How is this any different from the second?

Rating: Null/10 (7 May 2006)

Yet again there is another woman in peril, who Cruise must save, some action sequences borrowing directly from the Matrix, with all of the jumping and slow motion, and Tom Cruise has yet to show me he can act. He seems to have the opposite of the Midas touch, everything he touches turns bad, but the problem here is that Cruise produced it, this was pretty much his baby yet again, and he made the plots so hokey, and clichéd (how many time has someone been on a motorcycle looking like he's mad at the world with sunglasses?) And Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall?! When he said that I was like 'Are you kidding?!' I can't believe he actually said that. I don't know if Tom Cruise really thought he was cool, by now he and his team who pretty much look like GQ cover models have not proved they can act, they look good, but they can't act.
Tom Cruise is the one who takes the cake. Here he is one of the richest men in Hollywood, got that way pretty much on his appeal as a sex symbol, used to be clean cut, and now he is trying to reinvent himself as some goteed rebel, but it just doesn't work. He never was a rebel before, just some pretty boy who couldn't act, and he never could. The story is not about any kind of spying it is about Tom Cruise being cool. Everything seems to work out perfectly for him, no matter how bad things get every time some car is barreling for him it manages to stop just in time. I wouldn't be so upset with it except he seems to expect the audience to take it seriously.
Philip Seymour Hoffman and Laurence Fishburne, two fine actors have no business appearing in this movie. They are very good actors and they need to stick to good movies. I guess they both felt they needed the exposure or the money. No one in this movie is required to act, and that is the most sad for those two. Cruise's acting really is his make up, which make him look hurt, or tired, but he can't do it himself.
The ultimate problem with this movie is that there is very little resemblance to the original TV show. It didn't have this kind of action, or slow motion beat downs, it had some but most of that show was with your mind, and they figured everything out without beating people up. If they want to make a movie like this fine but don't call it Mission Impossible, this has nothing to do with the original classic series anymore. By now pretty much all of the action runs together, it looks the same, feels the same and pretty much has the same consequence, and this movie has the same formula so many other movies do: A lesser bad guy and then the main bad guy. Both of them find their unusual ways to die, which happen to be so cool, but still so clichéd.
I guess that is the ultimate problem with this movie: clichés. This pretty much was no different from any other action movie, and with a 150 million dollar budget I guess I expected too much. And I guess I shouldn't have expected it any better, the only reason I saw it was on account of the movie I wanted to see started too early. StillI am hearing Cruise is gonna star in a remake of 3:10 to Yuma. I plead to you Mr. Cruise: You have ruined a classic TV series, please don't ruin a classic movie too.