Wednesday 19 August 2009

'Mission: Impossible 3' (Abrams, 2006)

Cruise is back in action in a sequel that's better than its predecessor, but nowhere near the quality of the original.


As seems to be symptomatic of most modern movies, Abram's visual style is a little too brutal to be truly great, unlike the confidence displayed by De Palma in the 1996 original. Nevertheless, his storytelling is sufficiently stylish to ensure an enjoyable energy pervades the film, making it a fun entertainment experience, albeit not a terribly significant or lasting one. However, the one place where Abrams' script and direction exceed themselves is in the film's obligatory pre-title sequence in which Ethan is in the most vulnerable and powerless position we have ever seen him in. It is a shock to the system, it is perfectly performed by all involved, and it marks the film's highest point, a point that eludes Abrams throughout the rest of the movie. Talk about peaking early.

Mission: Impossible 3 is one of those films that appears to get everything right, but leaves the viewer feeling flat. Emotionless. As if two hours of high octane spectacle ultimately amounted to nothing. As deficient as Mission: Impossible 2 was, it at least understood that its emotional core was rooted in the relationship between Ethan and Nyah, and Ethan's desire to protect the woman he cared for. But in Mission: Impossible 3, the writers appear to lose sight of what the emotional core of their story is. At first glance, one may think it's the relationship between Ethan and Julia. And while this certainly is an important part of the film's central theme, the real emotional core is Ethan's guilt and responsibility over the character of Lindsey Farris - Ethan's ex-student whom he had approved as being ready for field duty. The tragic irony is that there isn't much work that needs to be done. Merely a passing glance at Lindsey's empty desk during the film's coda would have been sufficient acknolwedgement of the reasons for the journey, since Julia becomes Ethan's emotional surrogate for Lindsey anyway. It's a small blip, but it makes all the difference.

I like the idea of Ethan as the older, wiser character. The mentor forced back into service due to his guilt over a captured student. The family man who doesn't want to lose everything he holds dear. The old dog being called back for one final mission. I like all that. Unfortunately, the concept is taken as far as it could have been. A further symptom of its lack of adventurousness is the fact that the second half of the movie basically has the same plot as the whole of the first movie. It is a lackluster retread of past exploits. Now, whereas this is to be expected in a Bond franchise that has lasted nearly half a century, there is no reason for such regressive storytelling when you are only on the third film in the series. It smacks of laziness, and frustratingly so. Instead of exploring the idea of a troubled family man conflicted about his life in the field, it's reduced to a dimensionless 'save the girl and save the world' plot. Disappointing.

While both this and Mission: Impossible 2 receive three star ratings, it is important to note that they are not of identical quality. M:I-2 is in the lower half of this category whereas M:I-3 is in the upper half. They are both solid Summer blockbusters, neither one attempting anything particularly grand nor are they ingeniously executed, but there is a notable difference in the quality of their execution, which I hereby acknowledge.

*****

No comments:

Post a Comment