be there and got killed. That's one gag they repeated two films ago, makes you think Hollywood has really run out of ideas. Why would the Secretary be out there in the field? It made sense in Ghost Protocol, but really not here. Great setpieces, great action, but the story and the way it involved Lane as Hunt's worst nightmare without showing the impact disappointed me. I just hope Dead Reckoning Part Two doesn't deliver a half-baked result like that, because I really and truly did enjoy Part One. They took their time with it, even though it's been three years now since Part Two has already been in production (shooting and rewriting on the fly, which, in the long run, could prove drastic). Knowing the lore, I just don't want them to handle it like teens handle online fan fiction. Or perhaps my way of thinking is boomer-like, which I take great pride in.

First time I'm hearing this from someone who found "The Mind of Stefan Miklos" complicated. Perhaps it's a matter of perspective, but I didn't find it that different from the rest of the M:I episodes, only a bit more hefty in its execution since M:I is supposed to be all mind games and manipulation of the enemy through deception, only that they were set out to do it against a very Hans Lada-like opponent whose wit and intellect did give Phelps a run for his money. Another one that provided this kind of weight is "The Interrogator" with Henry Silva - another great episode that I thoroughly enjoyed. But, yes, you're quite right that both ooze the same ideas as Inception. But, then again, Nolan may have written that albeit not on his own but by aping it from other sources, particularly Japanese animes and mangas. I, too, have a disdain for him and his likes - directors who really try to be "intellectual" and pretend they invented Rubik's Cube. But, their audiences are worse, convincing themselves they "have better understanding of a think-machine philosophy" than the rest of us. I'd rather get my champagne and caviar as is than mix it with cyanide and kool aid.

I just picked up where I left off with Tightrope! right now, and it's amazing how they fit in a compelling way of adapting a Yojimbo/Red Harvest-like story in a 20-minute episode. And this was broadcast on TV in 1959, which says a lot about talent that got appreciated back in the day. Amazing writing, terrific acting and direction. Mike Connors should have made more stuff like this after he was done with Mannix. I know they attempted to make Ohanian (based on his real last name) that's closer to his persona than Mannix, but that didn't work. However, I really would have loved to see a suave and a rogue-ish hero that he played in Tightrope!. He did make another pilot episode inspired by Mr. Lucky, though, which I haven't had the chance to see yet, but I will. One thing they keep making a large disservice to Tightrope! is by not releasing it on home media in any shape or form. Some episodes have been made for VHS tapes quite possibly, given the way the transfer looks from back in the 80s, some others they outright recorded with cameras from reel projections, and then, they bundled them all in bootleg DVDs where you can find them online, with one episode completely missing. Bryan Cranston is executive producing a parody of the show that's to star Ty Burrell, apparently, likely to spoof the technical limitations, the screen attitudes and narratives of that time, which could pave the way for the original show to get some exposure. No Mike Connors fan should be left without this show, because it's swell from what I've seen, and I'm already halfway through the season. And what a banger theme it has! I spoke with a lot of boomers who actually watched the show in their youth and they praised it to heaven and back, which is a testament to its popularity over the course of the year it was on television.



(Fan art, but with the help of AI, which I personally have edited myself and added the text, along with other modifications. I made sure the art was done in the style of Robert McGinnis's illustrations, whose work is out of this world. Him, Renato Casaro, Fay Dalton, Frank McCarthy, Montyne - an unusual choice, but I'm a big fan of his work on the Tarzan view-master reels - and last but not least, the modern-day Paul Mann.)

Hey there, Bird-lover.

You're quite welcome. Listen -- you would have fit right in if you were a writer or filmmaker back in the 60s. You understand that decade. Heck, it seems you live it everyday. I live in the past too so I know how it is. But if anyone can do a throwback to that decade TODAY it would definitely be you! Heck, you'd make a fantastic script doctor too. Look how quickly and deftly you fixed that whole Fakelps debacle. Kudos to you! Keep it up. You never know what might turn around for you. Much less talented people somehow made it.

Regarding the epilogue of ROGUE NATION, I guess I'm confused by what you didn't like there. Or maybe I'm not remembering an overlong epilogue. I remember the ending where they trap Lane in that glass box, which for me is one of the coolest moments in the entire film series and one that evokes the original TV series more than any other single scene in the entire film franchise! Heck, wasn't there even an episode which was called "The Glass Box"? Lloyd Bochner, Larry Linville guest starring if memory serves me correctly. Wonder if that was the inspiration for this scene. In any case it's just way too cool and suspenseful. Give me a scene like that over all the derring-do "I do my own stunts" grandstanding that Tom likes to do in each film. Sure, those stunt set pieces are exciting but nothing beats that raw 60s M:I spy feel. Anyway, I digressed. So the Lane capture in my memory is the ending of the film. I guess I don't recall an epilogue. Is it when Ethan and Ilsa say their goodbyes? As I recall that wasn't overlong at all and I don't recall it being at the very end. But I could be mistaken. I just recall the film as being very lean and fat-free. I'll agree that FALLOUT has a bit extra fat and is more emotional-heavy but not ROGUE NATION. But maybe I need to revisit the film.

TIGHTROPE is a title that I've definitely come across before, looking at Mike Connors' filmography. Never seen an episode though. Sounds interesting and worth checking out. Glad you're enjoying it. So many great shows that only lasted a single season that are largely forgotten while crap shows that seemingly ran for eternity. Seems unfair, doesn't it? I checked out the show's cool theme and it was by none other than George Duning whom I know as the man who created the theme for 60s TV western THE BIG VALLEY, one of my favorite TV westerns (after BONANZA). Guys like him and Dominic Frontiere and Jerry Goldsmith and Fred Steiner and Henry Mancini and Lalo Schifrin and Bernard Herrmann and Morton Stevens sure made an impact on classic television!

Since this thread is about Mike Connors and MANNIX I wonder what some of your favorite MANNIX episodes are. Or maybe your favorite season(s). I know you like season 1 (as I do) but I'm sure the show got even better as it went along, especially around seasons 4 or 5. I remember the excellent skiing episode "Cold Trail" from around that time and it featured probably the best car chase I've ever seen on television! I recall the season 2 opener "The Silent Cry" which is another favorite. What a banger of an opening for a new season, featuring a deaf-mute witness to a kidnapping. Then there's the pre-cursor to DIE HARD in the final season called "The Empty Tower" (with Bill Bixby) which was an absolute blast. Like watching a feature film! I've only seen a few episodes here and there post-season 1 so I'm not the best judge of those episodes. Season 1 is the only one I've seen in its entirety. From the first season the pilot is a definite standout! I just love that ending especially in the desert with that tower where there's some trippy camerawork going on as a body falls down the stairwell towards the camera! That whole ending is really suspenseful and feels like a feature film! The 2-parter "Deadfall" is another really good one. As was "Huntdown" which I guess became a trope for the series where Mannix always seemed to stumble onto some secret in some quiet little town. And mention was already made in this thread of the other trope - that Mannix seemingly served with a bunch of psychos in Korea, who years later would come back and try to kill him. I recall Steve Ihnat, Darren McGavin, and most notably Clu Gulager. Maybe there were others. Anyway, let me know what you think of some of these episodes or what some of your favorites were. Take care.

[Ornithologist]

Hi ornithologist, sorry, got side tracked on some things.

Yes I agree with you that by TND Judi Dench's M is the M of old - pimping Bond out to accomplish his mission. They did want to have their cake and eat it too. Trying to stay current but then also be faithful to who 007 really is. I have no complaints with that whatsoever. I love both GE and TND (GE more of course) so none of these things bother me. It's just that I think the series in the 90s (probably because of Babs and Michael taking over from Cubby - more Babs than Michael I think) tried to be more current with the changing times (which included being more PC, plus Bond not smoking though he then lights up in DAD) whereas in the previous 3 decades under Cubby Bond seemed to be a more unchanging character in a changing world, which is something that to me was always a major plus. Of course to criticize a changing Bond in the 90s is so unfair when compared to what they've done with him during the Craig tenure. So that's why ultimately the 90s was still a safe place for the 007 series compared to where we are now. Very sad what's happened.

