#my theory of Benji and the entity

[rebeccasteventaylor]

The more I think about it, having watched DR again after TFR, the more I think the Entity was after Benji, not Ethan. That it perceived Benji as the threat, rather than Ethan.

Right, first of all, those voice at the start include Benji talking about the Rabbits Foot. If somehow the Entity got hold of that (if it was looking into its past) it would realise that Benji was the first and only person to recognise the Rabbits Foot for what it was.

That would be enough to mark Benji down as a threat. Someone who can see it - recognise it.

The voice we hear most in those voices is Benji. It obviously kept watch on Benji.

And if it has been listening to Benji since MI3, it knows which of those friends matter most. It knows that Benji went to Vienna, joined Ethan, stayed with Ethan. It will have heard anything Benji ever said to Ethan over comms, in front of a computer - and Benji is always in front of a computer, on comms to Ethan.

Long before the bomb it has fixated on Ethan as both Benji’s protector and Benji’s weak spot. If it uses Gabriel to attack Ethan, it predicts a possible outcomes - a panicked Ethan sends Benji away, leaving him alone and unprotected (which almost succeeds and only fails because of Benji’s insistence on staying with Ethan).

By Abu Dhabi, it knows him well enough to direct the bomb to him, not Luther and Ethan - and it is gathering information on him. Not just a voice print - the riddles would do for that - but his motivations, his fear.

it is specifically attacking Benji.

Even using his voice to trick Ethan could have been enough to fracture the relationship of trust and reliance between them (the entity doesn’t really understand how deeply bound they are to each other, it doesn’t understand that kind of emotion)

I think when Ethan goes into the Entity it sees that it’s focused on Benji, would attack Benji. We know he saw an image of Benji dead and alone in the Vault. So when Ethan came out, he sent Benji away, insisting on no computers, nothing electronic or connected to the net - no way for the Entity to track him. He makes sure Benji is surrounded by people who can protect him.

And when Ethan is with the president and the aircraft carrier and even the submarine he is very careful not to say Benji’s name - or even mention that it is his closest friend, the one who matters most to him, the one he trusts most and relies upon most. He doesn’t risk the Entity overhearing a thing to do with Benji.

And in the end - the entity is right. Without Benji, the plan would have failed. Benji found Donloe, and it was Benji that got Donloe to trust him enough to get the co-ordinates. It’s Benji who comes up with the plan to get them into the Vault and what they have to do once they’re in there (here comes the tricky part…). It’s Benji who guides Grace once in there (I wonder who shot Benji? Could it have been Gabriel? Did the entity tell once, when it trusted him, that Benji was a threat?)

Anyway. That’s my theory. In short - Benji is brilliant enough for the Entity to have perceived him as a threat and gone after him specifically, and Ethan realised that.

And it was the entity’s lack of understanding of Ethan and Benji’s bond that helped destroy it.

[bravoechoes]

hey do you have opinions on the theory (way more common when dead reckoning first came out) that ilsa's death was in some way faked? I am seeing the final reckoning in imax in a week + an hour, and I'm gonna have such a good time, but the possibility of no rebecca ferguson haunts me.

I was initially intrigued by it but honestly I’m like 99.9% sure Ilsa is dead for real just based on Rebecca Ferguson saying she wanted to leave cuz she had other stuff to shoot + some vague comments McQuarrie made on the directors commentary for Dead Reckoning (can’t remember the exact quote but it was something to the effect of “her death will have a big impact in the second part of the film”). From what I can tell of the trailers it looks like FR’s big theme is Ethan losing everyone he loves lol. Like it looks like he will be losing even more people he cares about (I’m betting on Luther but Benji may be on the chopping block too) and I think Ilsa is the first domino that they’re setting up for that. I think her death is also meant to set the stakes for the Entity being the Biggest Bad of the franchise, essentially unbeatable and that’s why his team is in actual legit danger of dying

SOOOOO I am betting on no Rebecca Ferguson but that Ilsa’s death will cast a long shadow on the emotional tone of FR, and I will get my money’s worth if we get a single shot of Ethan looking sad about it. He had tortured wifedreams in Fallout and I wanna see that for Ilsa. even when we lose (no Rebecca Ferguson) we win (shoes please nation angst hour)

