Mission: Impossible - The Final Reckoning

Mission: Impossible - The Final Reckoning is bombastic to put it mildly, given all the fast-paced exposition and visually resounding action setpieces.

While after the Hitchcockian narrative of Mission: Impossible - Dead Reckoning, this concluding chapter somewhat may feel a bit inadequate - especially with all those lots of scenes in caves and lairs and prisons with no astoundingly risky turn - the highs are even higher than the lows seem lower. Let me tell you, everyone will be googling "Mission Impossible 8 submarine scene" a week for now.

The underwater chapter is indeed breathtaking and quite original piece of filmmaking and a nice addition to M:I franchise which saves the movie big time. That 20-minute sequence with submarine is perhaps the most original piece of action written for action-oriented narratives since 1996's Mission: Impossible's own aqua cafe sequence between Ethan and Kittdridge, directed brilliantly by Brian De Palma. The suspense as Ethan so assiduously tackled all those aquatic, James Cameron-isque challanges was palpable. The realism and authenticity added the rest.

Else, they have recycled tropes all over the place in order to pay homage - the gala which is rendered into a jail before the gathering itself is even exhibited - no fancy cars, garish costumes, stupendous decorum, dances, masks, bluetooth talk, etc. In here. I missed the trains as well.

And narratively, there also exists this thing called predictability, and it's here to stay in the movie - the biggest weakness of The Final Reckoning. The movie is, perhaps, the least memorable for its twists - or the lack thereof - when compared to all the other M:I movies in the franchise, probably tied with Mission: Impossible 2. But that's not to say it is bad, or average or even above average - no! It's hella great!!

In terms of action-based storytelling as well, this may seem like a step backwards from Mission: Impossible - Fallout. Most scenes, when considering the movie is nearly 3 hours long, is quite limited or superfluous otherwise. But all of that pays off in the final act, trust Mr. Cruise. Because that brings us to the biplane chase sequence.

After 150 minutes of absolutely no motorcycles and cars chasing each other, though plenty of Cruise sprinting, the red and yellow old-school biplanes going after each other in South African skies is something that should adequately feed all the ravenous audiences. It's suspenseful, it's engaging, it's REALLY dangerous; though the villainous Gabriel character is still bland and bad, like the previous entry.

The diversity, without throwing into our faces what their genders are, is probably the quintessential example of how these things should be done. Hannah Waddingham in charge of aircraft carrier was something that really paid off. I didn't like the "lady boy" person wearing that vest and donning horrible hairstyle in that submarine. Angela Bassett seemed a natural as a president and didn't feel forced to assume a masculine aura just because she's a female US President. Thanks to all the brilliant women in the movie to forsake that awful cliché line "you don't think a woman can do it" - you show them subtly rather than preaching non-stop about such superfluous substance like in some Marvel movie.

Overall, a decent enough Mission: Impossible movie but a brilliant actioner, nonetheless, given how the series has always fared when compared by Hollywood's standards. Kudos to Tom Cruise and Christopher McQuarrie.

7.5/10.

Ignore the critics. This was an absolutely fun and super entertaining movie. It was long but never dragged. In fact from the moment I sat in my seat I was at the cinema for over 3 hours. But it never felt like that.

The climax with the bi-planes was superb and one of the best and most exciting action scenes I've ever seen.

For me, this was one of the best Mission Impossible films. Loved it. Have no idea why some of the critics have panned it. Then again what do they know? It's all about having fun on the big screen and this is exactly what Tom Cruise does best. He's an absolute master in it. Highly recommend!

I really wanted to like this movie, and it hurts to say that it is actually very mid. It tries to be extremely high-stakes but forgets what made the best mission films so great-not only the action but also the characters. It's hard not to see that the plot is there just to fill the time between the key stunts. But I'd like to go into more detail, starting with what I liked.

1. Cinematography and action. As usual, the cinematography is strong with this one. Some of the shots were jaw-dropping, hands down. The submarine underwater sequence is a masterclass in tension. I forgot all the problems I had with the plot while watching it. Truly beautiful. No matter the issues that I will list further, I still have a crazy respect for Tom Cruise doing this for real and bringing the best action possible.

2. Benji. I absolutely love everything they did with this character. From being a nameless computer guy, to Ethan's close friend and partner, to actually becoming a co-leader with Ethan. Definitely well built and deserved.

3. Some connections with previous movies felt nice; one even had a great message behind it. Though I have to say, it felt like the creators didn't trust the audience enough to recognise them. For example, when one of the characters was brought back from another M:I, Benji immediately started explaining who this guy was, which killed some of the joy for me, as a fan.

But, even if I wouldn't call TFR a bad movie, it is a very flawed one.

1. The whole "CHOICE" situation is stupid. It's never once foreshadowed in any of the first six movies, so it feels like a retcon. Why was this even needed? It brings nothing to the story apart from Grace joining the team, which could've been done in a dozen other ways.

