Mission:
Impossible III leads the summer movie charge, and surprisingly, it didn’t
take in the sort of hefty box office revenue many analysts predicted, leading
some Hollywood insiders to suggest that perhaps Tom Cruise’s off screen antics
have compromised his box-office bankability. Poppycock! Firstly, $48 million in
three days is nothing to cry about. Need I remind anyone that Titanic never made
more than $29 million in a given weekend and it went on to gross a staggering
$600 million domestically. While I don’t think Mission: Impossible will gross
anywhere near that, it will hardly emerge as a dud. I wouldn’t say I love
the movie, but I did like it. At the very least, it’s a big step up from
John Woo’s John Woo parody Mission: Impossible 2.
In
the franchise’s third outing, Tom Cruise’s special agent Ethan Hunt
comes out of semi- retirement to help rescue a kidnapped agent (played by Felicity’s
Keri Russell) whom he trained at the academy a few years earlier. The covert rescue
mission leads Hunt to the villainous Owen Davian (played by recent Oscar winner
Philip Seymour Hoffman), a deadly arms dealer who possesses an item known only
as “The Rabbit’s Foot.”. What “the Rabbit’s Foot”
actually does remains a mystery throughout the film, but hilarious co-star Simon
Pegg (of Shaun of the Dead fame), gives his two cents during one of the film’s
more humorous scenes. Meanwhile, a somewhat domesticated Hunt must hide his true
identity from fiancée Julia (Michelle Monaghan), which proves to be extremely
difficult.
After
sitting in development hell for quite sometime, Cruise had reached out to several
different film makers to helm this project including David Fincher (Seven) and
Marc Carnahan (Narc). Eventually, the movie would fall in the capable hands of
Alias and Lost creator J.J. Abrams, a visionary who is no stranger to the world
of spies.
So rather
than setting out to make a picture full of giant, meaningless explosions and flashy
car chases, Abrams decided to do something a little bit different. He’s opted
to add a more human element to the proceedings and the end result is a picture
that’s a hell of a lot more character driven than the second picture, but
it lacks the intensity and panache of Brian DePalma’s entertaining but overly
complicated first installment.
I
like Abrams. I never miss an episode of Lost. I admire what he’s tried to
do with Mission Impossible III. During the first ten minutes, he had me. The opening
scene provides nail biting tension and as I watched a sadistic Davian confront
a helpless Hunt, I thought; “this is going to be one hell of a ride.”
For some of the running time, it is, but Abrams is unable to sustain the tension
- particularly in the second half of the film.
What
I love most about this picture is the way that it smacks of Abrams pure love for
movies. Particularly action movies. Mission: Impossible’s plot structure
greatly resembles James Cameron’s True Lies. What’s more, much of this
movie’s look reminds me of some of Cameron’s earlier films. Remember
that sort of bluish tint that covers the frame in The Abyss and Terminator 2?
That’s what Mission: Impossible 3 looks like. I also caught little winks
at John Carpenter. Not the horror maestro Carpenter of Halloween fame, but rather
the futuristic, gritty Carpenter of Escape From New York. At one point in Mission:
Impossible III, a key character undergoes a tense bit of nasty business that reminded
me of a similar scene in Carpenter’s picture in which Kurt Russell’s
anti-hero Snake Plisken has tiny explosives lodged into his arteries. If he is
unable to complete a given task in an allotted time frame, the explosive will
go off killing the renegade almost instantly. Granted the character that undergoes
this similar scenario in Mission: Impossible III isn’t required to complete
a mission. No, this character is merely put through the ringer because the mad
man behind the scenario gets off on it.
Abrams
also tips the hat to George Lucas and Steven Spielberg. Watch as Hunt and his
team try to make a big get away by means of a helicopter. During the sequence,
Hunt and crew maneuver the chopper in between massive windmills in Palm Springs.
While some might see this as a nod to Rain Man, I was instantly reminded of the
asteroid chase in The Empire Strikes Back. Moreover, as Hunt desperately tries
to retrieve the cylinder containing the “Rabbit’s Foot” as it rolls
uncontrollably through a high traffic area. This entertaining sequence reminded
me of the opening moments of Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom as a panicked
Indy desperately lunges for a vile that contains an antidote to the poison he’d
inadvertently imbibed. Like the best of film makers though, Abrams never appears
to be ripping anyone off. These tiny details are loving odes to those he respects
in the business.
The
acting is mostly solid. Tom Cruise is intense, and I much prefer this Ethan Hunt
persona to the grungy one on display in Mission: Impossible 2. Philip Seymour
Hoffman is outstanding but sorely underused as Owen Davian. I just love the confidence
this guy exudes even when he’s in Ethan’s custody. Sadly however, the
effective Hoffman clocks in around twelve minutes of collective screen time in
the movie. I wanted more. Ving Rhames, Maggie Q, and Jonathan Rhys Meyers are
entertaining as Hunt’s covert team. While I wouldn’t call them fully
realized characters, Abrams does right by allowing each to have a few moments
to shine. They aren’t merely background characters. They do get in on the
action. Michelle Monaghan is given the rather thankless task of playing Hunt’s
clueless fiancee. More or less, she’s reduced to the damsel in distress role,
although she does have a few cute moments at the end of the picture. It would
have been nice if she had even half the spirit or tenacity of her Harmony Faith
Lane in the entertaining Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang. Kerri Russell gets to kick some
ass as an agent from Hunt’s past. It’s a far cry from her role in Abrams’
Felicity, but she makes the most of her limited screen time. Billy Crudup is a
complete blank as special agent John Musgrave. In his defense however, he didn’t
have much of a character to work with.
Mission:
Impossible III is fairly simplistic in it’s approach. It is bogged down by
moments of completely unnecessary humor (watch as Hunt scales the Vatican Wall
– immediately following, he makes a lame “Humpty Dumpty” reference),
but thankfully such moments are mostly kept in check. I also felt the ending of
the picture lacks the undeniable edge generated by the beginning of the movie.
It could also be argued that, as was the case with the first two pictures, it
has very little in common with the popular TV. show on which it’s based.
In fact, the only thing it really has in common with the show, is the title.
Having
said all of that, I had a pretty good time during Mission: Impossible III. I wasn’t
overwhelmed by it by any means, but I like that for the most part, the action
sequences compliment the film. They don’t take it over. Save for a crazy
sky diving scene, much of the action on display in Mission: Impossible III is
somewhat possible - unlike the bullet train sequence in the first picture and...well...pretty
much everything in Mission: Impossible II.
While
many might argue that this installment in the lucrative franchise plays like an
extended version of Alias, I suppose things could have been a hell of a lot worse.
And while we’re on the topic of Alias, once again, as I mentioned in my review
for the lackluster The Sentinel, TV has certainly raised the bar. Shows like 24
and Abrams’ Alias and Lost are so solid, that as of late, it’s been
hard for certain action films (throw in Firewall) to measure up. The same could
be said of Mission: Impossible III. Thankfully though, this movie provides just
enough thrills for a recommendation.
On
a side note, it was recently reported that Mr. Abrams was handed over the reins
to a new Star Trek film due to early buzz generated by MI:3. It’s speculated
that the new Star Trek picture will trace the early Academy days of Kirk and crew.
Given Abrams’ obvious affinity for iconic characters, he may just be the
right man for this mission – should he choose to accept it.
