 |
|
|
|||||
The first Mission: Impossible film came out in 1996 when star Tom Cruise was 34 years old. Fast-forward to Memorial Day weekend 2025: Cruise is 62 and theres speculation that Mission: Impossible The Final Reckoning could be the last movie in the franchise. Is this just a marketing ploy to get fans in theaters to kick off the summer blockbuster season? Who knows. Lets take a look at the history of these films, their box-office earning power, and what Cruise himself has said about the movies over the years. A brief history of the Mission: Impossible franchise The Mission: Impossible films are based on the 1966 TV series of the same name, which was created by Bruce Geller. Peter Graves, who played Jim Phelps on the series, didn’t appear in the first film and was in fact very disappointed with it because his character was made to be the villain in the story, as CNN reported. Actor Jon Voight took the role. Even though this move upset other actors from the series and some fans, the box office numbers proved that fans soon got over this reversal of the source material. The franchises first four installments had different directors, while the last four were helmed by Christopher McQuarrie. Cruise has been among the producers of the films from the beginning. How does it stack up against other action franchises? The Mission: Impossible films continue to jockey for the title of highest-grossing Tom Cruise movie, according to Screen Rant. Each new installment tends to beat the previous contender. According to Box Office Mojo, the seven films in the franchise have earned a domestic lifetime gross of $1.3 billion, making Mission: Impossible the 23rd most-valuable movie franchise by that measure. To put that in perspective, the Marvel super hero franchiseNo. 1 on the listhas earned $12.8 billion, followed by Star Wars ($5.1 billion), Disney live-action reimaginings ($3.5 billion), and Spider-Man ($3.3 billion). Compared to pure action-movie franchises, Mission: Impossible falls below James Bond ($2.3 billion) and the cars and costars of The Fast and the Furious ($2 billion), but it beats out Indiana Jones ($1.1 billion) and Tom Cruise’s own Top Gun franchise ($899 million). Why do fans think this might be the last Mission: Impossible movie? Originally, the latest two Mission: Impossible films were supposed to be a two-part story shot back-to-back. The second film was initially called Mission: Impossible Dead Reckoning Part Two, with the name change being announced in October 2023. Part One was loved by critics but had a disappointing box office return. Further complicating the matter, Final’s budget kept growing because of delays due to the Covid-19 pandemic and the actors and writers strikes. These setbacks caused tension in the production process and may have even accelerated conversations of the film becoming a more definitive conclusion to the franchise. While the creative team has not publicly spoken out about the stress of the delays, the title change signals to fans this might be the last time Ethan Hunt saves the world. It is, I hope, the satisfying conclusion to a 30-year story arc, director McQuarrie said in an interview with Empire in February. Im pretty confident that people are going to feel that the title was appropriate. Cruise also seemed to confirm the end of an era on the red carpet at the New York premiere. Its the final! Its not called final for nothing, he commented to the Hollywood Reporter. Two years ago he told the same publication he would make Mission: Impossible movies into his 80s. When asked about this, he clarified: I actually said Im going to make movies into my 80s; actually, Im going to make them into my 100s. Since everything eventually seems to get a reboot these days, it is not far-fetched to believe audiences might see Ethan Hunt again, especially if the box office numbers are impressive. No spoilers but several reviewers, including Clint Gage for IGN, point out that the plot of the film leaves room for future storytelling opportunities. Cruise has several film projects in development over the next several years so it does appear that it is goodbyeat least for nowto the beloved franchise. Mission: Impossible The Final Reckoning hits theaters in the United States on Friday, May 23.
Category:
E-Commerce
On TikTok, soup is getting a rebrand. Its now water-based cooking to you. Pov you started water-based cooking and now your skin is clear, your stomach is thriving and you recover from illness overnight, one TikTok post reads. Others claim the method is making them age backward. But a quick scroll through the comments has many pointing out the obvious: Bro invented soup, one commenter wrote. Another added, As an Asian, what’s new? The post made its way to Bluesky, where one user joked: I need to start jumping on these phony trends. Get a water-based cookbook self-published by tomorrow. Hit TikTok running. They added, Send me soup recipes. Let’s all get richto which one user replied, I have one that involves chicken and noodles, or as they called it: “chicken noodle water-based meal.” While this cooking method predates TikTok by at least 50,000 years, it has been recently popularized on TikTok and Instagram by scientist and registered dietitian Michelle Davenport, PhD, whose work focuses on slowing the deleterious effects of aging. She argues that cooking mostly with broth and water can help slow aging by reducing the amount of advanced glycation end products (AGEs), the compounds that attach to our DNA and cells. These are formed when food is cooked at high, dry temperatures and contribute to various health issues. On Davenport’s Instagram page, which has over 250,000 followers, youll find recipes for dishes like water eggs and breakfast soup. (Dr. Michelle Davenport the woman you are, the caption of the original TikTok post reads.) “Water-based cookinglike steaming or simmeringis a simple way to get more out of your food,” dietitian Kouka Webb, MS, RD, CDN, told Fast Company. “It helps preserve delicate nutrients that are often lost with high-heat methods, and it cuts back on the need for heavy oils. As a dietitian, Ive seen how small shifts like this can support things like blood sugar balance, better digestion, and even lower inflammation over time.” But while the health benefits of water-based cooking are plenty, clearly not everyone is here for the TikTokification of recipes and cooking methods that have existed for generations. And on TikTok, food trends come and go quicker than you can say, “lemony miso gochujang brown butter gnocchi.” Last year, there was the dense bean salad trendwhich is exactly what it sounds like: a bean salad. There was also the tadpole water trend (just add chia seeds to a glass of water). And, of course, who could forget the classic “girl dinner”? May I interest you in a delicious bowl of alphabet soup?
Category:
E-Commerce
President Donald Trump is threatening Apple with a 25% tariff if the tech giant doesn’t start producing iPhones in the U.S. In a post on Truth Social, his social media platform, Trump said he had “long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhones that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else.” “If that is not the case, a Tariff of at least 25% must be paid by Apple to the U.S.” he added. An Apple spokesperson didn’t immediately respond to Fast Company‘s request for comment. It’s the latest company to be caught up in the administration’s aggressive tariff policies. Walmart, for example, drew the president’s ire after it warned consumers last week that it may have to raise prices due to cost pressures. For its part, Apple has been working to diversify its production for the more than 60 million iPhones it sells in the U.S. annually. The vast majority of Apple products are made in China, though the company is reportedly working to move production for most of its U.S.-bound iPhones to India. Still, Trump’s threat spooked investors. Shares of Apple fell more than 2% on the news, as iPhones could become incredibly pricey. Wedbush Securities managing director Dan Ives said in a note to clients that it would take five to 10 years to shift production to the U.S. and phones could end up costing $3,500. New iPhones, without all the bells and whistles, currently go for around $800. “We believe the concept of Apple producing iPhones in the US is a fairy tale that is not feasible,” Ives wrote.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||