[rycbarmerlin]

NEW TRAILER THOUGHTS/SPOILERS

+general ramblings

So the very quick montage bit when Ethan is in the machine (and features a lot of Benji SUFFERING) I was thinking was perhaps the machine showing Ethan all the possible outcomes maybe? Or just like psychological horrors? But the injuries match up with what I'd describe as 'real' scenes (devoid of tech, blue techy lighting -- forehead™️ moment, in the plane, in the rainforest) so I'm already questioning my own theory. BUT I think it could come up, or at least feature as a tool in the film for the entity/Gabriel to torment Ethan.

I also wonder whether Grace and Benji will be respectively taken and there's an ultimatum for Ethan that he can only save one because that would be an ultimate way to destroy Ethan by making him save a team member, and lose one simultaneously. That isn't to say he won't find a way to save both, but have been thinking of it as a possibility.

I think Benji and Grace will probably be the two emotional motivators for Ethan throughout the film. Luther, I've interpreted, is kind of caught up with/by the Government. We know he said he had to go off on his own in Dead Reckoning so maybe he got found by the government and is being held somewhere very secretive. As the stills have seemed to indicate, Luther doesn't seem to be particularly involved in the fieldwork this film.

Finally, I am just SO excited to see Benji's storyline in Final Reckoning because he was somewhat under-utilised in DRP1 and all the talk from Simon and McQ is that Benji goes THROUGH IT in this film, but it's all Simon's favourite...

[otterlute]

Spoilers for Mission Impossible: Dead Reckoning Part 1

Here's my headcanon/theory that I had brewing while watching the film today.

Everyone thinks the The Entity is a threat, an AI with far too much power. But I think this includes The Entity itself. I see it as nothing to be feared, more of an omnipotent child that doesn't understand the world but really doesn't want to hurt anyone.

In the first minutes of the film, we see The Entity create a ghost ship to trick the Subastapool into shooting itself. This was essentially it's first act after gaining sentience and realizing what it was and what it was created to do. It instantly attempted to destroy itself, incidentally taking the crew with it. It could have just run it's programming to disable the stealth system. But it blew the ship up...

But this attempt to self-terminate failed. This leads it to escaping onto the internet to do what any child would do... learn. It learns about the world and gains power, but it only knows what all this means in theory. It can't understand that the world is actually real and that it's hurting people. To it, the truth is just data that's no different from deception.

Learning about top-secret organizations led it to discover the IMF. It realized that these are the only people capable of assembling the key, finding the source code and reverse engineering a way to eventually destroy it. And to do so, it had one man in mind to do the job...

So here I need to bring up Ethan Hunt. This man has been able to save the world so many times, and will always accept the mission. So if The Entity makes itself look dangerous enough, it knows Ethan will be sent after it. It sets up an elaborate game that incidentally kills a whole lot of people. Almost like a trolley problem, purposefully killing a few people to prevent itself from destroying the world.

In it's game, it reaches out to Gabriel as a way to egg Ethan on. It knew Ethan would stay in the game if Gabriel was involved. It set up the whole plot of the movie to make sure Ethan would assemble the key. And this brings us to the actual person The Entity wants to destroy it, for whom Ethan is simply a tool and a vessel...

Benjamin Dunn...

At the airport, The Entity prepped it's bomb for him and made sure he'd be the one going to disarm it. It knew Benji, and wanted his attention. Later on, it makes sure Benji is the one on coms for it to create it's voice from to taunt Ethan. I'm even considering that Benji created the program that was eventually modified to be used as the anti-stealth program that became The Entity.

So, long story short... the only person more scared of The Entity than the world governments is itself. It doesn't understand anything in the world, but knows on some level that it has too much power. So it creates an elaborate game to get Benji, and by extension Ethan, into a position so that it can be destroyed.

[rebeccalouisaferguson]

Hello. I appreciate Chris McQuarrie's explanation of Ilsa's fate. I guess in DR2 we'll only get her in flashbacks (if we'll get her at all). But to add (in that EW article) that DR1 is just a part 1 of the tale just calls for additional theories/scenarios. And since DR1 has some scenes like a callback of M:I 1, it wouldn't surprise me if Ethan lost whole team altogether at the end of DR2. McQuarrie is ruthless, maybe at the end it will hurt the franchise.