It's funny that you mentioned your love for the MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE film series. I'm with you 100%! That series is now doing successfully what the Bond series used to do - thrill and entertain! Bond is all about moping and wallowing in self pity these days with too much "personal" angst and baggage. The M:I series has some of that but the spectacle and the creativity of the set pieces and the plot comes first which is what draws me to these films. 100% agreed that GHOST PROTOCOL was the turning point for the series where it basically shot to the next level. It finally founds its identity. I remember once watching the first one on VHS years ago (this was long before I ever saw a single episode of the TV series) and being confused and underwhelmed by it. Then I saw the second one on VHS and was surprisingly entertained by it - it was basically a high-octane John Woo actioner with a pretty straightforward plot that was easy to follow so it pleased me just fine. But let's be honest - it hardly feels like M:I. Then I saw the third one on DVD and again was underwhelmed by it. Like you I thought the personal soap opera baggage was too much and quite frankly the film lacked a big budget feel to it. It felt like an extended episode of ALIAS (J.J. Abrams was behind both). But now the 4th one I actually went to the theater to see with a buddy of mine and I honestly didn't expect much (based on the previous 3 films) and was mainly looking forward to the Burj Khalifa scene which was so heavily promoted. But man, I was totally blown away!! Every part of that film just clicked for me, every set piece was amazing. Maybe things slowed a bit when they got to India but then there was the cool car park scene (very creative!!) to cap it all off. Even the score by Michael Giacchino had a cool 60s retro feel to it, including the first usage of Schifrin's famous "The Plot" theme from the TV series. Man, that brought a smile to my face. Anyhoo, I thought the film was a fluke (they got lucky) and the next one couldn't possibly be this good. Imagine my surprise when I walked out of the theater in 2015 after seeing ROGUE NATION and being blown away yet again. Honestly, I think it even surpasses GHOST PROTOCOL. Just a perfect film, not one scene wasted, not one misstep. Plus the addition of Rebecca Ferguson was a major asset! Imagine how disappointing it was later in 2015 to watch SPECTRE on the big screen (another spy film about a secret shadowy organization controlling things - Syndicate vs Spectre). Boy, what a difference between the 2 films. Big fan of Sean Harris too as the creepy Solomon Lane. Probably my favorite M:I villain (along with Henry Cavill). Which takes us to 2018's FALLOUT. This is where we may disagree because to me it's the perfect M:I film and quite possibly the greatest action film of all time. I literally had to hold on to my seat because the action was so visceral and so intense!! That helicopter vs helicopter battle at the end amongst those cliffs in Norway is probably the most insane thing I ever saw, followed by the Hunt vs. Henry Cavill battle to the death. Amazing film!! I can't believe that there's someone out there (McQuarrie and Cruise) who seem to have some secret formula on how to create the perfect film. Again and again and again. This type of thing isn't supposed to happen with sequels. But somehow they managed to find a way to top each one. The last one DEAD RECKONING was another fantastic film but I've only seen it once unlike the others so I still need to see it again to figure out where it ranks. It's definitely near the top. Can't wait for PART 2.

Speaking of the M:I TV series I think the episode you mentioned where Cinnamon is captured (and tortured too, or at least sleep deprived) is season 3's "The Exchange", correct? John Vernon is the main baddie in that one, as he always is. Our guys are trying to do an exchange to get Cinnamon by giving up some foreign agent. It was a very good episode. Back to the first M:I film - I don't think any of the TV cast liked that film. I think Martin Landau had some negative things to say (not sure about Peter Graves) and as for Greg Morris he walked out of the film after about 20 minutes (long before the Phelps as bad guy reveal) and basically called it a piece of sh!t. I'm sure the killing of the whole IMF team at the start rubbed a lot of folks the wrong way. Folks walked in to expect something resembling the old series and got something completely different - a major subversion of the series. It's like if you walked in to see a traditional Bond film (back in the day, because anything goes these days) and expected Bond to get his mission from M and go on his merry way to complete his assignment.... instead Bond shows up at the Mi6 headquarters and finds M, Moneypenny, Q, Minister of Defence, Bill Tanner, and other staff all assassinated and he himself framed for the murders. Now he has to spend the rest of the film on the run and try to figure out whodunit. Oh, and at the end M turns out to be alive and turns out he/she killed everyone. Hey, I'm surprised Babsie hasn't tried this yet with the current Bond films. Maybe we'll get it in the next one... Anything goes, right?

As for the film version of THE MAN FROM U.N.C.L.E. it actually just popped up recently on my Netflix account - it's on my to-watch list. I heard good things about it from a buddy of mine who's a big Bond fan. Wasn't too big on the old TV series. A bit too out-there for me, and this is coming from someone who enjoys the outrageous Bond films like YOLT and MOONRAKER. But I think the TV series often went too far into the fantastical realm. It's okay from time to time. But on a weekly basis it gets to be too much. And too cheesy. Fun for the kids though. It becomes too much like THE WILD WILD WEST (the TV show, never saw the film) where it's basically science fiction/fantasy. I prefer more grounded TV spy fare like M:I or even I SPY. Though some of the earlier B&W episodes of U.N.C.L.E. are pretty good. "The Iowa-Scuba Affair" comes to mind. Mostly for the casting of Slim Pickens as a rural good ol' boy type who's apparently the head of a Commie spy ring bent on overthrowing the leadership of some Banana Republic. Now that's a hoot!

Regarding Alistair MacLean, I completely forgot about ICE STATION ZEBRA. You probably know that Howard Hughes was absolutely obsessed with this film and played it constantly almost on a loop. Weird chap, eh? I did finally see the film some years back and enjoyed it quite a bit. Submarine films can be hit or miss but this one worked just fine for me. Good Cold War story with good performances all around, including Mr. McGoohan! Well, except for maybe Ernie Borgnine who's about as Russkie as Jackie Chan is Italian. So yeah I enjoyed the film and would count it as one of my favorites from 1968 (just below ONCE UPON A TIME IN THE WEST and BULLITT) but no way would I ever watch it on a constant loop and it's nowhere near the brilliance of WHERE EAGLES DARE. Speaking of which, I use the line "Broadsword calling Danny Boy. Come in, Danny Boy" almost on a regular basis. I'll have to give AVALANCE EXPRESS a look-see. I've come across that title in the past. I know Mike Connors is in it and I'm a huge fan of both Lee Marvin and Bobby Shaw.

Your legacy script for MANNIX sounds fascinating. I'll be first in line at the cinema when the film comes out!

Welcome back, my friend! No worries, I understand. I got a little tied up myself!

You've hit the nail right on the head regarding the franchise that was great once, the so-called "trendsetter" of them all. Nothing to add, really, except that... Whatever you said regarding "anything goes", that already has happened after the atrocity of 2021. Ian Fleming Publications commissioned a book that did all of that: Bond is gone, preachy stuff about "minority" 00s, M dead, Tanner commits suicide (they planned that originally for the 2015 idiocy ), and the topping on the cake... Moneypenny - a mere secretary in the 1960s - becomes M.

The trouble with the first three M:I films is that they focus on one character as opposed to a team of agents: Ethan Hunt takes the lead while the rest of the team takes a backseat. It doesn't work like that. I was watching an interview of Tom Cruise the other day from the 90s where he basically said he got the series because he liked the theme and not much else, which is exactly what I perceived he would've done, turning the M:I theme into The Ethan Hunt Theme. Reminds me of the Spy Hunter video game series where they blatantly stole Peter Gunn's Theme and claimed it as the theme of their own series. Any person without an OCD would develop one because of it. Imagine...

"That's a cool theme. What's it called?"
"The Peter Gunn Theme."
"Nice, so the hero is called Peter Gunn?"
"No. He's called Alec Sects. Later, Alex Decker."
"Erm... Then, who's Peter Gunn?"
"Some guy from some TV show."
"Is that in the game?"
"No."
"Then, why is the series using a theme from a TV show named after the hero of that series?"
"Dunno, sounded cool. We couldn't have come up with our own theme, so we snatched another one."

Head-scratching!

