Talk:Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation/Archive 1

"Cofirming the ruse"
The (current) end of the plot summary doesn't ring true to me. It suggests that Ethan's 'going rogue, but not' was planned between the two characters, off-screen, prior to the original senate hearing. While that would mesh with the "Ethan was playing the very long game" ethos, my understanding of the end scene is that (following the incident with the British PM), the position of Secretary had been transfered to someone who had just been given a large amount of political capital, and would now be grateful to Ethan for this (as well as having had the truth of the situation totally confirmed to him, at that meeting). This book-ends the opening hearing's "until you get a new Secretary..." statement (or however that went). But (ironically) with a completely opposite result to that which was original imagined when this was said. However, I've only seen the movie. Perhaps the stated plot summary is taken from Word Of God material, whilst I've misunderstood the situation. Still, putting it out there. Without spoilering things too much, hopefully. 213.205.252.119 (talk) 03:57, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I agree and have fixed it.ACB Smith (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 05:43, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

Edits
I've cut out a couple hundred words from the plot, as per the guidelines that it be between 250-500 words.ACB Smith (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 05:42, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I have gone back through and restored some of the content that was cut because it affected the cohesion of the article. This is what happens when you prioritise a low word count - you wind up in a situation where there is an over-emphasis on the origins of the Syndicate, but you end up cutting Hunt's initial pursuit of Lane or his realisation that he has to confront Lane. Sure, WP:FILMPLOT recommends 400 to 700 words, but that doesn't mean that you have to try and get as close to 400 as you can for the sake of getting as close to 400 as you can. Brevity might be valued, but not at the expense of a) Hunt's initial reason for pursuing Lane, and b) the only real moment of character development in the film. Editors should put more thought into what best represents the events of the story without getting hung up on a low word count. Your intentions might be noble, but they are doing damage. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 22:06, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Yeah, seems I was misquoting it. Sorry about that.  I've been away for a couple days, but it seems that a chunk of what remains is what I wrote, and from what I can tell, most of the details that have been added are pertinent and concise; it was good that they were added. For the record, I was trying to get to 500, not 400, and the main motivation for the rewrite was clarity.ACB Smith (talk)

I've made edits to the plot, mostly reducing word count while keeping the core flow and major elements intact. Improvjam (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 18:36, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Cast
If anyone actually sees this movie they may note Zhang did not star and doesn't deserve the billing. Only an extra or at best a cameo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.53.114.236 (talk) 04:43, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Yeah, agreed. I would cut off billing below Atlee.  If nobody objects, I'll do that tomorrow. ACB Smith (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 05:42, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
 * The following source confirms that she was, at most, 2 seconds in the movie. . Also, there is mention that "...Chinese actress Zhang Jingchu joined the film's cast, in a major role" in the Production section. This is obviously done to enhance her status and visibility online. About Tom Hollander and Jens Hultén, they both deserve billing since they are in several pivotal scenes, actually accounting for more Simon McBurney's screen time. Some of those are even described in the Plot section. 200.42.237.185 (talk) 18:32, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

I second this point as she only appears in a very minor cameo role definitely not major at all!/. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nutterdrummer (talk • contribs) 09:21, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Where's ALIBABA Pictures?
Why is nothing in this article mentioning the production company "Alibaba pictures?"

Its because their Asian, right?

Once again this confirms that WIKI-pee-dia is a RACIST WHITE SUPREMACIST web-site pushing EURO-CENTRIC propaganda!!!

‘Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation’ To Receive Investment From Alibaba Pictures

http://deadline.com/2015/06/mission-impossible-rogue-nation-alibaba-pictures-paramount-china-1201452851/

Alibaba Pictures investing in Paramount's 'Mission: Impossible -- Rogue Nation'

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/envelope/cotown/la-et-ct-alibaba-pictures-paramount-mission-impossible-rogue-nation-20150624-story.html

Alibaba investing in 'Mission: Impossible _ Rogue Nation'

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/a48d55ef331348049c1b4a3ee3045e41/alibaba-investing-mission-impossible-rogue-nation — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.122.139.234 (talk) 23:39, 1 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Yes, Alibaba Pictures was one of the producers of this film and it should be mentioned. 200.42.237.185 (talk) 18:34, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

Wow, the teapot calling kettle black... You raise such a row about the article omitting one asian production entity you completely negated the other asian entity also billed in the movie, China Movie Channel. 67.78.149.36 (talk) 23:11, 3 August 2015 (UTC)


 * There's a difference between an investor and a producer. Some films, particularly European and Canadian ones, can list 6 to 8 additional funding entities aside from the production company. WP:FILM is pretty clear that the articles are speaking about the actual production company &mdash; which received the funds, hired the writer, actors, director, etc. &mdash; and not the funding entities they went to. --Tenebrae (talk) 17:00, 4 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Alibaba should be covered in the "Production" section. I think it was not included because investing-related coverage is not consistently included (can be seen as boring and not very relevant). Erik II (talk &#124; contrib) (ping me) 17:13, 4 August 2015 (UTC)