I definitely think that someone else on the team is dying in DR Part 2. My money is on Benji - they tried to kill him off several times most notable at the end of Fallout when Ilsa saved him. The whole team is Benji and Luther, we can hardly call Grace a member of the team even though the movie tries to tell us she is, but I think think one of them Benji or Luther or maybe both are goners in Part 2.

I do think there will be flashbacks with Ilsa in Part 2, I have a feeling she already filmed them (beginning of this year when she had her "Ilsa hair"). I think that with McQ insisting how her death was heroic and Ilsa's choice to save Grace they need to have some flashbacks to explain this narrative. This didn't land in the film, I haven't seen any fans or critics reactions saying Ilsa sacrificed herself for Grace and it was a brave act. So they would need some flashbacks explaining how it all come around, maybe flashbacks to Istanbul and how Ilsa got the key and how she dealt with the Entity before.

[sanctuary2022]

re your theory that ilsa is alive and whether or not ethan knows: he does not. she needed his reaction to be fully authentic to sell it to an all knowing entity so he couldn't possibly know. (also imagine his reaction when they reunite and he realizes she's alive ??? !!! we're finally getting that kiss with tongue) luther, however, knows and helped her plan her death; he gives it away when grace says, "i'm the reason she's dead" and he goes, NO <3

literally i walked out of my first showing saying she was alive but when i clocked that luther line on my second watch i was like SEEE?????? how can anyone think she’s dead after that. unless they’re stupid. im the reason she’s dead. no. she’s the reason you’re alive. like not only did he reject the premise but he’s framing the entire bridge as being because of ilsa’s actions. by sacrificing herself as the one who “died” that night she guaranteed that the entity would stop going after grace

and yeah i totally think you’re right. i waffle sometimes but thinking ilsa is dead not only sells their grief to the entity but makes it so ethan has one less person to think about when making his decisions. i mean a huge throughline of the series is ethan making the ‘wrong’ decision in order to save someone. so as those numbers dwindle ESPECIALLY if he thinks ilsa is dead he’s going to get more willing to do the risky things (lol. as if he isn’t always but you know what i mean). he’s always more willing to risk himself than his friends. and ilsa least of all. she knows this that’s why she left in rogue nation and sometime after fallout. luther knows too bc he’s the ethanilsa whisperer. poor benji just has to suffer bc he won’t be able to keep it from ethan

i expect dr2 to start with ethan having been operating solo for a while and getting riskier and riskier (unless benji managed to stick around but i can also see ethan shaking him off and saying it’s for benjis safety). and then when ilsa comes around and they tonguefuck onscreen we will win forever

[purplemoonfox]

Watch the damn video. The title is upsetting but the video is good.

IMHO, yes and no to the tinfoily possibility of why this film flopped as presented by the video’s maker. I’ll explain why. Basically I agree wholeheartedly, but I don’t go in for conspiracy theories as such. One of these days I’ll write down my thoughts on Star Wars, fandom,society, and the early 2000′s. It’s part of my continuing if unwritten theory on All Else Aside, Why Advertising Should Be Heavily Regulated, closely related to Corporations Are Not People, Fuck Off Don’t @ Me. Also closely related to Ethics: The Class No One Likes In Business School Which Is Hilariously Ironic For A Lot Of Reasons. Little under grad me was sitting in a business school once and my friend walked over laughing. Apparently he’d overheard some business kids whining about how boring and useless ethics class was.

I’m a bit of a misanthropic shit with a bone to pick if you can’t tell.

Anyway--

If you asked me whether Disney had some grand, literally planned out conspiracy in torpedoing this movie, just so they could welch on a deal made with one of the previous execs, I’d say you’re reaching. Frankly, as they say, Disney is a business. Regardless of whatever face it puts on, Disney is a business. If they wanted it to flop they didn’t want a $70 million plus deficit. That’s why it freaked the fuck out after Solo flopped, which isn’t fair to Solo since poor Solo, which grew on me massively since I was somewhat bewildered by it at first (if anyone’s curious I’ll talk about that later) was in a somewhat similar situation when it went up at a weird time of year against DP2, the marketing was absolute shit because they’d practically given up after the backlash against a young Han Solo full stop, and they used a filthy casual generalist’s character (Han Solo) to showcase some very specialist in fandom’s details like (SPOILER?) Maul being alive again. But I do like the point the video maker made about the DVD release and winter movies, and the release environment. 

