Mission: Impossible III

Mission: Impossible III has only one absolutely great action scene (and we’ve already seen it in the trailer) and it lacks the high-tech charge that was typical of the preceding instalments. However, these shortcomings are offset by the film’s superb balance of authenticity (!) with a detached sense of humor and, mainly, its dynamic story in which something important is constantly happening, driven by urgency and emotions. Ethan’s relationship with his new wife works very well and when her life is hanging in the balance, it’s about more than saving the world. The less we see of the super-villain played by Philip Seymour Hoffman, the more impressive are the scenes featuring him. This is a different but effective instalment in the franchise. It’s a popcorn movie that, like the Bourne films, won’t insult your intelligence. I was most pleased with the breakneck shots, starting on Cruise’s face and continuously following his subsequent acrobatic stunts (jumping off of a skyscraper, running across Chinese rooftops). This makes up for the absence of De Palma and Woo’s eye-candy action from the previous M:I films. (02/05/2006)

The intricate espionage games like in De Palma's first film take a back seat, Abrams presents a pure action spectacle, during which you can calmly sit through an unintentionally self-parodic resuscitation scene and the fact that Hunt's emotional relationship with his wife is brought to life through some really toe-curling dialogues, and I, as an ordinary viewer, will hardly care if they are just a mockery of a genre cliché (which I may or may not believe). Leaving aside the recent and brilliant The Bourne Supremacy, the last time I enjoyed a similar ride on the big screen was perhaps twelve years ago with de Bont's Speed. The impressive opening, which introduces Seymour Hoffman as a truly amazing, uncompromising bad guy, is followed by a slowed-down breath to a big continuous action whirlwind that, with a few cool plot twists and very little respite, only ends with the onset of the closing credits. I really enjoyed myself. PS: Cruise seems to be a capable producer and lately a better and better actor, but here again he chose a weaker moment with his sometimes theatrical speech. (24/05/2006)

Uncompromisingly unrelenting from the first seconds, larger-than-life in the action moments with thrilling special effects, and always eases up at the right moment. This is a thriller that is unparalleled in the spy subgenre in recent years (except for the Bourne films, which are in a completely different league). Abrams's direction is like a Swiss watch. It doesn't get stuck even in the more intimate scenes of the engaged secret agent (the return home after a failed operation is one of the most moving parts of the film) and thanks to the brilliant casting, it doesn't slip into theatricality even at its weakest moments. Oscar-winner Phillip Seymour Hoffman is a cold-blooded asshole like no other, Ving Rhames sprinkles dry catchphrases, Michelle Monaghan plays more than just a "damsel in distress," and even Tom Cruise is watchable, though he strikes his usual pose here as well. Even so, Mission: Impossible III is the best possible film for a single watch that can see the light of day from the waters of the standard Hollywood mainstream. (02/10/2006)

I don't know why I don't like Ethan Hunt... It's definitely not a problem of the lead actor, because Tom Cruise has finally gotten into a productive age and I think he's playing one great role after another. But there is something disgusting about the scout Hunt, who is a great partner, a lover and, moreover, runs in a truly exemplary manner, with exemplary body guidance and the way he holds his hands. One has to sigh: "Look how beautifully Ethan runs..." But that's not the worst thing about Mission: Impossible III - the worst things about this movie are the non-action sequences. The family sequences. J. J. Abrams unfortunately proves that his domain is working on series, and I say without exaggeration that in the movie theatre, I was bothered by his shallow and stupid conception of interpersonal relationships. And through his acting, Tom Cruise reminded me of his worse times. It's too bad, because trying to turn the dummy Hunt into a man is a good way to go, but in my opinion he managed instead to make a completely different kind of dummy. Fortunately, there is still action, and here Abrams does well. Mission: Impossible III is an old school action film, with all manner of explosions, a wild shootout and a minimum of hi-tech directing solutions. The conservatively, but perfectly filmed action definitely escalates with stylish Vatican infiltration. Here, the director shows his television clip school in full field and we can only say: it is beautiful to watch and it has a damn good tension. Another positive aspect is the magnificent and cold-blooded villain Philip Seymour Hoffman... Such a repulsive and perverted type of character really gladdens and creates a strong tension in the film. This tension works despite the fact that the relationship between Ethan and his chosen Jules got a little annoying for me. But the duel between the inventive agent and a slimy dealer is just so exciting and its action is so adrenaline-fueled that the final idyll, containing perhaps all the worst clichés, including hilarious slow motion, just can't destroy my impression of a good action movie. However, it is quite obvious that the creators wanted to make Hunt a great character, which they failed at. He's just a picturesque boy from an American textbook in a very explosive world. It could have been even better, but the third film is probably the best in the series... A stronger ***. (06/05/2006)

