3. Mission: Impossible III
I was honestly not sure which I preferred between M:I-3 and M:I-5. I reflected and, I have a feeling that the warm buzz of M:I-5 is merely because it is shiny. The plus-points of M:I-3 give it the edge…
Pros – What an outstanding cast! Philip Seymour Hoffman (pre-dating Heath Ledger’s joker with his superior, supreme confidence) steals the show, and he rarely turns up. In fact, he’s so good, JJ Abrams repeats a scene to begin the film. There is a clear objective to bring Mission Impossible back to some of its roots. This can be evidenced with themes and codas in the score, the actual team work on display and the clear three-act set pieces – helicopter escape to the Vatican to Shanghai. The outstanding Vatican sequence is an incredible set-piece revealing how they make the masks (something that was always been weirdly easy in previous films) and recreate voices so fast. Abrams shots are relentless, peaking with a camera panning alongside a sprinting Tom Cruise in an exceptionally busy Shanghai. We also find out, at his wedding, that Ethan’s middle name is Matthew. This is promptly followed by the two consummating their marriage in the middle of a hospital, i.e – her workplace.
Cons – Who really cares about the ‘Rabbits foot’? It’s a silly name, for one. Chimera, NOC-list – even the unnecessary ‘Cobalt’ name in Mission Impossible – Ghost Protocol at least sounds cool. Add to this how the immediate opening showing the death of Hunt’s wife spoils the entire film. We know, in 10 seconds, that (a) Hunt’s wife will be pulled into the story, (b) an explosive can kill people via their head and (c) Eddie Marsan will get his nose smashed in. The tension built in sequences leading up to each of these events are spoiled entirely as we have seen it in the opening sequence. In many respects, the ‘heart’ of the film laying in the husband and wife simply seems a little un-Mission Impossible – what next, they have a child and it’ll become a Taken movie? Ultimately, his wife doesn’t die, rendering the entire opening scene irrelevant. In fact, after Philip Seymour Hoffman is out the picture everything that follows destroys the film. His wife is a skilled marksman – and can’t stop asking questions? Ethan will die?! He’s an action hero! Jack Bauer. Jason Bourne. James Bond. They don’t die… unless they get old and retire. M:I-3 went there and missed.
Haaseline says
Agreed, but you could have mentioned Brian DePalma as #1 Director
Chris Hbk says
Everyone has their own opinion…
I agree that the final hour of MI4 is poor, but I would go further and say that I can rarely get through it after the Dubai scene. Renner’s acting is atrocious; “She was not, the mission, Jane!”
I also hated how they gave half the plot away with the opening credits and theme music in MI4… surely that’s a bigger crime than what you mentioned about the start of MI3?
For me;
5 – MI2; awful action filled with no substance.
4 – MI4; overrated, poor acting, too much comedy and not enough venom after the great job done by PSH in the previous instalment.
3 – MI5; only seen it once but I actually feel it could rank higher after repeat viewings… Had a good balance to it.
2 – MI; Great film, agree with all your pros and cons.
1 – MI3; I appreciate I’m in the minority with placing this at the top, but it’s so much darker and grittier. Better acting than all the others bar the first instalment, a variety of scenes, conflicts and revolations.
cjohnston says
again (as a post below articulates); opinions will and do – vary.
~
.I dug what Brad Bird brought to the table with GProtocol until about twenty minutes left in the film when the wheels inexplicably fell off.
–
For me, Rogue Nation is easily the BEST one out of the franchise..