I came across a youtube video on the subject (linked at the bottom of this post). While I am a fan of both franchises, I am traditionally a much bigger Bond fan; largely because my dad was a huge fan of the films, named me after the title character, and brought me up watching them. But the Mission Impossible franchise has, since, really won me over. In my opinion, it's much more consistently good than the Bond franchise. I also like the character of Ethan Hunt better than the Brosnan or Craig Bonds; as much as you may hate Tom Cruise for being a little nutty, he's clearly a better actor than the other two, and I find he creates a character you can empathize a lot more with.
These are my takes on the categories covered in the video - I am specifically going to focus on the Brosnan and Craig eras, as, they paralleled the MI series. It's not really a "This character is better" take on each, but rather more of a description of my thoughts:
1. Combat and physical skill - In combat situations, Ethan Hunt utilizes martial arts techniques, extensively; Bond just brawls and pushes. Bond does have skill when it comes to making his way through obstacles (as he shows at the beginning of every movie), but Ethan Hunt manages to do it more frequently and better. When it comes to infiltration, Bond is lazy, he just walks right in, and somehow the villains are fine with it. Hunt spends a lot more time in the shadows, and is FAR more stealthy, his villains never know what hit them until it's too late.
2. Villains - Having half the Bond villains with some kind of personal vendetta against Bond is kind of silly. Having it happen ONCE in GE007 was great! But I find that MI achieves personal grudges in a better way; the personal grudge is established during the first act of the film when Ethan manages to royally **** up the villain's operation. In TWINE and Skyfall, the reasoning for the vendetta is just brushed over in dialogue. Then in Spectre it was REALLY stupid, like Austin Powers Goldmember stupid. A good Bond villain was Le Chiffre, but that is the exception rather than the rule, and he was established in the same way that MI villains are established - he's a bad guy, Bond ****ed his operation, and NOW there's a personal vendetta. My personal favourite villain between both franchises from 95 to presant was Davian (Philip Seymour Hoffman); he was a modern day Auric Goldfinger.
3. Locations - Ethan Hunt is all business: he arrives at a location where he and his team will plan out how they're going to use it and their gadgets in order to achieve their objectives. Bond goes in, does his alcoholic thing, and when it comes to work, no planning is necessary, he just has this unrealistic instinct about how to get the job done in every single circumstance. Bond is like Archer, he's lazy, alcoholic, and manages to always win. Hunt is more like a male Lana Kane, plans well, is methodical, and really depends on her team to give her all the information she needs.
4. Gadgets - The relationship between gadgetry and the situations they are used in are completely reversed between the two franchises. In MI: Ethan Hunt's team scopes out the situation, and then gets the appropriate gadgetry required to achieve the goals for the situation. Whereas Bond is usually given all this random cool gadgetry by Q-Branch, and then it just happens that a bunch of perfect situations where they can all be used occur through the course of the movie. In other words, Ethan Hunt: "I'll need the following gadgets in order to carry out my plan." Bond "I have the following gadgets; now, I wonder if a series of situations will arise where I get to use each and every one of them to get out of situations of otherwise certain doom?"
5. Women - James Bond clearly has many more sexual partners than Ethan Hunt. The reason could very well be that Ethan manages to hold down a relationship for more than 1 movie in a row. In the Bond universe, everyone is as promiscuous as university students; in the MI universe, significantly less so. With Bond, the degree of the attractiveness of a woman is proportional to how important she is to the case at hand.
The original video:
These are my takes on the categories covered in the video - I am specifically going to focus on the Brosnan and Craig eras, as, they paralleled the MI series. It's not really a "This character is better" take on each, but rather more of a description of my thoughts:
1. Combat and physical skill - In combat situations, Ethan Hunt utilizes martial arts techniques, extensively; Bond just brawls and pushes. Bond does have skill when it comes to making his way through obstacles (as he shows at the beginning of every movie), but Ethan Hunt manages to do it more frequently and better. When it comes to infiltration, Bond is lazy, he just walks right in, and somehow the villains are fine with it. Hunt spends a lot more time in the shadows, and is FAR more stealthy, his villains never know what hit them until it's too late.
2. Villains - Having half the Bond villains with some kind of personal vendetta against Bond is kind of silly. Having it happen ONCE in GE007 was great! But I find that MI achieves personal grudges in a better way; the personal grudge is established during the first act of the film when Ethan manages to royally **** up the villain's operation. In TWINE and Skyfall, the reasoning for the vendetta is just brushed over in dialogue. Then in Spectre it was REALLY stupid, like Austin Powers Goldmember stupid. A good Bond villain was Le Chiffre, but that is the exception rather than the rule, and he was established in the same way that MI villains are established - he's a bad guy, Bond ****ed his operation, and NOW there's a personal vendetta. My personal favourite villain between both franchises from 95 to presant was Davian (Philip Seymour Hoffman); he was a modern day Auric Goldfinger.
3. Locations - Ethan Hunt is all business: he arrives at a location where he and his team will plan out how they're going to use it and their gadgets in order to achieve their objectives. Bond goes in, does his alcoholic thing, and when it comes to work, no planning is necessary, he just has this unrealistic instinct about how to get the job done in every single circumstance. Bond is like Archer, he's lazy, alcoholic, and manages to always win. Hunt is more like a male Lana Kane, plans well, is methodical, and really depends on her team to give her all the information she needs.
4. Gadgets - The relationship between gadgetry and the situations they are used in are completely reversed between the two franchises. In MI: Ethan Hunt's team scopes out the situation, and then gets the appropriate gadgetry required to achieve the goals for the situation. Whereas Bond is usually given all this random cool gadgetry by Q-Branch, and then it just happens that a bunch of perfect situations where they can all be used occur through the course of the movie. In other words, Ethan Hunt: "I'll need the following gadgets in order to carry out my plan." Bond "I have the following gadgets; now, I wonder if a series of situations will arise where I get to use each and every one of them to get out of situations of otherwise certain doom?"
5. Women - James Bond clearly has many more sexual partners than Ethan Hunt. The reason could very well be that Ethan manages to hold down a relationship for more than 1 movie in a row. In the Bond universe, everyone is as promiscuous as university students; in the MI universe, significantly less so. With Bond, the degree of the attractiveness of a woman is proportional to how important she is to the case at hand.
The original video:
-Insert Inspiring Quote-