But, yeah... The M:I film series found its identity by Ghost Protocol because they actually followed the formula of the show where Hunt wasn't the main focus but the team was. The whole team was given equal screen time and importance. Of course, Ethan Hunt still leads the team like Jim Phelps had done it for six seasons and Dan Briggs a season before him. This actually would lead us to an interesting conversation since I observe all of this rather closely. Since Rogue Nation, they tightened the connections to the TV show even more by producing prop documents for onscreen use where Ethan Hunt, Luther Stickell and Benji Dunn were all recruited by a certain Lt. Commander Briggs, which indicates that this is Dan Briggs and he was still in the IMF by the 90s, while the first film infers that Fakelps introduced Ethan Hunt to a lot of the good stuff. Funnily enough, none of the stuff Fakelps claimed to have been present in his background were present with the Jim Phelps of the show, meaning the writers had no bloody idea what they were yapping about. And you're correct, Landau and Morris both dismissed the first film as an embarrassment, with Landau basically saying "Our team was going to commit suicide one by one", laughing at whoever came up with that story. But, Greg Morris... Now, he was disgusted by the way they mistreated Phelps! Now, that's a friend! He walked out of the cinema and correctly called it a "piece of s**t". Peter Graves turned down the offer to reprise his role given the context, but publicly remained diplomatic about it. I heard he was greatly upset, though. The character meant a lot to him. As you've seen in "The Exchange", he essentially went rogue like Ethan always does, and moved heaven and earth to bring back Cinnamon without compromising the mission. Is this the kind of man who'd kill his own team for his own benefit? I hope they're reading this! However... Apparently, the character of Willy Armitage was present in the earlier versions of M:I-2 (post-Oliver Stone; that was a complete different M:I-2), but they let go of that, quite possibly to keep the series fresh and not risk a reboot. Continuity and all. But, like you said, while it's an entertaining action film (and a damn good one at that), it's nothing like an M:I film. You just hear a hard rock version of the M:I theme cued when Ethan Hunt does "something cool" the way The James Bond Theme would've played if Bond did something cool during an action scene, hence my argument above regarding the misuse of the theme. The third film retained the M:I feel after Woo-ifying the previous one, but to this day, it remains the weakest one in my book. The one I ignore every time I do a marathon. One pointless film that goes nowhere, copying The Bourne Supremacy like most action films between 2004 and 2011 (woeful times!). Cruise, apparently, wanted Martin Landau to cameo as Rollin Hand in the third film but Landau refused. Then, by 2009, when Jim Abrams was still attached to direct the fourth film (thankfully, he did not), he wanted Peter Graves to come back. They were probably attempting to fix the issue from the first film. They even entertained the idea of a prequel for the third film. However, when Graves passed away, those plans fell apart. But, IMO, they can still fix this. Let me tell you how...

Christmas Eve, 1991 - the night before the Soviet Union dissolved:

A team sent by the IMF and led by veteran spymaster Jim Phelps succeeds in orchestrating the end of the Cold War by pulling a mission heavily deemed impossible for years. The team, with the help of spies on both sides of the Bloc, contribute to the cause and making it to the clear. Despite the dissolution of everything embodied within the Soviet Union, the KGB recognized Jim and thus sent one of their most formidable assassins to kill him and dispose of him. A rogue faction inside the Kremlin vows revenge on those organized this operation and they carefully place that very assassin inside what they identified years ago as IMF due to traitorous moles inside the Pentagon or the US Intelligence community (could be CIA, NSA, National Intelligence, any of them), thus revealing the face of the man Ethan Hunt knew as "Jim Phelps" (Jon Voight) - The man who never was.

Just imagine the whole thing ending with the team heading out in a truck per the ending of every episode, the Soviet Union is about to fall and people are excited that the Cold War is ending. "Have Yourself A Very Little Christmas" is playing during the scene, cut to Jim walking under the snow in Moscow as the team scatters to head for their specific exit routes, happy, and as the song approaches its ending, an assassin shows up with a silenced CZ 82 and shoots Jim abruptly once he turns to a backalley and drops dead (reminiscent of Sidney Reilly's death), then the assassin steps out as the alley light reveals his face, it's the character played by Jon Voight. As he pulls Jim's corpse away, the blood on the snowy floor is painted away, the song ends and the screen fades to black.

The IMF got downsized and rebranded as a wing of the CIA (like Special Activities Division), its budget slashed, because those in power deemed the agency unnecessary given the Cold War was over now and the tension between the East and the West got reduced - but that was all superficial. Most of the IMF personnel were sacked, including agents from an era of relics and thus new faces were needed. A man identifying himself as "Jim Phelps" one day reports to duty after months of going MIA and he had all the answers to regain his clearance, thus re-establishing his identity with the agency. After all, there was no one to dispute his claims. Inside men replaced the required information working for the enemy the way IMF used to do back in the old days, so archived information was unreliable to identify the impostor.

Then-director of the CIA, Eugene Kittridge got wind of a traffic of smuggled information going out from Langley to enemy nations and independent enterprises in the same business and decided to play along, but it cost him dearly, losing multiple agents and important personnel in the long run, so clearing the name of Jim Phelps after the incident surrounding the NOC list in '96 was irrelevant to him, thus sweeping this under the rug to preserve his own career. Kittridge was always a career opportunist - The truth never mattered to him.

So, how do we exonerate a man who's dead and his corpse is nowhere to be found, either? Somebody knows the truth and since we're dealing with awakening the demons of the past, the past itself will take care of the future and the truth will come out to serve the ongoing mission in the depths of the Bering ice cap."

So, why would Ethan Hunt care about a man he never knew? Because the man he knew was the man that he is. A man of honor who would put others before himself and, in Ethan's own words, the lives of others will matter more than his own. This was the man that Jim Phelps - the real Jim Phelps - was, and this is the man Ethan Hunt himself is. Both would've torn the universe in half to save innocent lives as well as members of their respective teams. Many times, Jim disobeyed orders (in other words, "went rogue") to save a colleague and they did the same for him. Ethan understands that all too well, so he'd do anything to exonerate a man whose name has been shamelessly desecrated in spite of his loyalty, patriotism and contribution to the preservation of all that is good and pure.

"For Jim," Ethan Hunt will say.

Years later, after Ethan completes the Sevastopol mission, he stops by the residence of the Phelps family, leaves a medal of honor Jim Phelps received posthumously on the porch, breaks out a slight smile - somewhat saddened, somewhat relieved - and walks away. His phone rings as in Ghost Protocol and he starts getting briefed about a new mission that's left incomplete to the audiences, the credits roll in. New day, new threat. "Theme from Mission: Impossible" explodes.

Courtesy of Ornithologist from a Discord server, 08/03/2023

This is how I would have done it. Quite possibly even involving Stefan Miklos, who, in my opinion, is the best antagonist of the TV show (the '88 revival included), who'd order the killing of Jim Phelps. The real Jim Phelps. And as he was embarrassed by the IMF years prior and now losing the Cold War, why not embarrass the IMF in return by having his own "Jim Phelps" inside the IMF?

Anyway...

Regarding Fallout, unfortunately we'll have to disagree there. I highly regard it as a great action film, and, if the movies in between the first and this wouldn't exist, this would indeed be a great sequel to that film. But, as an M:I film, it's a very big miss for me because it essentially undoes everything Rogue Nation worked for, undermining that film like it never mattered. Sean Harris was alright, I suppose, but for an anti-Ethan Hunt, I would've gotten someone else for that role, Christian Bale to be precise, as an inside joke. You know the connection. Solomon Lane should have been frightening, depicting an Ethan Hunt who's just evil. As for Cavill as August Walker, I thought he was an overglorified henchman. Not a bad character and even more so not a bad actor. I love Cavill, he's a great chap and I'd cast him in a lot of Bond-like roles. Even Thomas Crown. He's the second coming of Pierce Brosnan, IMO. But, Walker is someone I wouldn't see as a leading villain type but a henchman. Fallout was just M:I-3 done better. A lot better. Great action film, but not a faithful M:I film. They made the mistake of Ethan Hunt taking the sole focus again and involved his personal life, too. Nightmares, frights and anxieties that are unearned. A case of "show, don't tell". It didn't "show". Long story. We'll have to discuss that some other time. But, I'd also have to affirm that Rebecca Ferguson was a beautiful addition to the team. Cruise has an idea for things like these and he definitely paid the homages to the stuff he associated with Becky. She looked like Ingrid Bergman, and he called her Ilsa Faust (named after Ilsa Lund), set the movie in Casablanca, and made her rather mischievous in a lovable way like Ilsa Lund was in Casablanca. And "Faust", well... Because she essentially made a deal with the devil (Faustus and Mephistopheles), the latter allegorically being both Lane and Atlee (wasn't elaborated whether he was an MI6 officer or "C" himself).