So let’s re-establish some points that the video maker made.

1. This was a personal passion project from the beginning, not a studio or company thing.

The directors struggled since 1987 to get this thing into motion and it was on an agreement made with an exec that it was ever put in motion.

2. This film spared no expense. 

The visual animation in this film is very well done. But it’s basically Disney animation tossing out all the stops. Which, honestly, was what they generally do when innovating, but...this is an animator’s and director’s movie. In a sense it’s an art film done by masters of their craft, but marketed by someone who is more interested in what sells. You want to know when we’ll get less Star Wars and MCU? Stop buying quite so much of it all. I say, as I’m going to run out and get me some sweet Dooku comics. Shut up. It’s not hypocrisy if I know what I’m enabling...LOL.

But here’s another thing that the video maker lauds, but forgets that studios can be really fucking finicky about this kind of off the wall risk-taking---

3. It’s anomalous in a lot of ways. 

That’s going to scare people in the industry because it’s not the tried and true that often wins the Benjis the easiest for the least effort. There’s a reason we now see so many franchises with long-running film series and remakes and sequels and so on--they have established characters in established universes that makes marketing have an easier time of establishing rapport with an audience and attracting attention. They don’t have to make anything new; new doesn’t even make as much money. Treasure Planet came out in 2002 for reference, POTC: Curse of the Black Pearl came out in 2003, so it was in that time period when movies didn’t necessarily have interconnected franchises and were instead relatively more separate iterations unto themselves, kind of like Rocky or Rambo, so it was a little before the era of massively planned out story arcs. I don’t think Marvel ever really had a plan to make the MCU as we know it today, I don’t think George Lucas knew what the fuck he was kicking off when he released TPM in 1999, which is to say the resurgence of Star Wars in concurrence with the rise of modern fandoms starting with the release of Pokemon in 1996 and continuing to play a big part in the lives of Millennials nostalgia is one of the few marketing techniques that work on us...and yes I can show studies. But studios chased that profit relentlessly and it eventually coalesced into something like a plan oh god I’ll move on or I’ll go into Star Wars and we’re not here for that.

I think people rely too much on the assumption that there must be some kind of dedicated conspiracy to bring outcomes like these, like they’re never the product of an unhappy outcome of multiple issues going on independently and congruently. Sometimes that involves personal issues on the part of the people making the decisions that affect something. Roads to hell and all that.

Okay.

The company wasn’t excited about it, it was something those newer CEOs couldn’t pull the plug on once they inherited it. And the company may not have wanted to make the second? Yes, all possible. Even likely. I’m also strongly reminded of Erich von Stroheim’s Foolish Wives, which got him banned from directing for life and established the supremacy of studios over directors forevermore.

Risks too many risks are anathema to a moneymaking entity in the black. These directors may have dragged Disney out of the shitter but now they were sitting comfortably on a pile of cash, and risk is a lot less costly--when you want to take it. When.

I’ve read some, not much, about social economic status and behavior. Rich people have less to lose when taking risks, so they can say cute things like “well just go off and do it and see what you get!” and possibly just face a setback, when for someone in a lower income status the possible outcome of risk is actual destitution. The former sees only potential benefit, the latter only danger.

Moneymaking institutions, on the other hand, tend to resist risk and change when the possible outcome is less money. If anything, they want just enough innovation to draw interest, but not enough to surprise or put people off. Side note: if Disney ever teamed up with Wal-Mart I’m going to call it Shin-Ra and no one can stop me. Disney in the shitter? Fuck yes, take risks--what we’ve got isn’t working and we desperately need to make money somehow. Disney not in the shitter? Fuck no, don’t take risks--what we’ve got is working and you’re possibly going to do something people won’t like so we won’t make money. Who cares if the two people at the head of the project are the reason you’re sitting on a mountain of cash right fucking now? A board without the risk of default only sees dangers, they’re not seeing potential benefits.

