MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE – GHOST PROTOCOL Review

by     Posted 2 years, 338 days ago

mission-impossible-4-movie-image-tom-cruise-slice-02

15 years ago, Brian de Palma turned Mission: Impossible, a well-regarded spy TV series into an exciting action-thriller, and Tom Cruise earned a career franchise he could call his own.  Then something went seriously wrong with John Woo‘s Mission: Impossible II, but J.J. AbramsMission: Impossible III picked the franchise back up with a fun, albeit empty-headed installment.  The only consistent element was Cruise, but sometimes even his charisma couldn’t overcome dull action scenes or shoddy storytelling.  Director Brad Bird (The Incredibles) doesn’t do dull action scenes or shoddy storytelling.  He never has, and he’s at the top of his game with Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol.  Bird has always put story first, but he never forgets to give the audience the brash, bold excitement only a big screen can bring.  Bolstered by a quick, sharp script, and a terrific ensemble, Bird delivers bone-crunching action, fleet-footed pacing, and the best Mission: Impossible yet.

After a thrilling escape from a Russian prison, Ethan Hunt (Tom Cruise) barely has a moment to breathe before being called in for a new mission (should he choose to accept it).  Hunt and fellow IMF agents Jane Carter (Paula Patton) and former technician and now field agent Benji Dunn (Simon Pegg) head to the Kremlin to discover the identity of a terrorist code-named “Cobalt” (Michael Nyqvist).  However, the mission goes sideways, the team is forced to abort, but on their way out the door, the Kremlin explodes, and the IMF takes the blame.  It’s a cover for Cobalt to steal nuclear launch codes, but the U.S. President initiates “Ghost Protocol”, which disbands the IMF and disavows all its agents.  However, the Secretary of Defense (Tom Wilkinson) gives Ethan and his team an alternative: find Cobalt, recover the codes, and stop nuclear apocalypse.  Accompanied by IMF analyst William Brandt (Jeremy Renner), the team has to take on their mission with zero outside support and a fistful of awesome gadgets.

When post-Cold War films make Russia the enemy in an attempt to play off the tensions of the Cold War, it rarely works.  It feels more like a way to play it safe, ignore the modern world, and as a result the conflict feels artificial.  But it works with Mission: Impossible because the original TV series was created when the Cold War shaped our world.  When Ghost Protocol recreates that conflict, it feels authentic instead of nostalgic or timid.  But then the script and Bird have the smarts to expand the movie, take it to new locales, and let us know that the technology may be modern, but the stakes come from the old specter of nuclear annihilation.  The attempt to recover nuclear war codes comes off as classic rather than stale.

Since we all know what nuclear war does, we automatically understand the stakes and we don’t have to fool around with convoluted villains and their nefarious plots.  Philip Seymour Hoffman did a brilliant job playing the heavy in the last movie and rather than try to out-do him, Ghost Protocol lets the villain stand as a plot-point who drives the IMF team to crazy, superb, spectacular missions..  The prison escape cold open provides an appetizer of the intense set pieces to come, and those set pieces do not disappoint.  The action demands to be seen in IMAX, but the story will work no matter the size of the screen.

At the outset, I was worried the film would rely to heavily on consumer gadgets like iPhones and iPads.  Thankfully, Ghost Protocol quickly moves on to some of the most brilliant gadgets I’ve ever seen in a movie.   They’re creative, intelligent, and it makes Ethan’s harness trick in the first movie seem quaint by comparison.  But Bird knows he can’t give the IMF team all of the advantages.  Ghost Protocol is about throwing up constant barriers to their success.  It’s fun to watch the execution of best laid plans, but it’s even better to see them come apart and force the team to improvise.  That’s where Mission: Impossible gets its excitement.  Oh, and the sound design.  And the cinematography.  And the editing.  And Michael Giacchino‘s brilliant score which doesn’t feel like a re-tread of his Incredibles score (and that’s surprising since The Incredibles music was clearly influenced by the Mission: Impossible theme).  Live-action doesn’t offer the same freedom as animation when it comes to set pieces, but Bird uses the weight of the real world to his advantage, although three are a few cartoonish moments like Ethan apparently having a face-bones of steel.