As for Dead Reckoning Part One, I'll have to start a whole new thread for it. Lots to discuss. It's one genius film building up to how ingenious Part Two is going to be. I hope they deliver, because like you said... McQ and Cruise found a formula that worked for that... other franchise. Gee, why would that work? (The Higgins emoji. I love it. )

Re: The Man from UNCLE, you're right about everything you said about the show. The first season is outstanding, the second... is alright. But, the third one and onwards... Not for me. Too "out there", like you said. That's why I prefer the film over the show, and this comes from a purist and a traditionalist. Only bad thing about the film is the way the agency was handled. Afterthought. But, I can overlook it. As I said, though, do watch Kiss the Girls and Make Them Die. You'll like it.

And really, for my own take on Mannix (I decided not to call it just Mannix, but want to give each entry its own title, like the Bond films, and I already have a great title named after a Lalo Schifrin track), I'm glad you see the potential. I'm drawing a lot of inspiration from Harper (1966) and Marlowe (1969) to make the character a bit more robust characteristically and less kind like the Joe Mannix that we know is. Given today's world, it would make sense for a descendant to be slightly more smug and sarcastic when interacting with people who have no respect for anything. But, he's not cold-hearted. He'd pretty much be like his ol' grandad, helping those who really are in need, and definitely isn't uncaring.

Wow, buddy, that is one amazing script idea for your M:I Fakelps correction! Are you sure you're not an actual Hollywood writer that's lurking around here? No wait, strike that!! If you were an actual Hollywood writer your ideas wouldn't be nearly this good. Seriously, Hollywood unfortunately has a lack of good writers these days. Either that or they're forced to write "by committee" and sacrifice their good ideas to please what the studio execs want to see. I could never work in such a system. So yeah, what you have right there is not just a proper understanding of the M:I series (tone and feel) but a really awesome premise of how to fix that whole Fakelps debacle. If I were McQuarrie I'd definitely hire you, man! Great job!!

I think you hinted at some connection with Christian Bale and the M:I series? I'm afraid I'm not familiar with it. Unless you're referring to his one-time rant (meltdown?) at some film crew member several years back and then Cruise did the same thing during the Covid epidemic at one of his crew members? Maybe that's it lol.

Yeah I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on FALLOUT. I mean yes I do see that there is more emotional baggage with Hunt in that film (dreams, flashbacks, nightmares) but for me it doesn't really detract because the film is such a well-oiled machine and such an excellent piece of grand entertainment. I agree that Cavill who I guess is supposed to be the main baddie comes across more as a henchman but I'm fine with that because he's such a physical screen presence (from that amazing bathroom fight to the showdown in Norway helicopter vs helicopter) that I can't really find any faults with him. His twist and reveal is great as well so I've no complaints. Sean Harris as Lane is more of a creepy background villain this time around but again since Cavill is front and center I have no issues with that. I preferred Lane without the beard in ROGUE NATION where he didn't look like an Old Testament prophet lol. But hey maybe that's the point - the Prophets, right? He's one of them. Speaking of the bathroom fight - man, that was intense!! I thought I saw the greatest bathroom fight in movie history a long time ago when I saw James Cameron's TRUE LIES but after seeing this one the former pales in comparison. This is on a whole other level!

You mentioned Stefan Miklos... am I safe in assuming that "The Mind of Stefan Miklos" is your favorite episode of the original series? Apparently this is a fan favorite. I have to be honest that first time I saw it I was completely confused. I just wasn't prepared for an episode like this. Definitely a deviation from the norm. Sure, you typically had to pay attention while watching previous episodes but it's not like you had to take notes and carefully follow every move and countermove on the screen. Most episodes were pretty easy to follow and definitely not taxing on your brain. But this one was definitely different. I remember scratching my head afterwards and thinking did Christopher Nolan's dad write this??? Seriously, that's how I felt after seeing Nolan's INCEPTION. Utter confusion! I don't care for Nolan by the way. He seems too preoccupied with trying to be smarter than the audience and to be confusing for the sake of confusion - as a way to generate more buzz for his films. Not my thing. Anyway, I digressed. So then I went back and rewatched "Stefan Miklos" immediately a second time and this time paid VERY close attention to every detail and then it made much more sense and was a much more satisfactory viewing experience. Like I said, I wasn't ready for something this labyrinthine in a M:I episode. Well done indeed. But maybe it should have come with a warning at the beginning to pay very very close attention.

I'm deeply touched by the heartfelt compliment, my friend. Thank you. What I wouldn't give to have been a writer and filmmaker in an era where Hollywood was at the top of its game, producing and making films and television shows that were unmatched - Quite the golden era it was! But, yes, I also couldn't work in that very system you mentioned that keep besmirching the name of a once great industry. It would be illogical to think there are no good creatives out there who couldn't deliver, it's just that those in power don't want them around rather deliberately, like a certain contemporary show I heard based on a book series made today whose current writers are ones who have no respect for the source material nor any love for it, and the studio wants it that way. Goes to show where the blame should be directed to. But, yeah... Same thing applies to the world of literature and comic books. Saddening to see the pendulum swing to the opposite side too far and for too long. Hopefully, we'll see it swinging back in the right direction in my lifetime.

The Christian Bale connection comes from the fact that he was greatly inspired by Tom Cruise to portray the sadistic, "soulless" villain in American Psycho based on an interview Cruise did with David Letterman. Apparently, Cruise at one point was also considered for the role that Bale played. So, why not have Bale play the villain opposite Cruise's hero? Both are eccentric, pedantic (Bale even more so, I think Cruise mellowed down a lot since the Oprah incident) and still very energetic. I would have loved to see that happen; it would be great revenge on Cruise's part.

The thing is that I am not against emotional baggage, but it just wasn't warranted in the slightest, in my opinion. I would have kept the action sequences as they are in the film but would have sacked the whole overlong epilogue to Rogue Nation that shouldn't have been. Or rather... prevent the fifth film from being an uneventful prologue to Fallout, thus really undermining its impact. Mind you, I don't hate the film. This may sound like I hate it, but I don't. Because it introduced The Black Widow (Vanessa Kirby) who's just marvelous in it! But, certain things the way they turned out and got repeated to death bother me, like how Alan Hunley, the IMF Secretary, had to be there and got killed. That's one gag they repeated two films ago, makes you think Hollywood has really run out of ideas. Why would the Secretary be out there in the field? It made sense in Ghost Protocol, but really not here. Great setpieces, great action, but the story and the way it involved Lane as Hunt's worst nightmare without showing the impact disappointed me. I just hope Dead Reckoning Part Two doesn't deliver a half-baked result like that, because I really and truly did enjoy Part One. They took their time with it, even though it's been three years now since Part Two has already been in production (shooting and rewriting on the fly, which, in the long run, could prove drastic). Knowing the lore, I just don't want them to handle it like teens handle online fan fiction. Or perhaps my way of thinking is boomer-like, which I take great pride in.

First time I'm hearing this from someone who found "The Mind of Stefan Miklos" complicated. Perhaps it's a matter of perspective, but I didn't find it that different from the rest of the M:I episodes, only a bit more hefty in its execution since M:I is supposed to be all mind games and manipulation of the enemy through deception, only that they were set out to do it against a very Hans Lada-like opponent whose wit and intellect did give Phelps a run for his money. Another one that provided this kind of weight is "The Interrogator" with Henry Silva - another great episode that I thoroughly enjoyed. But, yes, you're quite right that both ooze the same ideas as Inception. But, then again, Nolan may have written that albeit not on his own but by aping it from other sources, particularly Japanese animes and mangas. I, too, have a disdain for him and his likes - directors who really try to be "intellectual" and pretend they invented Rubik's Cube. But, their audiences are worse, convincing themselves they "have better understanding of a think-machine philosophy" than the rest of us. I'd rather get my champagne and caviar as is than mix it with cyanide and kool aid.

