Why is it Impossible to make a great M:I?

Rating: 6/10 (6 June 2006)

This is a very tricky review for me to write. The reason being that I don't remember the last time I felt so wish-washy about a movie. I believe the biggest problem was reading too much about the film before I saw it. Countless articles and interviews explaining how we finally get to see a fleshed out Ethan Hunt who was an actual human being this time and not just a super spy who looks cool in shades. And all those early reviews were so incredibly positive and eagerly proclaimed this to be the best in the series. Maybe there's no way to live up to that kind of promise. I feel that the film certainly tried. But in the end my gut tells me that it was just incredibly average. Right down the middle. Neither here nor there.
The biggest letdown for me was that I was lead to believe that this was the movie where we finally got to see the teamwork. The other agents were all supposed to be colorful and necessary and make the whole thing radiate with the same vibe the TV show had. But make no mistake, this is still The Tom Cruise Show. His team in this installment is only slightly less cardboard than the team from Part II. Personalities? Character development? Don't count on it. We get Ving Rhames who still has nothing to do as Luther, Maggie Q playing a character whose main purpose seems to be to look hot and has a name I don't even remember, and a totally wasted Jonathan Rhys-Myers as "the driver". And that's it. I just gave you all the info the movie gives us about this "team".
Ethan himself never completely emerges as a character either. The glimpse into his life away from IMF was nice, but ultimately useless. There aren't enough scenes with him and his wife to completely buy into their relationship. It's the same problem most action movies have. They expect the audience to believe these two are in love because they're telling us that they are. But they rarely show it. You rarely feel it. It's not there to flesh out Ethan. It's a plot device.
But there was also a lot to like about the movie. The scene at the Vatican is the only moment that the film lives up to its full potential. It's the only time in this entire franchise that you really get a taste of what an M:I movie should feel like. I also loved Hoffman as the main villain. His screen time is minimal but he milks every second of it.
I'm not familiar with J.J. Abrahams' TV work. I don't watch Lost and I never saw an episode of Alias (gasp!) and I've seen a few complaints that he recycled ideas from both. If he did, I wouldn't know. But I liked his approach to the material. The only scene that reeked of rip-off to me was the bridge sequence which was right out of True Lies. It even looked like the same location. It was too similar to even be considered an homage. It was theft.
This was sort of a hybrid of the first two films. If you put them in a blender you'd get this. It never feels as dense or layered as the first film. And it certainly never feels as light and over the top as the second. It's somewhere in the middle.
For my money, the first one is still the best. I know it has some glaring errors but it's still the strongest. This one is definitely better than the second, but not as much as many would have you believe. I would say it's worth a look but do your best to check your expectations at the door. You'll probably have a better time with it that way.