‘Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation’ Review Redux

MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE — ROGUE NATION (6 out of 10) Written and directed by Chris McQuarrie; Starring Tom Cruise, Simon Pegg, Rebecca Ferguson, Jeremy Renner, Ving Rhames and Sean Harris; Rated PG-13 for sequences of action and violence, and brief partial nudity; Running time 131 minutes, In wide release July 31, 2015.

My esteemed colleague, Adam McDonald, wrote a review of this film for the site this morning and you can read it here, but we differed quite a bit on it and I felt compelled to write another review. Not a counter-point, per se, but an alternate and slightly less enthusiastic take. You can read his 8 out of 10 review here. 

“Mission: Impossible — Rogue Nation” is the fifth installment of the “Mission: Impossible” franchise and the first to be directed by Chrisopher McQuarrie who made his name as a screenwriter. In a series that’s only produced one genuine misfire (the abysmal second installment), McQuarrie at least proves he’s at least more competent than John Woo in this world, giving us a series of one reel action sequences, each strung together by the trademark vague-speak of spies.

Tom Cruise more than capably marshals an ensemble cast that includes series veterans Simon Pegg, Ving Rhames, and Jeremy Renner.

The film centers around the Impossible Mission Force’s quest to annihilate their version of SPECTRE, “The Syndicate.” A description of the Syndicate would require all the stereotypical adjectives of rogue, enemy terrorist organizations in spy films: shadowy, elusive, deadly, and just one small step ahead of our heroes.

Naturally, Cruise’s Ethan Hunt and his team find another reason to be disavowed from official operations under the leadership of the director of the CIA, played here by Alec Baldwin. Baldwin basically repeats his role from Martin Scorsese’s “The Departed,” only much more predictably.

The film itself has as many twists and turns as the mountain pass that served as the set piece for a thrilling motorcycle chase. But since we’ve seen other “Mission: Impossible” films, we’ve been given a roadmap for those twists and turns, we can see them coming and it slows us down and diminishes our enjoyment accordingly. 

McQuarrie is able to direct action sequences with a deft hand, they’re exciting, realistic, shot well, and are edited with a kinetic energy that helped the film breeze by. The acting was top notch and there was nothing to complain about in those two departments. No, on paper, this seems like it would be a solid, fun entry into the franchise, but it is not without its problems.

As I said before, the film is easy to predict, but part of that is because we don’t get to see the machinations of the competing characters and the work they do to give us payoffs. The film lacks the right kind of context to make the revelations seem meaningful. Characters proclaim that they’ll turn the tables on the other characters, an action sequence whizzes by, and lo and behold, the tables have turned. Then, their opponent proclaims that they’ll turn the tables this time, another action sequence roars across the screen, and lo and behold, the tables have turned.

Imagine going to a magic show where the prestidigitator makes the promise of the magic trick, steps back stage while acrobats perform ticks on a trapeze, and then comes out afterward, clutching a rabbit and a hat, taking credit for the trick we didn’t see him perform. That is this movie’s structure in a nutshell.

Tom Cruise and his nemesis, Lane (played by Sean Harris) may as well have flipped coins in between action sequences.

Was the film entertaining and did it do what modern “Mission: Impossible” films set out to do? Yes. Is it as good as the two previous installments? Not on your life. 

Fun and good should not be mutually exclusive. We should demand more of even our silliest of summer movie fare. There are better movies to spend your time with if you’re looking for something even marginally more intelligent, ranging from “Ant-Man” to “Mad Max: Fury Road.”  But if you’re looking for little more than crazy stunts and preposterous action sequences strung together with idiotic and understated bits of talking, then you owe it to yourself to at least behold the spectacle in the confines of a movie theatre.

I wouldn’t blame you if you skipped it, though. You’ve seen this movie before and you wouldn’t miss much of anything.

6 out of 10.