I just picked up where I left off with Tightrope! right now, and it's amazing how they fit in a compelling way of adapting a Yojimbo/Red Harvest-like story in a 20-minute episode. And this was broadcast on TV in 1959, which says a lot about talent that got appreciated back in the day. Amazing writing, terrific acting and direction. Mike Connors should have made more stuff like this after he was done with Mannix. I know they attempted to make Ohanian (based on his real last name) that's closer to his persona than Mannix, but that didn't work. However, I really would have loved to see a suave and a rogue-ish hero that he played in Tightrope!. He did make another pilot episode inspired by Mr. Lucky, though, which I haven't had the chance to see yet, but I will. One thing they keep making a large disservice to Tightrope! is by not releasing it on home media in any shape or form. Some episodes have been made for VHS tapes quite possibly, given the way the transfer looks from back in the 80s, some others they outright recorded with cameras from reel projections, and then, they bundled them all in bootleg DVDs where you can find them online, with one episode completely missing. Bryan Cranston is executive producing a parody of the show that's to star Ty Burrell, apparently, likely to spoof the technical limitations, the screen attitudes and narratives of that time, which could pave the way for the original show to get some exposure. No Mike Connors fan should be left without this show, because it's swell from what I've seen, and I'm already halfway through the season. And what a banger theme it has! I spoke with a lot of boomers who actually watched the show in their youth and they praised it to heaven and back, which is a testament to its popularity over the course of the year it was on television.



(Fan art, but with the help of AI, which I personally have edited myself and added the text, along with other modifications. I made sure the art was done in the style of Robert McGinnis's illustrations, whose work is out of this world. Him, Renato Casaro, Fay Dalton, Frank McCarthy, Montyne - an unusual choice, but I'm a big fan of his work on the Tarzan view-master reels - and last but not least, the modern-day Paul Mann.)

Hey there, Bird-lover.

You're quite welcome. Listen -- you would have fit right in if you were a writer or filmmaker back in the 60s. You understand that decade. Heck, it seems you live it everyday. I live in the past too so I know how it is. But if anyone can do a throwback to that decade TODAY it would definitely be you! Heck, you'd make a fantastic script doctor too. Look how quickly and deftly you fixed that whole Fakelps debacle. Kudos to you! Keep it up. You never know what might turn around for you. Much less talented people somehow made it.

Regarding the epilogue of ROGUE NATION, I guess I'm confused by what you didn't like there. Or maybe I'm not remembering an overlong epilogue. I remember the ending where they trap Lane in that glass box, which for me is one of the coolest moments in the entire film series and one that evokes the original TV series more than any other single scene in the entire film franchise! Heck, wasn't there even an episode which was called "The Glass Box"? Lloyd Bochner, Larry Linville guest starring if memory serves me correctly. Wonder if that was the inspiration for this scene. In any case it's just way too cool and suspenseful. Give me a scene like that over all the derring-do "I do my own stunts" grandstanding that Tom likes to do in each film. Sure, those stunt set pieces are exciting but nothing beats that raw 60s M:I spy feel. Anyway, I digressed. So the Lane capture in my memory is the ending of the film. I guess I don't recall an epilogue. Is it when Ethan and Ilsa say their goodbyes? As I recall that wasn't overlong at all and I don't recall it being at the very end. But I could be mistaken. I just recall the film as being very lean and fat-free. I'll agree that FALLOUT has a bit extra fat and is more emotional-heavy but not ROGUE NATION. But maybe I need to revisit the film.

TIGHTROPE is a title that I've definitely come across before, looking at Mike Connors' filmography. Never seen an episode though. Sounds interesting and worth checking out. Glad you're enjoying it. So many great shows that only lasted a single season that are largely forgotten while crap shows that seemingly ran for eternity. Seems unfair, doesn't it? I checked out the show's cool theme and it was by none other than George Duning whom I know as the man who created the theme for 60s TV western THE BIG VALLEY, one of my favorite TV westerns (after BONANZA). Guys like him and Dominic Frontiere and Jerry Goldsmith and Fred Steiner and Henry Mancini and Lalo Schifrin and Bernard Herrmann and Morton Stevens sure made an impact on classic television!

Since this thread is about Mike Connors and MANNIX I wonder what some of your favorite MANNIX episodes are. Or maybe your favorite season(s). I know you like season 1 (as I do) but I'm sure the show got even better as it went along, especially around seasons 4 or 5. I remember the excellent skiing episode "Cold Trail" from around that time and it featured probably the best car chase I've ever seen on television! I recall the season 2 opener "The Silent Cry" which is another favorite. What a banger of an opening for a new season, featuring a deaf-mute witness to a kidnapping. Then there's the pre-cursor to DIE HARD in the final season called "The Empty Tower" (with Bill Bixby) which was an absolute blast. Like watching a feature film! I've only seen a few episodes here and there post-season 1 so I'm not the best judge of those episodes. Season 1 is the only one I've seen in its entirety. From the first season the pilot is a definite standout! I just love that ending especially in the desert with that tower where there's some trippy camerawork going on as a body falls down the stairwell towards the camera! That whole ending is really suspenseful and feels like a feature film! The 2-parter "Deadfall" is another really good one. As was "Huntdown" which I guess became a trope for the series where Mannix always seemed to stumble onto some secret in some quiet little town. And mention was already made in this thread of the other trope - that Mannix seemingly served with a bunch of psychos in Korea, who years later would come back and try to kill him. I recall Steve Ihnat, Darren McGavin, and most notably Clu Gulager. Maybe there were others. Anyway, let me know what you think of some of these episodes or what some of your favorites were. Take care.

Coming from you, that's high praise! Sometime ago I was involved with a video game project that didn't pan out, which I was aiming to make it look like a throwback to the Hollywood golden era type adventure capers. It just keeps falling apart, so I moved on, focusing on my own series of novels that very much adhere to the stuff we loved from those old days. Let's hope I get to complete all planned 30 entries before I get older and ripe.

Regarding the "epilogue", you misunderstood me. My fault - should've elaborated further. I've no problem with Rogue Nation in the slightest, from start to finish. My gripe is with Fallout, which serves as an overlong epilogue to Rogue Nation, or rather making Rogue Nation look like a prologue. The story in Fallout essentially undid everything Rogue Nation work for - whether it was the victories attained or relationships established - and that's why I'm not content with it in the slightest, lore-wise that is. Just like the second film, Fallout, in my honest opinion, would've been better if it was looked at as an original film unrelated to Mission: Impossible, because on their own, both movies are terrific and fun, but they don't fit in with the rest of the films. What I heavily disliked about Fallout was the fact that it was trying real hard to appeal to Ethan Hunt's human side, giving him nightmares and all that are rather unfounded and out of place, and using a villain who's said to be so bad and so grisly on paper it fails to show and only manages to tell. Now, take Phillip Seymour Hoffman in the role of a cardboard villain, Owen Davian, whom the actor actually made memorable because he played the role very well - It was a case of showing and not telling. Sure, the third film is my least favorite and might as well not exist, but the villain, as bland as he was motivation-wise and all, was presented well enough to be engaging. I never felt that with Solomon Lane. Fallout depicts this whole thing as if Ethan is now facing the devil and has to make deals left and right to come through, but it never felt that way. In fact, the stakes were higher in the second film and Ghost Protocol, I could see Kurt Hendricks (Michael Nyqvist) haunting people more than Lane. Lane, in his two appearances, seemed like a bureaucratic type of a villain who just inherited a legacy he could not control, which was the reason of his downfall. I didn't find August Walker believable either as a second lead who may have developed an idealist view of their cause - He's nothing more than an overglorified henchman. All of them are told to have done these atrocities but they were never shown to have possessed those credibilities in any shape or form. Hendricks, on the other hand, was like Stefan Miklos (Steve Ihnat) gone dark. He had the mind to execute an operation to frame an IMF team, which may contribute to insisting upon the fact that he may have led similar operations in the face, possibly the Kremlin's very own IMF. Lane and Walker lack those. Whatever victories Rogue Nation exacted, Fallout undoes them and decides to rewrite the DNA sequence with its own tone and retelling - "How to capture Solomon Lane, again, and how to defeat The Syndicate who have been defeated in the first place after all of them were captured and discovered."