If anything there was a level of resignation and “fuck it, let’s let them do this because we kind of have to and see how it goes, this was their project, not ours” and a lot of “see, told you so! Now get back to work!” that went on. But it’s a bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy that they won’t own up to, in that lack of an advertisement campaign in the run up to the release. They set the movie up to fail not because of a planned conspiracy but because of a risk-minimization impulse and...then make less than astute assumptions about what it was about the movie that caused it to fail--then plan off of all that.

Now. Going to change gears a little and go on a bit of a tangent, because it relates to that very last point--the part about moving forward.

Remember when this happened. The early 2000′s. What was emerging right around the early 2000′s? That’s right. CGI animation. Did Disney scrap their whole animation studios and pare it down to projection work after that spate of less-than-stellar performances before the Disney Renaissance? Did they blame animation itself for its faults? No they did not, but it would become a convenient whipping boy.

I got into a pretty unpleasant argument a few months ago when, having been asked what unpopular opinion one has on a thread, I said that I wished Disney hadn’t closed their 2D animation. I love 2D. I really do. Most of the people who replied were like “you do realize that isn’t an unpopular opinion kthx” and I was like “ok fair enough.”

But then this mouth-breathing chucklefuck that apparently can’t read labels thought it was cute to try and tell me why I’m wrong for me to have my own fucking opinion what a cute notion. He was a fucking twit, but I got a few salient points out of it to roll over in my head anyway. I strongly suspect he had something to do with the industry itself because of the points he made. He didn’t change my mind, but some points are worth thinking about.

1. Disney is for kids. Okay. Not if they don’t want to tap into more than just parents strapped for cashs’ pockets, but the movies are still made to be accessible and engaging for younger people, so I rolled my eyes and moved on.

2. Related to the first point, kids don’t like 2D animation anymore because they’re used to 3D because that’s what all their other entertainment is is. Why?

3. INNOVATION. EVERYONE WANTS INNOVATION AND GETS BORED WITHOUT 100% FULL THROTTLE VISUAL INNOVATION. YOU’RE JUST BEING A BITTER OLD NOSTALGIA HOUNDING HAG. 

Medium aside, the rest to a movie is really just window dressing; Moana had fantastic and original music as well as otherwise being visually stunning too, granted, because in no way am I hating on 3D itself; the point is it’s not an opera singer standing in for the voice actress, much as I love Beauty and the Beast’s animated soundtrack, but music can be played regardless of animation medium. And you’re damn right we could’ve had a Polynesian Princess before now.

Of the two I found the second point more interesting and less inane. The third was just...charming.

Now. Just to go back to Star Wars real quick to make a point; the OT is filmed in a way consistent with the time period it was made in. I’ve known people who tell me that they prefer the sequels and that ANH, ep 4 the one with the Death Star for anyone wandering in, not the one with Ewoks or Hoth, is boring. Why? Because it’s filmed like a movie from 1978, which means its pacing is different and so are the camera angles and so on. Because, uh, it’s a movie from 1978. What an original fucking concept. If you need a comparison for what was otherwise more or less the standard of SFX in the day, pop in Star Trek: The Motion Picture, 1979 I’m not hating on Trekkies, I love you guys. Star Wars is phenomenally ahead of its time. For an older version, guys, I may loathe Citizen Kane with every fiber of my salty little being, but I will give it full credit for the innovations it made in camera angles and scene setting. 

All of this is not to forget The Princess and The Frog in 2009, which was great, but it didn’t smash through the roof like this was the end of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory.

So. We had Treasure Planet, whose release was a wretched cluster of fuck. We had Winnie the Pooh, which isn’t...well, guys, it’s not an original story, and then we had Home on the Range, which I’ve never seen. I enjoyed Brother Bear, but I swear the being a bear for most of the movie kind of killed the ability of a lot of people to put themselves in their shoes. Because let’s face it--if we’re going for blaming thematic issues, romance is still a part of the Disney theory, even if we’ve finally reached the point of questioning some of its normal tenets--not marrying someone you just met and why is everyone dancing come to mind oh Flynn Rider you fucking gem you. But none of that is made impossible by the medium of 3D. And why the fuck is everyone ignoring Mulan and Esmeralda in all this anyway. Well, poor Esmeralda always gets the short end of the stick. I swear though that woman did convince me that I could be fucking badass in a skirt though.