2. This movie has some of the heaviest exposition I've ever seen. It felt dragged a lot of times. Not Andor-slow, rather just dragged and pointless. Characters explain things all the time, repeating and finishing each other's sentences. And even with so much info being said, it still sometimes gets unclear who the villain is or what motivation/goals they have.

3. We learn NOTHING about the Gabriel-Ethan relationship, which was teased so much in Part 1. Honestly, in the end, if Entity chose any other guy and not the one who happens to be Ethan's old enemy, nothing would've changed. Like absolutely nothing. What was the point of those flashbacks in Part 1? We have no idea what the situation was, who that woman was, why Gabriel killed her, or why Ethan was framed for it. It brings nothing new to Ethan's character. Also, Gabriel himself is boring. We know nothing about him, and if in theory, this could've been intimidating, in practice, it just makes him a poorly written villain. Why establish a detailed background and motivation for a character if we can just throw in the same flashback here and there and make Ethan panic when he sees him the first time in DR :) (I am not saying this franchise always had nuanced villains. It's an action blockbuster of all things. But Gabriel is just rock bottom.)

4. Final fight with Gabriel didn't feel earned or satisfying, because Gabriel is probably one of the most passive villains I've ever seen. He makes some bald statements and runs away the whole movie. And when he finally gets defeated, the scene itself is straight out of the comedy genre, in a film that otherwise tries to be obnoxiously serious.

5. Villains in this movie generally take minimal conscious action, so they do not feel intimidating or engaging. This is especially true of AI. It is hard to be afraid of it. AI enemy sounds cool on paper, but it doesn't really fit in Mission's formula. My concerns from watching DR were proven true. In the end, all we got was a race for an ultra-tech macguffin, which has to connect to other macguffin, which can be found by using another macguffin, only then to use the final macguffin at the right timing to defeat the Entity. Sounds stupid and boring? It is. That is the price for having the enemy you can't see in the media, where everything is based on seeing.

6. Yes, some villains from other iterations might not have been top-level, but at least the characters around Ethan made the movie engaging. This brings us to secondary characters in this movie. Paris... Pom Klementieff did a great job, but she did not have a lot to work with, unfortunately. We do not learn anything new about her. I really wanted to see her character developed in this movie, but it's just a sad mess, honestly.

7. Same goes for Degas. He showed signs of conscience, joined Ethan to save the world, and then completely disappeared from the plot.

8. There is just too many side characters, especially in the government and military. Most of them don't even have names. They are just plot vessels, not actual people.

9. Lite spoiler: In the film's first minutes, you get a montage of key moments from previous entries. That looked peak in the trailer, but watching it again in the actual movie felt very cheesy. I felt like watching a fan edit on TikTok, not a Hollywood blockbuster.

10. That ending... Probably the worst Mission ending ever. Extremely cliche and lacks emotion. I can't believe this is all they came up with, especially considering this is supposed to be the ending of a 30-year-long journey.

11. Probably the weakest soundtrack we got since MI3. Not a musician, so I won't be commenting on this, but subjectively it is definitely not as consistent and emotional as previous ones.

For me, this movie can be best described by my favourite quote from Arcane. In pursuit of the highest stakes possible, more characters than ever, and the longest, most extreme stunts, they failed to deliver the characters that make the audience care, stunts that feel natural inside the plot, and a villain who is actually intimidating.

This movie successfully concluded this 30-year-old franchise. The action was superb but not over-the-top. There are a lot of characters from the past that being brought back naturally, which I feel is a nice touch. It serves their purpose and doesn't feel out of place or forced. However, not all are to my liking - the twist wasn't as impressive as previous movies and the plot felt a bit linear and thin. It's almost 3 hours so I feels like a road trip rather than a roller coaster. Despite this, I enjoyed the ride and it reminded me of what MI is really about: "We live and die in the shadows, for those we hold close, and those we never meet."

Hats off to Agent Cruise, the only man who can make my heart race that fast. His 40-year dedication to extreme, practical stunts is why the MI saga holds an elevated position in action cinema. Whether his return to underwater sequences or clinging to a moving plane at 140 mph, Cruise really is the last man standing against CGI other than Nolan. Just for the action scenes, Final Reckoning deserves to be watched in an IMAX theater, preferably with comfortable seating options unless you want a backache from all the clenching.

But, there's always a but, the movie's storytelling is much worse than its prequel. The first hour of the film is surfeited with explanatory dialogue and contextualization, which becomes quite frustrating pacing-wise. Stylistically, there's also a superfluous amount of frontal close-ups and Dutch angles, which are really cheap choices for an epic finale. I loved the Entity in Part One because its mission remains unclear even to the end, but this movie blows that setup and we're again relying on one hero to save us from nuclear armageddon. To double down on that decision, the film spends its entirety adding stakes to this supposed world destruction by using countdowns numerous times and allowing the gloomy tension to pervade every scene, as the story is so self-serious it becomes too heavy and hard to immerse in.

In conclusion, The Final Reckoning is complete, it does bring back the nostalgia, but has a bit of issue executing its ambition.