Movie Review


MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE III

By: Rachel Reitsleff
Review Date: Friday, May 05, 2006

"Playful" may be overstating the mood here a bit or maybe not. MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE III certainly gets back to the franchise's roots by remembering that these IMF people, Tom Cruise's Ethan Hunt included, take pride and even some pleasure in their work, which includes a lot of top-flight con artistry and split-second handoffs, as well as stopping bad guys from destroying the world and of course blowing up as much stuff as the budget will allow.

In MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE III, IMF's erstwhile top agent Ethan has taken up training new recruits to prepare for doing the unthinkable: marrying a civilian, nurse Julia (Michelle Monaghan), who believes her fiancé works for a much more mundane branch of the government. Coming clean with the about-to-be-missus is an issue right up there with obtaining a mysterious device known as "the rabbit's foot" that may be capable of destroying the world.

The film opens with a sequence depicting Ethan and Julia in dire straits at the hands of arms dealer Owen Davian (Philip Seymour Hoffman), then flashes back to show us how things reached this pass, then charges forward through the finale. Director J.J. Abrams, who cowrote the screenplay with Alex Kurtzman & Roberto Orci all three collaborated for years on the Abrams-created series ALIAS takes welcome time for grace notes, bits of humor and banter that give us a breather from the deafening, metal-shattering action and also provides a reason to actually care about what's going on, rather than (as, for instance, in M:I I) watching some incredibly grumpy, annoyingly self-serious people go about trying to achieve their solitary ends. In some ways, M:I III feels something like ALIAS, which in turn borrows a lot from the original M:I TV series it has a blast with the gadgets and disguises and getaways, and also with the griping and advice (there's a memorable chat where Ving Rhames, returning as Ethan's teammate Luther, quizzes Ethan about his relationship with a younger female agent). There's also at least one show-stopping costume Maggie Q, as IMF agent Zhen, wears an outfit to a Vatican function that may cause some viewers to at least temporarily forget the plot. (The idea is that it will be plausible to the villain's henchmen that their busy boss will be attracted to her we have no questions on this score.)


Cruise is solidly in his element, running, base-jumping, punching, shooting and occasionally even crying persuasively as our hero. Hoffman avoids the temptation to overdo it, playing the villainous Davian as a man secure in the knowledge that he's in control at all times, no matter how things may look at the moment he also has fun with the bits where ... well, this is a MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE movie, after all. Rhames, Jonathan Rhys Meyers, Laurence Fishburne and Billy Crudup all provide strong support and Simon Pegg (of SHAUN OF THE DEAD fame) is one of the most enjoyable assets here, injecting the particular humor of British office anxiety into the mix. Monaghan makes the most of the love interest, who is refreshingly written as a reasonable person rather than the screaming ninnies that tend to occupy this story function.

Abrams has recruited a lot of his ALIAS team here besides Kurtzman and Orci, there's production designer Scott Chambliss, composer Michael Giacchino and even actor Greg Grunberg in a cameo. (Keri Russell, star of Abrams' earlier series FELICITY, also does well in a key supporting role.) Chambliss does a sumptuous job of moving us with the characters around the globe and Giacchino works greatly in the spirit of Lalo Schifrin, whose MISSION theme is surely one of the best-known riffs on the planet. Despite the huge scope of the film, there is a slightly television-esque quality to it, with lots of close-ups and frenetic cutting, even when the action and location seem fully able to withstand more leisurely examination. On the other hand, the willingness to not try to turn MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE into something it was never designed to be allows it to concentrate fully on all the things that are fun about the premise. Abrams and company, Cruise included, seem to love the whole playground here and show that they know how to run the game vigorously and unpretentiously.




More From Mania

MISSION Not So Impossible?

