| Error creating thumbnail: File missing Join our Discord! |
| If you have been locked out of your account you can request a password reset here. |
Talk:Mission: Impossible III
flashlight
can someone help me identify the flashlight used with the beretta?? anon
I believe it is an Insight Technologies M3. -- ZG
Imcomplete Page
I've watched this movie many times and I noticed a few guns are missing. During the chopper chase, Luther tries to shoot the enemy gunship with a flare gun, and one of the IMF agents uses some kind of dart gun to imobiled Hunt.
When did they use AK's?
AK-47
Several men are seen with AK-47s.
AK-74
At least one of Davian's men caries an AK-74 in one scene.
-I have no idea, but I think whoever said it is wrong. I only saw the AKMSUs, not AK-47s or -74s. -MT2008
I actually saw Owen Davian's men used AK-47s and Ak-74s during the warehouse raid and during the bridge ambush. They were just never seen very clearly.
Extra G36 mag
I just noticed that Ethan had an extra mag in the case, but I guess he was too much in a hurry to clip the mags together. What is bothering me is why is the rifle disassembled in the back of the van? Excalibur01
I was wondering that too. Maybe it's so an escaped prisoner cannot quickly shoot his captors or maybe it's because assembling the weapon creates more tension for the moviegoer. --Ben41 01:27, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
Well they had a scene where Ethan was training someone to assemble an M4 blind folded. So maybe they did a scene where a special forces guy actually gets a chance to assemble a weapon in live combat. The odds or reality of that is pretty stupid though. And seriously, even if he didn't have time to clip the mags together, he could have least put it in his jacket. Excalibur01
Also note that it is impossible to atttach (and remove) the carrying handle/optical sights (DE: HKV) of the G36 without using a screwdriver and doing so requires rezeroing of the sights. The whole idea of carrying the only long rifle/support weapon during a high risk operation dissasambled in a box in the trunk is absolutely ridicoulous. On the other hand we (German Army) were trained to (de-) assemble our weapons (amongst others the G36) not only blindfolded but also under the most unthinkable conditions and it took us less then 20 seconds (without the carrying handle of course) though doing this was more for fun than for actual battlefield conditions. Clipping the mags together is not a good idea because it makes this Weapon too top heavy (filled mag >0,5kg) and uneasy to handle during a prolonged firefight. Cantrary to popular belief it is not the fastest way to reload the weapon.
But you do agree that he should have at least TAKEN the extra magazine with him instead of leaving it in the box. He was running into a shootout and he didn't think that he'll need a reload? Excalibur01 14:30, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
He was being realistic about his purpose. He mostly likely knew that a 5.56 round wouldnt really do anything at the distance they where pertraying and that it really would have little effect on a plane shooting missles at them. He was out gunned from the start and just needed a little cover fire to keep the bad at bay. Spades of Columbia
Ok, what you just said made entirely no sense whatsoever. If you have a gun and extra mags, you would bring as much as you can carry not one mag in the gun and that's it. No one would just take a weapon out and leave the extra mags behind because they are "no match" for what the enemy is using. You use every bullet you have. And he wasn't needing a "little cover fire". He was trying to take out the goons rescuing his prisoner. Excalibur01
He barely got the chance to use the first magazine...what would be the purpose for the second mag, the last 5 to 10rds shot out of his gun was shot at nothing but thin air. Spades of Columbia
- What do you mean barely got the chance? He was shooting at a helicopter that had the DOOR OPEN. He expended his only mag so fast and had a CLEAR shot at his prisoner! If he had reloaded, he would have killed the guy so he doesn't escape and cause him trouble later. Excalibur01 04:40, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
Go watch the movie again...ethan knew he didnt have a shot, at the end of his magazine he was shotting out of anger, that shot at that distance was not plausable, once again the initial use was for cover fire and he just happened to put a scope image of the bad guy getting away in a helicopter for dramatic effect...for movie sake the gun looked cool and had a small but uneffective objective, but everything about that senerio did not require the addition magazine. ethan wasnt attacking he was surviving. Spades of Columbia
It's bad movies logic. He was still in range with his G36 Excalibur01 14:08, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
How do you know he was in range?...He was shooting a elevated target from a bridge over the ocean with a red dot scope!...a range finder would have trouble telling you at what range to aim. While all this is going on the helicopter is moving, not only moving, but moving away from the gun. Even, and this is a big even, if he had time to reload what would he of shot at? By the time the gun was empty, the target was long gone and ethan gets rid of the gun and jumps into a car,why would there be a purpose for that second magazine or even showing him grabbing the magazine? Spades of Columbia
