site banner
PaperclipPerfector  4d ago (text post)   2475 thread views

Friday Fun Thread for March 6, 2026

Be advised: this thread is not for serious in-depth discussion of weighty topics (we have a link for that), this thread is not for anything Culture War related. This thread is for Fun. You got jokes? Share 'em. You got silly questions? Ask 'em.

0
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Funny, the only Mission Impossible film I've seen is the first one. Brian de Palma is such an inconsistent director. Scarface is an obvious masterpiece, and Carrie is great, but The Untouchables is overrated as hell, and despite being marketed as thrillers both Blow Out and Body Double were so boring I turned them off halfway through. I was fully onboard for the first half of Mission Impossible when it's a tense, nervy thriller, but by the time the climax rolled around and it had turned into a silly action film I'd completely lost interest. The Prague operation that opens the film and the climax on the train feel like they belong to two completely different movies: it's no surprise it went into production without a finished screenplay.

Curious if any of the sequels are any good.

So, there are the original 3 which are far different in feel, almost feels like a different series. And then there's a small gap, and then starting with Rogue Nation you have another set of 5 (clustered a bit plotwise as a set of 3 and then a final set of 2), and now they're basically done (at least, with Tom Cruise as lead). They're at times gimmicky especially plotwise, quality is variable, but they are in my opinion all quite fun, solid popcorn movies. Fallout in particular, I think even standalone, is actually one of the best action films of the 2010s, in terms of the fights and visuals. So if you're interested, start with Ghost Protocol, if you're just curious, maybe try Fallout directly.

Curious if any of the sequels are any good.

I remember the 4th one being a nonsensical mess plot-wise, even by action film standards, but being very competent as an action movie. There's a part involving a chase in a dust storm, and the direction is such (by Brad Bird) that it's easy to keep track of everyone and what they're doing despite it feeling like it should be a confusing mess. Oh, and Cruise climbs some big building.

Oh, that was the one with Simon Pegg, wasn’t it? I remember it being good. The action was rather formulaic - if any plan was announced explicitly or implicitly, you could guarantee something would go horribly wrong within five minutes - but it was just really nice to see someone who had a very good formula apply it so well.

The action was rather formulaic - if any plan was announced explicitly or implicitly, you could guarantee something would go horribly wrong within five minutes

Are there many movies that don't follow that trope? If so, how? It seems like an exceptionally difficult cliche for screenwriters to avoid. If you announce the plan and nothing goes wrong, you just wasted everybody's time telling them something redundantly before you show the same thing later. If you don't announce the plan and something goes wrong, you've just confused everybody. If you announce a plan and it seems to go wrong but the real plan is going right then the added levels of contrivance are just a more played-out and mockable trope.

Inception, Ocean's 11, Rogue One, Now You See Me, there are definitely a few that pull of a flawless plan either in full or for at least 10-15 uninterrupted minutes of screen time. There's also at least one "perfect heist" type movies where the meat of the story takes place after the money gets stolen according to plan, but for the life of me I can't remember the name. Most of these are emotionally a kind of "competence porn" (although that phrase usually seems to be used to describe books, for which "things go according to plans" is actually decently common in my experience).

Or, occasionally, it's because the actual plan is just a little too complicated to explain purely visually. And actually, if you saw this quote recently, it may be trending this way even if the explanation isn't required at all:

Matt Damon Says Netflix Wants Movies to Restate the ‘Plot Three or Four Times in the Dialogue’ Because Viewers are on ‘Their Phones While They’re Watching’

But overall, yeah, it's a fair and usually correct point you make.

There's also at least one "perfect heist" type movies where the meat of the story takes place after the money gets stolen according to plan, but for the life of me I can't remember the name.

The Great Train Robbery works this way, IIRC.

There's also at least one "perfect heist" type movies where the meat of the story takes place after the money gets stolen according to plan, but for the life of me I can't remember the name.

The Italian Job may count.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats