Mission: Impossible - The Final Reckoning

Mission Impossible: The Final Reckoning serves as the grandest and boldest farewell to arguably the greatest action franchise of all time. Yet, it lacks a true sense of finality.

The film shoulders a colossal burden, attempting to deliver a worthy goodbye to Ethan Hunt and the iconic franchise. It aims to provide satisfying conclusions to a bloated roster of side characters while also setting up inevitable cash-grab sequels. Additionally, it strives to outdo every previous installment by going bigger and bolder than ever. While it excels in some areas, it falters in others.

One of the film's biggest challenges is managing its vast ensemble of characters. The script occasionally struggles to balance them all, resulting in scenes where some characters randomly appear and disappear, seemingly out of convenience rather than logic. This inconsistency can be jarring, pulling the audience out of the experience.

In typical Mission Impossible fashion, the film promises the most spectacular set pieces yet-and it delivers. These grand, meticulously crafted action sequences are thrilling to watch. However, their constant back-to-back presence somewhat dampens their impact. Once the audience becomes accustomed to the relentless spectacle, the element of surprise and tension starts to wane.

The stunts, while still impressive, carry a bittersweet note. Unlike previous installments where Tom Cruise's daring feats were fully captured on camera, this time around, roughly half of the action scenes rely on noticeable green screen effects. Though understandable, given Cruise's age and safety precautions, it slightly detracts from the visceral thrill of witnessing genuine stunts, making the danger feel less real.

Performance-wise, this installment shines, particularly with Angela Bassett delivering one of the most emotionally charged portrayals in the franchise. The script's emphasis on deeper emotions allows for some of the finest acting moments in the series.

However, the editing feels somewhat sloppy, giving the impression that substantial material was left on the cutting room floor. While the brisk pacing keeps the film engaging, it sometimes feels as if we're only witnessing the start and end of scenes without the journey in between, leaving a sense of incompleteness. The cutting is fast, but not in an exhilarating manner-instead, it's disorienting.

If this truly is the final goodbye to the Mission Impossible series, it's been an unforgettable ride. Despite its flaws, the franchise remains the pinnacle of action cinema in my book, and its legacy will undoubtedly endure for generations. I've said this before, and I'll say it again: we are witnessing a master at craft. Cherish it while you can.

This message will self-destruct in five seconds.

I'm going to sound negative because to be honest i expected a lot more from this movie.

First of all the dialogue was unusually poor, i know that's not what the movie is for but it's noticeable and it broke the immersion for me. The beginning felt like an introduction, which might be necessary for first time mission impossible viewers, though quite repetitive for those who have seen Dead Reckoning. The flashbacks and flashforwards to explain the story was a lazy choice in my opinion and it was one the big negatives in this film. The whole story is constantly being explained leaving no room for mystery, some intrigue or some unpredictable moments. Actually it becomes almost annoying because the dialogue is just sloppy, leaving very little for the actors to work with. Fortunately some momentum is gained as the movie progresses, mainly from the stunts which are absolutely incredible and let's be honest, you probably won't find anything that comes close in any other type of media. Though this momentum doesn't last long because of all the explaining again and the bad guys seeming to be there only for show. What I'm trying to say is that Yes the action sequences are obviously the main selling point of MI but not the only one. An interesting story that keeps its viewers guessing is what separates an OK MI from a great MI. I don't know, maybe they messed up the editing? I think the writing was a problem, the whole thing seemed rushed.

I think i will just rewatch Fallout to feel good.

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.

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.

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!