You couldn't be more right! There are shows out there, mostly created and produced by Dick Wolfe that I find unworthy of my time (he single-handedly ruined Miami Vice). Bland police procedurals, hospital dramas, melodramas, soap operas that have been running for God knows how many tens of seasons while good shows are often botched and put aside to relative obscurity it makes me sad.

I couldn't exactly pin down which episodes I find to be my favorite because there's very few in number I don't like from Mannix, but I'd like to start with the one that I found compelling but would have otherwise somewhat elongated to a second parter to demonstrate the villain's maniacal mastermind: "End Game" with Steve Ihnat. Now, Mannix is known for having people from his past pop up and make trouble which has since become the precursor to shows like The Rockford Files and Magnum, P.I. - especially the latter. Ihnat portraying a demolitions expert who sold out the unit back in Korea and has come to "punish" Mannix for abandoning him was a powerful one. I likened it a lot to Robert Loggia's Trusseau in "Don't Eat the Snow in Hawaii" and to a lesser extent, James Whitmore, Jr.'s Nuzo in "Did You See the Sunrise?" two-parters. I loved those. Steve Ihnat was just one of those people who should've stayed longer with us because he could've become an A-Lister given time. His other appearance in "To Draw the Lightning" is also one of my favorites in which he plays a stubborn cop with lots of integrity, refusing to ask for help. Another one I like, but purely for sentimentality, is "The Girl in the Frame". You have to admit, it does whet your appetite for curiosity - Expecting to find out who may be that girl in the painting, a reincarnation? A mirage? A foulplay (isn't it always? )? Now, one that I definitely saw as a highlight of the show was "Deadfall" (another two-parter) where Intertect's background is established a little, Mannix is in the wind whose fate is uncertain, and Wickersham is faced with uncertainty just like his operative. It's where I came up with the plot of the legacy script I'm working on (not using the story in any shape or form) but the way the characters behave and think. Wickersham himself is a field operative when the need arises, perfectly shown when he manages to escape from the hole they put him in despite his health condition. I love all the Nancy Kovack episodes, but I admit, I'm partial to her - that's why. There's a lot of parallels between Mannix episodes and those that of Magnum, P.I.. "A Question of Midnight" is another great one, Lee Meriwhether being a mysterious player you'd be intrigued to explore her motives. This is possibly a leftover on my account from her appearances in Batman (film adaptation of the '66 series) and Mission: Impossible. "A Night Full of Darkness" is also an impactful one where Art Malcolm loses his wife. What I don't like about it is that it's quickly forgotten in the subsequent episodes. Something like that you just don't forget. "Birds of Prey" is also one of my favorites, which actually led me to watch the film Venetian Bird starring Richard Todd (a Bond candidate before Connery). It's almost like a shot for shot remake of the film, which, in turn, is based on the novel of the same name. Mannix just replaces the protagonist of that novel, and some details are altered as well to accommodate the show. You also mentioned Darren McGavin: Who wouldn't love "Mad Buck Gibson"? He always plays eccentric fellows with lots of energy to emit, be it in the Mannix episode who's a psychotic dojo owner, discharged marine from Mannix's unit, and in secret a killer, or an eccentric writer and adventurer who essentially is analoguous to Ernest Hemingway (I actually have a feeling his portrayal of Mad Buck was based on Sterling Hayden's portrayal of Roger Wade from The Long Goodbye, whom, in turn, I also likened a lot to Hemingway - but the character is actually half-based on Raymond Chandler himself back when he was in heavy doubt of himself and when his wife was terminally ill; another story for another day). That said, I've never seen Kolchak nor have any interest in it. Another one I found impactful was Mannix starting off as a drug addict in "The Ragged Edge" which at first I almost believed to have been the case, but really was waiting for him to reveal himself as undercover, faking his condition to fool someone and that happened. I was relieved, I must say. I knew it, but confirming it gave me a relief. I was almost scared to see them take the route of that one Starsky & Hutch episode where Hutch was forced to become an addict against his will. Can't recall the name of the episode now, but I figure it was inspired by The French Connection II with Popeye Doyle going through the same motion. Anyway...

I just love this series. So much can still be done with it. And I intend to revive this and reignite the Mannix craze that people had back in the day.

Lots to discuss and explore over time, they can't be all summarized in one post. Looking forward to continuing this discussion, my good man. Cheerio, for now, and take care!

[Pahonu]

I’m enjoying the conversation, but I can’t keep track of who is saying what!

[Ornithologist]

Unfortunately, I'm very talkative. Must be the Higgins syndrome.

[Pahonu]

Unfortunately, I'm very talkative. Must be the Higgins syndrome.

Not at all! It’s just the quoting and re-quoting has gotten very hard to follow!

[Ornithologist]

Unfortunately, I'm very talkative. Must be the Higgins syndrome.

Not at all! It’s just the quoting and re-quoting has gotten very hard to follow!

I'll try to reduce it. Been a long time since I've dealt with forums pages.

In the meantime, I just revisited "The Inside Man". Funny that for years I didn't really make the connection but this episode was very Tightrope!-like and one that inspired one of my works. As I said above, it's one of my favorite episodes (included in the Nancy Kovack bundle). It also features John Colicos who's a terrific character actor you'd never think you're watching him twice - He never repeats the same trick, metaphorically speaking.

[Luther's nephew Dobie]

Ornithologist wrote
You also mentioned Darren McGavin: Who wouldn't love "Mad Buck Gibson"? He always plays eccentric fellows with lots of energy to emit, be it in the Mannix episode who's a psychotic dojo owner, discharged marine from Mannix's unit, and in secret a killer, or an eccentric writer and adventurer who essentially is analoguous to Ernest Hemingway (I actually have a feeling his portrayal of Mad Buck was based on Sterling Hayden's portrayal of Roger Wade from The Long Goodbye, whom, in turn, I also likened a lot to Hemingway - but the character is actually half-based on Raymond Chandler himself back when he was in heavy doubt of himself and when his wife was terminally ill; another story for another day).

Ornithologist,
You cleared up something for me, Hayden channeling Papa H. never seemed to me quite right, regarding what he was doing acting wise in "The Long Goodbye".
That his performance was half inspired by Chandler makes better sense.
Remember those commercials with the "most interesting man in the world", that's Sterling Hayden in real life, just his WW 2 record in the OSS would make a terrific movie,
and woe unto anyone attempting to verbally spar with him, his IQ was far above average.
I thought Darrin McGavin was letter perfect as Mad Buck, I have always wondered why he didn't at least cop an Emmy nomination for it, he felt so alive he almost jumped off
the screen. I was happy that the writers had the episode end the way it did, his interaction at that point with Thomas spot on, not a false note to be found.
Even a few years before I doubt CBS would have let them have that ending.
I realize I am in the decided minority when I say I didn't care for The Long Goodbye, chiefly because I feel Elliot Gould was a terrible pick for the lead.
Gould strikes me as someone without a lick of street smarts and I doubt he has ever been in a fight in his life, he just didn't seem capable of projecting any sort of menace
or that here was a person whose capabilities you'd best not attempt to test because he could back it up.
On the other hand what do I know, I was stupid enough to glare right back at Steven Segal when we crossed paths in Little Italy till Kelly LeBrock led him away, full of ale me sizing him up as a
pony tailed git. I didn't know till later he was a karate champ. Today if I met him I'd run away like a little girl, I don't want to get beat up, it hurts!
Nowadays he isn't a champ but a chump, a traitor, a proud Russian citizen and pal of Putin.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Murder, My Sweet (1944) -
"She was a charming middle-aged lady with a face like a bucket of mud. I gave her a drink. She was a gal who’d take a drink, if she had to knock you down to get the bottle."

[Ornithologist]

Ornithologist wrote
You also mentioned Darren McGavin: Who wouldn't love "Mad Buck Gibson"? He always plays eccentric fellows with lots of energy to emit, be it in the Mannix episode who's a psychotic dojo owner, discharged marine from Mannix's unit, and in secret a killer, or an eccentric writer and adventurer who essentially is analoguous to Ernest Hemingway (I actually have a feeling his portrayal of Mad Buck was based on Sterling Hayden's portrayal of Roger Wade from The Long Goodbye, whom, in turn, I also likened a lot to Hemingway - but the character is actually half-based on Raymond Chandler himself back when he was in heavy doubt of himself and when his wife was terminally ill; another story for another day).