But it all comes back to story and characters and Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol puts together the best IMF team in the series.  Cruise continues to carry Hunt as a seasoned pro who’s greatest strength is his talent to deal with situations in the moment while still sporting a big grin on his face (the one made of steel; not even a nosebleed from this guy).  Aside from some brief cameos, the only returning character is Benji and Simon Pegg delivers the comic relief in spades.  Great comedy is like music: it has a beat and a rhythm, but brilliant comic actors like Pegg know how to play the song and make it their own through unexpected expressions, timing, and delivery.  Paula Patton not only smolders, but proves herself an equal member of the team rather than Ethan’s potential love-interest.  More importantly, she gets her own character arc that shows she has an outer life beyond Ethan’s story.  And Renner gets to play it all with comedy, beatdowns, drama, and proves Brandt to be Ethan’s equal.

There was some confusion last year when it was reported that Renner would be taking over the franchise but Cruise would still be co-starring.  Ghost Protocol clears that up: it’s a team movie now—or at least that’s what it should be from now on.  Previous Mission: Impossible movies are The Ethan Hunt Show with the IMF Players.  The fourth Mission: Impossible changes the game by making each member of the team crucial to the mission’s success.  Ethan is still the leader, but each agent has to accomplish their own objectives independently in order to make the team’s mission a success.

Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol is just about everything you could ask for from a blockbuster.  There are some silly moments but never to the point where we’re taken out of the movie.  There’s a perfect understanding that Mission: Impossible shouldn’t try to be the Bourne films.  It’s not about gritty realism.  It’s about colorful characters, cool gadgets, and kick-ass action.  Brad Bird has made not only the best Mission: Impossible, but one of the best action movies of the past several years.

Rating: A

mission-impossible-ghost-protocol-movie-poster-02




Like Us


Comments:

FB Comments

  • Mark

    Glad you mentioned the sound design, because it was pretty incredible, especially during the Dubai sequences.

  • ClintClitwood

    once again you’ve proven yourself as a simplistic tool idiot. MI2 was the only one that had a well constructed plot and at least Woo actually brought his signature style. MI3 was cookie cutter light hearted bullshit from lens-flare addict Abrams who relied on a lame Macguffin. And Hoffman played the villain “brilliantly”?!…you’re a tool. He was barely utilized and never got to show his true bad-guy potential..that was everybody’s huge gripe with the movie.

    • Tenebrous

      Your pathetic attempts at instigating a conflict with the writer of this article elicit laughter from me. Take your petty indeferences elsewhere.

    • tarek

      MI2 was dull and stupid. I could get through it. And if you thnk so, then you must be a fanboy of John Woo.

    • sense 11

      2 & 3 are fking horrible

    • hey809

      the movie was the best of the 3. so you need to stop acting like you know what makes a good movie. to each its own. you might not like it if you see it and you might love it.

    • Jake

      They were all great in their own ways. Of course, with different directors, you’re going to get a different outcome, that’s just life. MI2 was pretty cool, and they made Sydney look awesome!

    • Jazzy Jace

      I’ll admit Clint, you do have some valid points. Mi-2 was more of a Hitchcock story, rather than a straightforward MI film and yes, Hoffman was a crap baddie in 3; but we can blame that on Abrams, who was clearly intimidated by the weeny Philip (and the screenplay as well).

  • tarek

    I’ve never doubted about the result of MI 4. When a serious Director is behind the camera, I’m not worried.
    Bird is a talented and enthusiast Director.

  • sense 11

    Already have my ticket, i’m watching it on Imax this Saturday after The Dark Night Rises Prologue. :)))))))

    I’m very excited and looking forward to disregarding MI2 & 3, I love the first one

  • gimpsuit

    Saw this last night and wasn’t overly impressed. Reviews seem to be loving it, but its way too long and I was bored for the last hour.
    Gadgets were all VERY handy for the exact purpose, and they always had exactly what they needed at the exact time.
    And they managed to stick an ipad and iphone in there too.
    For such a big budget film it didn’t feel very big. The action was ok but pretty stock standard.
    Good, but man, please don’t buy into the glowing reviews, they’re overselling this film alot.