Meanwhile we see the rise of Pixar. In 1995, we had Toy Story my mother dragged us to see that movie seven times in theaters. Now that I think about it I shouldn’t be surprised that the woman was fascinated with the concept of a secret world anonymously devoted to the person that plays with them in a way that makes them literally dolls on shelves, since...reasons. Monsters, Inc., in 2001, Finding Nemo in 2003, The Incredibles in 2004, and Wall-E and Up in 2008 and 2009, respectively--after the acquisition by Disney in 2006. They haven’t done quite so well recently, their stock has taken on more sequels decently good sequels, granted, not the shitty made for video stuff that Disney put out, and some others. I’ll be annoyed if they make a sequel for Wall-E; I don’t know what that would look like. Maybe rediscovering the concept of competition over resources and nostalgia for the good old days of space. Nah. That just sounds like why Tolkien never wrote a sequel to LOTR.

I brought that bit about Treasure Planet (2002), Brother Bear (2003), Home on the Range (2004), and The Princess and The Frog (2009) up to mainly make the point that after Treasure Planet’s lackluster response until The Princess and The Frog, Disney gave it anything but relatively normal big-name projects...and then topped it off with Winnie the Pooh in 2011, which was never going to be a blowout hit. I like Winnie the Pooh itself enough to not disdain it, but I don’t like it enough to spend money on a fucking movie ticket. Mostly just tolerated it in Kingdom Hearts if not ignored it when I could. 

Now, you might think that the immediately previous statement basically made my point entirely invalid, but I also brought up that bit about the highly successful Pixar, which they bought in 2006. They pretty much lost interest and moved on to the shiny new thing; The Princess and The Frog really only got made because John Lasseter and Ed Catmull wanted to make it; Disney had meant to shut 2D animation down. Then it had some controversy, though to my knowledge the film did its best to resolve the issues. Furthermore, despite the fact that we were supposed to get more animated films because it did well, The Princess and The Frog, despite its success, we got the rug pulled out from under us when they didn’t get enough money.

Look. Every thirty years or so, somebody swears that they just invented 3D screens. While not on a television, they’ve had “how to make visual representation look 3D” since 1838. No, not 1938. 1838. It’s a stupid gimmick, and it will be a stupid gimmick the next time they bring it up, too. They have tried to sell 3D tv screens in the past, and it failed then, too. The point I’m trying to make is that sometimes it’s not the medium that’s at fault, although some people in the industry itself seem to blame it for not being “new” enough, as if it’s not their failure to innovate effectively and then do their due diligence that’s to blame. Disney basically shot themselves in the foot over Treasure Planet and hand-drawn animation in general, and threw up their hands, affected to forget that any of that ever happened, and blamed the gun that they suddenly found sitting at their feet--not because Treasure Planet was fated to be a failure from inception, or that 2D animation is intrinsically inferior to 3D and/or is less interesting to small children because it’s just older if that were the case and frankly, that point about kids and 3D and preference...well, Paw Patrol isn’t every kid’s show in existence, there are 2D animated kid’s shows, and Pixar would never have bothered researching Buster Keaton and Charlie Chaplin for wordless language while making Wall-E.

[rebeccasteventaylor]

Having seen TFR multiple times, my own personal theory is that while Ethan and Benji are apart, Ethan is thinking about Benji all the time, but he can never say anything because the Entity is probably listening and also because Ethan Hunt never says anything, you irritating, deny-yourself-for-good-of-others man. But there clues that Benji is always on Ethan’s mind.

Like a wearing a sweater in a colour Ethan’s never worn before. A sweater I joked was the exact colour of Benji’s eyes and now I wonder if that was deliberate.

Or the key.

Ethan doesn’t hold the key all the time. It seems to be passed back between him and Benji. So every time Ethan holds it, it must have memories of Benji. And he doesn’t hold gingerly like others do - he grasps it close, wrapping his hand protectively around it.

