Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol

How peculiar that a director who had previously worked in the field of animation brought a necessary breath of fresh air to the action genre, which had become dependent on the post-Bourne chaos cinema style. Bird’s Pixar movies abound with astonishing action sequences built on the clarity of the scene, long shots and the interconnection of the action with the setting and its elements. Bird brings the same qualities to Ghost Protocol. Replacing animation with live action enhances the strengths of the medium, thus bringing back the attraction of physical action. At a time when blockbusters are rather cartoonish CGI mess with the deepfaked faces of live actors, Bird had Tom Cruise climb the façade of the world’s tallest building. Similarly, the brilliantly designed and always spatially uncluttered chase through a sandstorm is an expressive counterpoint to the cluttered mess of scenes composed of tremendously brief shaky-cam shots that have inundated big-budget action productions in recent years. In comparison with the dark, tense and sophisticated nature of the competition, particularly movies based on comic books, Ghost Protocol also offers a big, longed-for dose of exaggeration and light-heartedness. In addition to that, Bird manages to combine all of the aforementioned elements into brilliant sequences abounding with inventiveness, charming humour, physical action, playful interactions between the actors and a surreal upgrade of the technological gadgets. If what remained of the third Mission: Impossible in the audience’s memory was the playing with expectations and building of suspense with no action sequences, the fourth instalment does not rely on its twists and turns, as its action passages (not only the Burj Dubai and the robotic parking lot, but also the sequences in the prison and the corridor in the Kremlin) rank among the absolute best of the genre. (27/08/2015)

After an excellent part 3, Ghost Protocol falls a little short, but what it loses in violence and fatefulness, it gains in humor, elegance and a greater team spirit. The layering between action and story is most similar to part one, but this one lacks suspense and fear for the hero (the entire threat of nuclear war just doesn’t come across at all threateningly). The only exception is the middle part in Dubai which delivers the requisite genre entertainment to the letter, innovates and drives deep. Technical gadgets (although still faulty) play a much greater role than before and are (along with Pegg) the source of the best jokes. Jerry Renner with his snappy lines is also excellent, in a very different role than we are used to. And just a shame that Josh Holloway didn’t get much of a chance to warm up in this movie. (17/12/2011)

Everything I could ask for from an action movie. Well-written dialogues, detailed scenes that wait calmly for half an hour before engaging some of the indicated elements, a polished visual, and a soundtrack that reflects the subtle irony and exaggeration of the whole spectacle. Two hours of dynamism, invention and infiltration, each with more ideas than any previous MI as a whole. Finally, it doesn't take itself too seriously and it bets on only one big currency - spy entertainment. The best MI and overall one of the best and most unique blockbusters of recent years. Thumbs up for Brad Bird - he sees action differently. Where others would bet on monumetality and quantity, the director plays with the perfect execution of de facto relatively tight scenes, the spectacularity of which does not lie in the number of explosions, but rather in the intelligent use of scale and utilization of the environment. Bird just sees better. (09/05/2013)

It is true that the MI franchise is one of the few where each episode has a completely different directorial style. The first was the most spy-driven ride, the second had an action-packed poetic feel (which many did not appreciate), the third focused on physicality and kinetic action, it is interesting to see which direction the next episode will take. Or in other words, it was a great challenge for Brad Bird to figure out how he actually wants to play this game. The fourth episode bears the closest resemblance to the third, but I’m not convinced that it reaches its quality. Cruise is insane, his stunts are over the top. The action is perfectly shot, especially the adrenaline-filled finale in Dubai and the car chase scene (both briefly shown in the trailer). There’s plenty of physicality as well, but unlike the third film, it’s more focused on details and moments. I didn’t feel immersed in the whole film, and that is a bit disappointing, but, Abrams is Abrams. The emphasis here is on the team (excellent cast and chemistry) and that is good. Facing the world alone for the fourth time would not be the same. The cameos are okay (Sawyer from Lost and Ving Rhames at the end really hit the mark). It's a ride, probably the fastest action film of the year, with Tom at his finest. Perhaps a bit too mainstream (BMW, iPhone), but that's something you have to take into account in today's marketing era. I would go to the cinema again. It's not as “real” as the previous episode, but it stands up well. Ethan Hunt on this wave – that's totally fine. PS: The sequence in Dubai is possibly the most captivating stunt scene ever. (27/12/2011)

The most compelling evidence for why we should adore Abrams. This Scientology production tinsel may have inherited most of its predecessor's hallmarks, such as adrenaline-pumping action and plenty of teasing of past films, but it neglected to add at least a drop of itself to it. Neither the BMW prototype nor the protagonist's breasts stay in your head longer than the legendary opening countdown lasts; there’s zero work with the villain, the plot isn’t very catchy, and the premature climax of everything that was already done in Dubai is Bird's sole responsibility. (22/12/2011)