Hunt's most balanced escapade. Innovator Abrams managed to revive a somewhat exhausted series into a position of a strong blockbuster player, and thanks to fast editing, well-developed characters, and a close portrayal of Ethan's character, he achieved a nearly historic success. Despite his specific approach, he never lets us forget which action hero we are watching, taking the best from the cleverly targeted mood of the first installment and the action-packed sequel. This time, I found myself holding my breath for the central adventurer, rooting for him intensely, and shivering during all the action sequences. Until the period when McQuarrie took the series under his wing (forever?), I actually liked the third installment the most among the entire M:I franchise. As the years go by, it loses some of its uniqueness and irreproducibility, but fortunately, not the entertainment value, tangible drive of the story, likable attempts to deviate from genre conventions, and last but not least, the atypical (and cunningly) villain. (31/07/2006)

There is one positive thing I have to admit about this film. Out of the three sequels about the indestructible agent, it is the best one, but I have a problem with the whole series, just as I have a problem with the majority of action movies. It is simply an unrealistic fairy tale, where you need to turn off your brain and not think about the numerous holes in the logic. Unlike the series of James Bond films, it lacks style and humorous exaggeration. The third part is the most mature in terms of filmmaking, but paradoxically it lacks a truly worthy opponent compared to the previous two films. Philip Seymour Hoffman is a great actor, but he doesn't get enough space and the script doesn't demonize him enough, and if it weren't for the betrayal, he would play a rather embarrassing role as a quickly defeated opponent. If someone is to stand up to such a brilliant invincible agent like Ethan Hunt and the American Secret Service equipped with hi-tech technology, it must be truly a devil in human form, who aims at least, but I emphasize at least, to take over the world... Overall impression: 45%. (14/04/2009)

It’s been a long time since I came across such an exciting and unpredictable action thriller (I really didn’t expect to see Pavel Sobotka appearing in it :). Some things were predictable, but Abrams distracts from them more than perfectly and keeps you in constant suspense. It's also nice to humanize, and show the imperfections of Ethan Hunt, who is still as cool as before, but he's unlucky and not everything works out (running out of ammo at key moments are prime examples). Another great change is the team. Finally, we get to see all the team members in action and not just Hunt. This time he relies on them and fully cooperates with them, which is quite different from the previous parts. In addition, Hoffman is a fantastic villain, completely uncompromising and, most of all, believable. Cruise is more or less in good form, as is the rest of the cast. The best installment in the Mission: Impossible series to date (and quite possibly the last). (22/09/2006)

Hands-down the biggest and best action hit of the year, impressive in its forcefulness, continuous adrenaline action, and solid performances. J.J. Abrams raises reality and the laws of physics much higher than Brian De Palma or even John Woo did. Ethan Hunt is completely different for the third time, and this image is damn good. It’s nonsense to compare it to the previous installment, as they are two completely different pieces, technically, aesthetically, stylistically, and in terms of the action itself. It is unusually fierce for an action blockbuster, with a solid dose of realism. In addition, Abrams utterly rules the audience with some set-pieces and fast but incredibly clever plot twists, detailed studies of various tricks (like creating a facial mask), and gimmicks. That is one thing this series was missing. Tom Cruise is a capable actor and his physical condition is unbelievable (see the almost minute-long uncut shot of his sprint in treacherous alleyways), and that's exactly how a special agent should look. And just when it seems like there could be some wear and tear, a cool line and a healthy touch humour come into play. Philip Seymour Hoffman is so arrogant and brutal as the villain that he’s a joy to watch. One of the highlights of this year. (05/10/2006)

A spectacular and thrilling ride that uses a very simple plot to continuously present stylish and very realistic action, just as we would always like to see under the MI brand – the ground-to-air shootout on the bridge, in particular, is one of the best ever in cinema. The ending may be surprising only by how unsurprising it is, but otherwise just about everything works for Abrams, from the aforementioned riveting action to the repulsive bad guys (Hoffman) to the genre soundtrack (was it me, or was one Shanghai theme really that reminiscent of Silvestri’s Predator?) to the all-important element of Ethan's deep relationship with his life-threatened wife, which finally put a more personal and tangible danger on the agenda than just "destroying the world". An honestly supercharged hit that cleverly raises established genre benchmarks to a higher, albeit exclusively visual, experiential level. 80% (28/11/2015)

It was only when I got to this film that I actually realized I had never seen it before. One, two, and four, yes, but the third one somehow cleverly evaded me. I was quite curious, even though watching "M:I 3" at a time when one is nicely chronologically going through all the Bond films is not the best solution. Not that "M:I 3" doesn't have anything to offer, but one has the feeling that it's a bit of the same. However, it is true that J.J. Abrams gave this series a boost again and it's not bad compared to the Bond films. Mainly because the Bond films are often quite exhausted. Abrams added emotions to the film and it really works. Philip Seymour Hoffman once again showed how he was born for acting. (07/03/2014)