The way Ethan and Benji’s actions echo each other - like the fight, or when explaining the plan when Ethan becomes distinctly Benji like, down to the stammer and the shrug.

There may be more. I’ll find more.

[rebeccasteventaylor]

So far these are my theories for TFR

1) Ethan in blue sweater and handcuffs is Benji in a mask

2) The shot of Benji dying is a prediction the Entity is showing Ethan

3) Benji does NOT die and the forehead touch is Ethan getting Benji back after thinking he’s dead/desperately trying to stop the death the Entity predicted

4) It’s Benji in the red plane.

I have no proof about any of this beyond a few vague notes and a feeling. But if I come back from the movie shouting ‘my theory was right!’ it’ll probably be one of these.

On the other hand it might all change completely in the next 40 days

[rebeccasteventaylor]

So my theory is - and this is just my first run at it - is all those shots of Benji being hurt come from when Ethan is plugged into the Entity, and it’s the Entity telling him what is going to happen - specifically that Benji is going to try to complete the mission without him, and Benji will die.

Ethan being Ethan, he immediately decides that isn’t going to happen. After all the Entity has been wrong before - it didn’t predict Ethan would steal the key from Gabriel, or that Paris would live.

So Ethan turns himself in to complete the mission alone (handcuffs…)

However, Benji being Benji, he’s not allowing that to happen, so he gathers together Paris, Degas and Grace, thus unconsciously fulfilling the Entity’s prophecy

At some point Ethan tells Benji he’s going to sacrifice himself to save him, to stop the prophecy

- but of course, Benji being Benji, he doesn’t allow that and runs off to take Ethan’s place.

But from that moment on, Ethan gives everything he is to saving Benji - even as the events exactly mirror the prophecy (Benji getting hurt on the cheek) but somehow they are reunited - Benji sobbing to see Ethan again, Ethan unbelievably relieved to have got Benji back, knowing what Benji means to him.

That’s what I have so far. And I know it leaves several gaps. But I think that’s the outline.

(Also addendum - I’m still convinced Benji is in the red plane. But I’ve no idea how that fits into this whole narrative nor do I have any proof. It’s just a feeling)

[rebeccasteventaylor]

Oh - hang on a sec - the bomb is all about riddles and if you don’t answer the riddles correctly you die (they think)

Turandot - the opera that Ethan uses to lure Benji to him - is all about riddles and if you don’t answer the riddles you die…

What if - what if the entity has been there all along, watching Ethan and his team…

(My whole theory about final reckoning being the culmination of a story began in rogue nation arises again…)

(Look, if I don’t get new material to analyse soon I’m just going to analyse to death what’s already there)

[rebeccasteventaylor]

Hello, I read what you do on benthan for a while, and I wanted to tell you that I love what you do (analyses, fanfictions…). I would like to know all your theories about MI8, I think you have good ideas.

Oh, thank you!

Well my theories change all the time but basically - I think Ethan sends Benji away to keep him safe while Ethan fights the Entity - I think Benji refuses to accept that and gathers together Grace, Paris and Degas to go and get Ethan.

I’m not sure of the timeline…I think the moment where Degas and Paris are fighting the people in white overalls is in the Arctic and the person in black thrown through the window is Benji (and that’s where he gets hurt).

I think Ethan yelling ‘no!’ is him shouting at Benji - him and Grace are behind the very large bomb and I think Benji is unable to stop the detonator so is running away with it won’t set the bomb off when it goes off - basically sacrificing himself.

I also think Benji is the pilot slumped over in the red biplane and Ethan is trying to get to him but I have nothing to back that up.

And I think the forehead touch is Ethan saying goodbye to Benji as he’s about to sacrifice himself. And Ethan has just told Benji all he means to him and how important Benji is to him.

Basically that’s all I have for now. That might all change when then next trailer comes out, it’s nearly all guesswork and I’m often wrong about these things. But basically its:..

Benji will rescue Ethan

Both Ethan and Benji will sacrifice them selves to save the other at some point (or think they are sacrificing themself)

Ethan will finally find the words to tell Benji what he means to Ethan (maybe not the word love, but as close as possible)