Ornithologist,
You cleared up something for me, Hayden channeling Papa H. never seemed to me quite right, regarding what he was doing acting wise in "The Long Goodbye".
That his performance was half inspired by Chandler makes better sense.
Remember those commercials with the "most interesting man in the world", that's Sterling Hayden in real life, just his WW 2 record in the OSS would make a terrific movie,
and woe unto anyone attempting to verbally spar with him, his IQ was far above average.
I thought Darrin McGavin was letter perfect as Mad Buck, I have always wondered why he didn't at least cop an Emmy nomination for it, he felt so alive he almost jumped off
the screen. I was happy that the writers had the episode end the way it did, his interaction at that point with Thomas spot on, not a false note to be found.
Even a few years before I doubt CBS would have let them have that ending.
I realize I am in the decided minority when I say I didn't care for The Long Goodbye, chiefly because I feel Elliot Gould was a terrible pick for the lead.
Gould strikes me as someone without a lick of street smarts and I doubt he has ever been in a fight in his life, he just didn't seem capable of projecting any sort of menace
or that here was a person whose capabilities you'd best not attempt to test because he could back it up.
On the other hand what do I know, I was stupid enough to glare right back at Steven Segal when we crossed paths in Little Italy till Kelly LeBrock led him away, full of ale me sizing him up as a
pony tailed git. I didn't know till later he was a karate champ. Today if I met him I'd run away like a little girl, I don't want to get beat up, it hurts!
Nowadays he isn't a champ but a chump, a traitor, a proud Russian citizen and pal of Putin.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Murder, My Sweet (1944) -
"She was a charming middle-aged lady with a face like a bucket of mud. I gave her a drink. She was a gal who’d take a drink, if she had to knock you down to get the bottle."

Yes, certainly. I've been curious about that little detail myself until I found out that in the original book, Wade was meant to be a commentary on Chandler himself, some even outright called The Long Goodbye "his most personal" and somewhat of a "semi-autobiographical novel". That said, Wade still screams Hemingway to me, to be honest, especially with Hayden's portrayal. As for Elliott Gould being miscast, I would agree with you if we're talking traditional Marlowe, but remotely nothing of his portrayal ever channeled Marlowe other than a few background details like his penchant for drinks and the fact that he's a private eye who has a disdain for the authorities. But, then again, the latter element was mostly due to the storyline itself. When writing that film, Leigh Brackett deliberately wrote the script in a way that updates the character in a way she saw fit and Robert Altman liked it. I have to say, I have a soft spot for the film even if it's nothing like Marlowe. But, I very much did enjoy the update that was Marlowe with James Garner, based on The Little Sister. As opposed to the loser (I don't mean that as an insult) type of a guy he was portrayed as by Gould, Garner's was very much like the tough underdog like Marlowe is meant to be. The reason they brought Brackett into the fold was the fact that she helped adapt The Big Sleep with Bogart some 25 years prior. Two versions of the script were written, apparently, and one was a period piece, in case the studio didn't want to take a chance. I enjoy the film, I won't lie. But, then again, unlike most Marlowe fans, I also enjoyed the 2007 pilot episode with Jason O'Mara who also felt disconnected from the traditional Marlowe that we know just like Gould was, but his street smarts had some credibility. Only fault the fans see in him was that he was upbeat, which Marlowe wasn't. I didn't mind that.

And spot on with Mad Buck Gibson's ending. I have to admit, I was glad they left it ambiguous but I would like to think Buck didn't die, made it to safety and eventually found a way to beat the grim reaper and postponed the infinity and jelly doughnots for a few more years. I prefer happy endings or at least ones that open the door for a happy ending, even if it feels ambiguous. I've yet to see McGavin's Mike Hammer series, though. But, I heard it's not widely liked and particularly not by Mickey Spillane who wasn't involved much with the show itself. I'll see if I can track down a copy after I'm done with Tightrope!.

[ZelenskyTheValiant (Ivan)]

Coming from you, that's high praise! Sometime ago I was involved with a video game project that didn't pan out, which I was aiming to make it look like a throwback to the Hollywood golden era type adventure capers. It just keeps falling apart, so I moved on, focusing on my own series of novels that very much adhere to the stuff we loved from those old days. Let's hope I get to complete all planned 30 entries before I get older and ripe.

Regarding the "epilogue", you misunderstood me. My fault - should've elaborated further. I've no problem with Rogue Nation in the slightest, from start to finish. My gripe is with Fallout, which serves as an overlong epilogue to Rogue Nation, or rather making Rogue Nation look like a prologue. The story in Fallout essentially undid everything Rogue Nation work for - whether it was the victories attained or relationships established - and that's why I'm not content with it in the slightest, lore-wise that is. Just like the second film, Fallout, in my honest opinion, would've been better if it was looked at as an original film unrelated to Mission: Impossible, because on their own, both movies are terrific and fun, but they don't fit in with the rest of the films. What I heavily disliked about Fallout was the fact that it was trying real hard to appeal to Ethan Hunt's human side, giving him nightmares and all that are rather unfounded and out of place, and using a villain who's said to be so bad and so grisly on paper it fails to show and only manages to tell. Now, take Phillip Seymour Hoffman in the role of a cardboard villain, Owen Davian, whom the actor actually made memorable because he played the role very well - It was a case of showing and not telling. Sure, the third film is my least favorite and might as well not exist, but the villain, as bland as he was motivation-wise and all, was presented well enough to be engaging. I never felt that with Solomon Lane. Fallout depicts this whole thing as if Ethan is now facing the devil and has to make deals left and right to come through, but it never felt that way. In fact, the stakes were higher in the second film and Ghost Protocol, I could see Kurt Hendricks (Michael Nyqvist) haunting people more than Lane. Lane, in his two appearances, seemed like a bureaucratic type of a villain who just inherited a legacy he could not control, which was the reason of his downfall. I didn't find August Walker believable either as a second lead who may have developed an idealist view of their cause - He's nothing more than an overglorified henchman. All of them are told to have done these atrocities but they were never shown to have possessed those credibilities in any shape or form. Hendricks, on the other hand, was like Stefan Miklos (Steve Ihnat) gone dark. He had the mind to execute an operation to frame an IMF team, which may contribute to insisting upon the fact that he may have led similar operations in the face, possibly the Kremlin's very own IMF. Lane and Walker lack those. Whatever victories Rogue Nation exacted, Fallout undoes them and decides to rewrite the DNA sequence with its own tone and retelling - "How to capture Solomon Lane, again, and how to defeat The Syndicate who have been defeated in the first place after all of them were captured and discovered."

You couldn't be more right! There are shows out there, mostly created and produced by Dick Wolfe that I find unworthy of my time (he single-handedly ruined Miami Vice). Bland police procedurals, hospital dramas, melodramas, soap operas that have been running for God knows how many tens of seasons while good shows are often botched and put aside to relative obscurity it makes me sad.