When you're in a combat situation, you wouldn't worry about how effective or impossible it would be to hit your target. You'd just try whatever you could. Besides, he could have seen where his rounds were going compared to his target and have adjusted his aim depending on the fall of the rounds. -guest
- Ok, first off, the G36 he was carrying had what you could call "dual optics". It has a red dot and a scope to shoot with. A rifle like that could take out something at least 500 yards away. A helicopter is fast, but from the camera changes and points of view, Cruise's character still would of had enough range to at least take pot shots at the guy. Either way, reloading and continue firing until the helicopter is out of effective range would be the thing to do and if not, at least he'd be shooting his gun in anger. Excalibur01 03:35, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
Just rewatched the movie today and ethan reloaded the G36, so he did indeed bring the extra mag. Right after he shoots down the drone ethan jumps over that gap in the road after throwing the g36 across. Once he pulled himself up and started to run towards the helicopter you can hear him drop the mag and then you can see ethan put in a new mag and hear him rechambering a round. After in which he unloads the new mag trying to shot the helicopter...but want seems wierd is i can only count like 20rds tops out of each mag.Spades of Columbia
I saw that scene again and all I can heard is the sound effects making a clicking noise. What little of Cruise actually doing to the rifle almost seems like he was just checking the chamber. I really wish we can get behind the scenes footages to see if the actor actually did a reload or was it all just sound effects added in. It just sounded like generic noises you heard when someone's handling a gun in a movie Excalibur01 04:50, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
The rest of the henchmen
Any ideas what happened to some of Davian's men after the bridge ambush?
They got paid and went on to the next job
Davian's Gun =
is it possible that it's just a P229 Sport with a black finish? rather than a P228.
More questions regarding the bridge ambush
1. The guy with the Dragnov sniper rifle told the other guy controlling the UAC to fire rockets at Ethan Hunt. He obviously did have a clear shot through his scope, so why didn't he shoot at Hunt himself rather than just calling an airstrike? &
2. Any ideas what language he was speaking?
the language was german
- re.1: Ever heard of the character shield. Basicly it's impossible for low ranked goons to kill the main good guy. He probably knew that and sent the UAV to attack and distract Hunt so that he himself could escape alive.
Ans. Question 1- My idea behind that, is that would be too boring. How many times have you seen people being shot with a sniper rifle in your life? Plenty, right? No, the director thought it would be better for the SVD welding bad guy to call on a UAV to shoot at Mr. Hunt and fail, versus taking one good shot from long range and knocking his head off with a 7.62x54R. That's cliche action movies man, get used to it. --Camden Hennis 14:43, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
Movie quotes for main page.
Ethan Hunt (Tom Cruise): This is a Beretta 92F. It's a very accurate, close-range weapon. Don't point it at me. Julia (Michelle Monaghan): Sorry. Ethan Hunt: It holds 15 rounds. When the mag is empty, the slide will lock back like this. Julia: How do you know so much about this. Ethan Hunt: To reload, push this button. The empty mag falls out and you shove the other one in, like the batteries in the flashlight in the kitchen, then relase the slide. Julia: Why are you giving me a gun? Ethan Hunt: There could be others. If you have to use it, you stay low. You identify your enemy. Point and shoot. It's very simple. Point and shoot. --Mission: Impossible III
--Charly Driver 09:33, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
It's added. --Predator20 14:24, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
Beretta Caption
Somebody wanna change that so it doesn't say M92FS? I have no idea how many times I've seen that mistake. -- K 98.118.59.244 10:13, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
Whats wrong? is it the FS? or the M?--Spades of Columbia 17:40, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
As far as I know the only Beretta with an M designation is the M9. So there is so such thing as a M92FS, it'd be either an M9 or a 92FS, in this case the latter. -- K 98.118.59.244 23:48, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
The "m" is a simple abbreviation for model...so all it is saying is Model 92fs and in some locations...like if you would google "m92fs"...you would find they do write it like that. It might not be proper but its not wrong.--Spades of Columbia 00:31, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
Taken from the IMFDB page for the 92FS:
"NOTE: In the past, the Beretta 92F and 92FS have often been misspelled on IMFDB as "M92F" (as this page was originally titled), "M92FS", or "92 FS" with a space in between the "92" and "FS". These are incorrect spellings; the correct versions are "Beretta 92F" or "Beretta 92FS". Please do not use any of the mis-spelled versions on any future pages, and please correct older pages with this error." -- K 98.118.59.244 11:09, 5 August 2010 (UTC)