  • hey809

    MI3 was awesome, but this one was even better.

  • Jason

    Part 3 was beyond forgettable. It really shows just how low the level of Hollywood film making has gone when a movie like Mission Impossible 3 is spoken of fondly. Same generation of ignorant movie fans that think Paul “Shaky Cam” Greengrass is some sort of top notch director.

    Parts 1 and 2 were great with 2 edging it out for high quality action film making. The kind that is all too rare in Hollywood, especially nowadays where horrendous “shaky cam” directors are celebrated.

  • RogerBacon

    This writer is trippin’, MI2 is one of the most entertaining action films in a long while. Certainly has its flaws, but goddamn is it fun to watch

    • Strong Enough

      oh yea hes “trippin” becuz he has a different opinion then you right? smh

  • aquarius1271

    I adore MI2. It is a mesmerizing action film, one of my top action flms of all time. It is so sad that after all this time critics still seem to not get it.

  • DES

    For someone who has seen every MI tv show, 20 times each, none of these movies come close to the real thing it was in the 60s. But, at least, MI2 was better then the rest. So, let’s see what Bird has done. The closest MI movie in the past years are Ocean’s 11, Inside Man, and Collateral. All were MI tv episodes, staring Martin Landau inside the bank and Casino, and Robert Conrad as the killer-come-to-town, with Nimoy as Paris, as his Taxi driver.

    So, all the MI fans out there, these movies are nothing but rehashes of the old tv shows, including Twilight Zone, Star Trek, Wild Wild West episodes. Everything has been done in some form or another in the 60s, the good old days of real story telling, and with less visuals.

    Long live the 60s.

  • thechillerdewd

    Matt, don’t listen to all the haters out there. (MI2 was totally forgettable imo)

    I think I am the only reader who gets the sarcasm in your articles, I actually enjoy them the most. At least your writing is humorous and not dead serious… to all those haters, I am under the impression that you solely read an article (written by Matt) to rant about it and insult him. If you don’t like his writing style don’t fucking read it…

    About MI: Ghost Protocol, I am really excited to see it, guess it’s gonna be the first movie with tom cruise that is enjoyable in a long time… it’s a pitty that we only have one imax cinema in the country and they are not even playing it. -.-

  • Twowolves

    Maybe I’ll give this one a shot. I haven’t like the movies because I grew up on the shows, and in the show, it’s about the team completing an impossible mission. The first movie started strong and then killed off the team and left Tom alone in a paint-by-number insider betrayal story. Lame.

  • broski

    This movie was fucking awesome, by far the best in the franchise and Brad Bird was a perfect fit for it. I was expecting to be wasting my money just so I can see the prologue for TDKR but this was pleasantly worth it. I’d even see it again.

  • Pingback: Movie Review: Mission Impossible – Ghost Protocol | Hollabang

  • Pingback: News: The Conversation: What’s the Movie to See This Christmas, ‘Ghost Protocol’ or ‘Girl With the Dragon Tattoo’? | News 25/7! Delivering news in real time

  • Pingback: The Conversation: What's the Movie to See This Christmas, 'Ghost Protocol' or 'Girl With the Dragon Tattoo'?

  • Pingback: The Conversation: What’s the Movie to See This Christmas, ‘Ghost Protocol’ or ‘Girl With the Dragon Tattoo’? | Video Zone

  • Adel

    MI4 an average action movie , i hope shorlok 2 give me more ..

    i thind 2011 very bad year for movies ;(

  • Pingback: “Snatch,” “Mission Impossible II,” and “Sunshine” « F*ck You

  • Tom Cruise Jackets

    http://www.angeljackets.com/products/Tom-Cruise-Mission-Impossible-Ghost-Protocol-Jacket.html
    The film is clever and well done as a throw back to series company Mission Impossible series thought.

Click Here