I couldn't exactly pin down which episodes I find to be my favorite because there's very few in number I don't like from Mannix, but I'd like to start with the one that I found compelling but would have otherwise somewhat elongated to a second parter to demonstrate the villain's maniacal mastermind: "End Game" with Steve Ihnat. Now, Mannix is known for having people from his past pop up and make trouble which has since become the precursor to shows like The Rockford Files and Magnum, P.I. - especially the latter. Ihnat portraying a demolitions expert who sold out the unit back in Korea and has come to "punish" Mannix for abandoning him was a powerful one. I likened it a lot to Robert Loggia's Trusseau in "Don't Eat the Snow in Hawaii" and to a lesser extent, James Whitmore, Jr.'s Nuzo in "Did You See the Sunrise?" two-parters. I loved those. Steve Ihnat was just one of those people who should've stayed longer with us because he could've become an A-Lister given time. His other appearance in "To Draw the Lightning" is also one of my favorites in which he plays a stubborn cop with lots of integrity, refusing to ask for help. Another one I like, but purely for sentimentality, is "The Girl in the Frame". You have to admit, it does whet your appetite for curiosity - Expecting to find out who may be that girl in the painting, a reincarnation? A mirage? A foulplay (isn't it always? )? Now, one that I definitely saw as a highlight of the show was "Deadfall" (another two-parter) where Intertect's background is established a little, Mannix is in the wind whose fate is uncertain, and Wickersham is faced with uncertainty just like his operative. It's where I came up with the plot of the legacy script I'm working on (not using the story in any shape or form) but the way the characters behave and think. Wickersham himself is a field operative when the need arises, perfectly shown when he manages to escape from the hole they put him in despite his health condition. I love all the Nancy Kovack episodes, but I admit, I'm partial to her - that's why. There's a lot of parallels between Mannix episodes and those that of Magnum, P.I.. "A Question of Midnight" is another great one, Lee Meriwhether being a mysterious player you'd be intrigued to explore her motives. This is possibly a leftover on my account from her appearances in Batman (film adaptation of the '66 series) and Mission: Impossible. "A Night Full of Darkness" is also an impactful one where Art Malcolm loses his wife. What I don't like about it is that it's quickly forgotten in the subsequent episodes. Something like that you just don't forget. "Birds of Prey" is also one of my favorites, which actually led me to watch the film Venetian Bird starring Richard Todd (a Bond candidate before Connery). It's almost like a shot for shot remake of the film, which, in turn, is based on the novel of the same name. Mannix just replaces the protagonist of that novel, and some details are altered as well to accommodate the show. You also mentioned Darren McGavin: Who wouldn't love "Mad Buck Gibson"? He always plays eccentric fellows with lots of energy to emit, be it in the Mannix episode who's a psychotic dojo owner, discharged marine from Mannix's unit, and in secret a killer, or an eccentric writer and adventurer who essentially is analoguous to Ernest Hemingway (I actually have a feeling his portrayal of Mad Buck was based on Sterling Hayden's portrayal of Roger Wade from The Long Goodbye, whom, in turn, I also likened a lot to Hemingway - but the character is actually half-based on Raymond Chandler himself back when he was in heavy doubt of himself and when his wife was terminally ill; another story for another day). That said, I've never seen Kolchak nor have any interest in it. Another one I found impactful was Mannix starting off as a drug addict in "The Ragged Edge" which at first I almost believed to have been the case, but really was waiting for him to reveal himself as undercover, faking his condition to fool someone and that happened. I was relieved, I must say. I knew it, but confirming it gave me a relief. I was almost scared to see them take the route of that one Starsky & Hutch episode where Hutch was forced to become an addict against his will. Can't recall the name of the episode now, but I figure it was inspired by The French Connection II with Popeye Doyle going through the same motion. Anyway...

I just love this series. So much can still be done with it. And I intend to revive this and reignite the Mannix craze that people had back in the day.

Lots to discuss and explore over time, they can't be all summarized in one post. Looking forward to continuing this discussion, my good man. Cheerio, for now, and take care!

Ok, I whittled down that really long nested thread. Easier for others (and ourselves) to read.

I see now what you mean about the prologue in FALLOUT basically being a tagged on epilogue of ROGUE NATION. I do get what you're saying about Lane now being like the devil, like he's the coming apocalypse. I agree that it doesn't seem warranted and nothing that was shown in ROGUE NATION suggested that. That's why I prefer Lane in RN where he was just this icy cool villain. Creepy but not the end of the world. My favorite M:I villain (yes, better than Phil Seymour Hoffman). I may have to revisit FALLOUT again but I think it was stated that Lane was the head of the "apostles"? And Cavill is one of them? So with that in mind I think that's why they decided to make Lane this almighty terror that we didn't know about in the previous film. Because we didn't know about the depth of the Syndicate nor about the "apostles". But in this film we do. So now Lane is this terror that haunts Ethan in his dreams. Again, I need to revisit the film to confirm whether this was the case or not. Or maybe my memory is fuzzy.

You mentioned MIAMI VICE and Dick Wolf... I actually had no idea that Wolf was involved with that show. I only know that Michael Mann was the showrunner there. For me Wolf is the LAW & ORDER guy and all those "realistic" 90s and 2000s procedurals. Never cared for any of 'em. Actually I never cared for MIAMI VICE either. I tried watching a few episodes but couldn't really get into it. The whole things just screams 80s which ordinarily would be a great thing (I love the 80s). Fast cars, synth music, etc. But that overly polished and glossy MTV style for some reason rubbed me the wrong way. The constant staring into the distance, brooding atmosphere ("look at us - we're different, we're dealing with some heavy subject matter here") doesn't appeal to me. The show was style over substance. And the substance that they did have seemed forced to jolt the audience to remind them that this was a "dark" show. I know it was different than anything on television at the time but give me an old school type of cop show over these MTV-cops any day. Funny that MIAMI VICE ran on NBC back to back with HUNTER and while I'm sure VICE was the bigger hit I easily preferred HUNTER. The latter didn't have the sheen and polish or the cinematic look of the former but I preferred its more realistic rough-around-the-edges feel. HUNTER could get dark too but it felt real. VICE felt fake. I understand that the first 2 seasons of VICE are generally considered the best but actually if I had to choose 2 episodes that I quite liked it would be from season 3 - "When Irish Eyes are Crying" with a young Liam Neeson as an IRA terrorist and "Walk-Alone" where Tubbs goes undercover in prison. I understand that season 4 is supposed to be the worst.

I do remember the MANNIX episode "End Game" and I also remember really looking forward to that one because the synopsis sounded really exciting. The result was something of a mixed bag for me. It's been a while since I've seen it so all the details are pretty foggy. I had no issues with Steve Ihnat - he was fine as the psycho. But I think something about the cat-and-mouse game didn't gel for me. Can't recall what. Also if I recall correctly at the end Mannix throws his walkie talkie with the bomb in it into some furnace or pipe and blows up Ihnat who just happens to be in that spot where Mannix threw it. How did Mannix know he was in that spot? Wasn't this pipe really long and spanned the entire building? Ihnat could have been anywhere. Did Mannix even know he was inside the pipe? I guess it felt like a rushed ending. I really would like to revisit this episode again. Also the one with Darren McGavin (who I agree was perfect casting as "Mad Buck Gibson") was a bit of a mixed bag too. His performance just seemed so bizarre - even for a psycho! It's like he was trying too hard to be as irrational and loony as possible. The result is more funny than anything. That leaves us with the Clu Gulager episode - "The Man Who Wasn't There". Which I think is the best of the Mannix's crazy psycho friends episodes. The way they keep him in the shadows with just a part of his face exposed is very creepy. He really does comes across as a creepy maniac. Very effective performance from Gulager. Some of the others you mentioned I have not seen so can't comment on those. Of course the season 1 episodes "Deadfall" and "The Girl in the Frame" I have seen and both are very good. The former is one of the best from the first season and the latter is a good mystery. I'm also looking forward to seeing more of the episodes where Mannix stumbles onto a small town hiding some secrets. I understand they had a bunch of those episodes (I've only seen "Huntdown" from S1 and "Silent Target" from S7 - the latter being excellent). I always liked this premise in many other shows I've seen. Regarding Nancy Kovack she really was one of a kind, wasn't she? What a gorgeous face!! Makes you melt when you look at it. Like it belongs on a portrait somewhere. She should have been the "girl in the frame" lol. It's so odd that Mike Quigley who runs the Hawaii Five-O fan site doesn't find her attractive at all. To me as a red-blooded male that's just so odd. He finds other girls of that day (like Barbara Luna) attractive but for whatever reason Nancy does nothing for him. Give me Nancy over Barb any day! Ha, Barb was actually in the "Silent Target" episode I just mentioned. She was also in the excellent Five-O episode "A Thousand Pardons -- You're Dead" with Harry Guardino as a murderous army sergeant. Kovack was also in the Five-O episode "Face of the Dragon" giving the Five-O guys inoculations against the bubonic plague. Gorgeous lady!!!

Hey, that STARSKY & HUTCH episode where Hutch is injected with heroin is the season 1 classic "The Fix". Robert Loggia plays the mobster who has Hutch injected. It's a dynamite episode. I'd say the best of the series. Watching Hutch go through all that pain is rough. David Soul sure acted his heart out there! I understand that in England reruns of this episode were banned or heavily cut - something like that. Lalo Schifrin scored that particular episode and it's a superb score. I agree that it seems to have been inspired by FRENCH CONNECTION II which had just come out that same year, a few months earlier.