Mission: Impossible 3
(Wednesday, August 31, 2005)
MISSION IMPOSSIBLE II
(Tuesday, May 23, 2000)
SCARY MOVIE 2
(Wednesday, July 4, 2001)
Escaflowne Movie: Standard Edition
(Saturday, May 4, 2002)

See more related content
More Content By Rachel Reitsleff
88 Minutes
(Friday, April 18, 2008)
ALIENS VS. PREDATOR: REQUIEM
(Wednesday, December 26, 2007)
HITMAN
(Saturday, November 24, 2007)
SLEUTH
(Friday, October 12, 2007)
THE SEEKER: THE DARK IS RISING
(Sunday, October 7, 2007)
HATCHET
(Friday, September 7, 2007)
RUSH HOUR 3
(Friday, August 10, 2007)
STARDUST
(Friday, August 10, 2007)
THE BOURNE ULTIMATUM
(Friday, August 3, 2007)
SUNSHINE
(Friday, July 20, 2007)
Fandango Logo
Comments/Responses
1 2 3 4 > >>
• May 05, 2006, 03:50am •
Say what you will about Cruise and his faux-religious insanity, but this movie is the one I've been most looking forward to all year. SUPERMAN RETURNS, X3, everything has taken a back seat to this film, especially since I heard that it was going to be focusing more on an actual IMF team, rather that the one-man team of Ethan Hunt. And I'll go ahead and admit it: I have really enjoyed the previous entries in this franchise. The first film has some great moments of actual suspense and the second has some really great action. This one seems to have elements of both, and I am hoping that it is all that it appears to be.

• May 05, 2006, 07:35am •
ditto... except for my thoughts on the previous movies. I thought the first Mission: Impossible was a much better film than the second one. It was pratically the complete opposite... Woo's interpretation was action, action, action, doves (pigeons or whatever the hell they were), and it was brainless (a no brainer) whereas Brian De Palmas relied more suspense thriller action movie that made you think.

As codenamev said this one does seem to have elements of both and I too am hoping that this movie is what the trailer eludes too.

This is going to make a $hitload of money.

• May 05, 2006, 07:53am •
Another B. I am shocked.

• May 05, 2006, 09:13am •
i'm shocked at the B as well... I saw this last night at a sneak preview, and its worth the A, or A-.

The reviewer says nothing bad! why is it a B?

• May 05, 2006, 11:10am •
MI:1 was OK. MI:2 was stupid. MI:3 will be worse. Tom Cruise is a goof-ball and freakishly weird! I refuse to watch him anymore in ANY film! He's lost me as a fan, and I refuse to acknowledge any of his work anymore. The last nail in the coffin for me was War of the Worlds....one of the worst movies ever made!

• May 05, 2006, 11:19am •
Speaking of WotW, the original, even 50 plus years old, is WAY superior to that piece of shit remake/retelling that Speilberg and Cruise did. The original is an absolute classic and makes Speilbergs feel like a hashed together Cruise vehicle to show off his acting(?) ability. It sucked!

• May 05, 2006, 12:11pm •
What does Cruise's religious beliefs have to do with his acting? Personally, I think he's a goofball wierdo, but if it's a good movie, I would still want to see it.

exalan • May 05, 2006, 12:16pm •
yeah i saw it last night too and movie is amazingly good. LOL, exarkun is an idiot quite flaming until you can actually come up with a good point about cruise movies.

• May 05, 2006, 12:26pm •
Well ''exarkun1138'', you surelly though that through....

Now, of course I won't try to convince you otherwise since your opinion seems strong.

I would disagree though has to why the hell are people saying that just because the guy is acting a little weird, he's now a ''goofball'' and all his movies are stupid????

WOTW was really good, what the hell people want more? Of course the original was better because it was never done before, now, with this remake, they tried a different aprovah and Tom and Dakota were excellent (ok, that young dude shouldv'e died in my book but, that's just me).

But, that's what I think and of course, you don't have to agree.

I'm going to see MI3 tonight, can't wait...

• May 05, 2006, 12:27pm •
*different aprovah = different approach....sorry, typpo

1 2 3 4 > >>
Login to post a comment!