Mission: Impossible III
—1. Overview
—2. Cast and Crew
—3. Photo Pages
—4. Trailers, Clips, DVDs, Books, Soundtrack
—5. Posters (Tom Cruise)
—6. Production Notes (pdf)
—7. Spiritual Connections
—8. Presentation Downloads
What would the TV show Alias look like with a bigger budget, longer running time, and a male lead? The answer: Mission Impossible 3. Take Alias, add in a generous helping of True Lies, and you know all you need to about the latest outing for IMF agent Ethan Hunt and his team. This isn’t to say that M:I:III isn’t fun; it is, in fact, quite fun. But you may be hard pressed to differentiate it from last week's adventure with Sydney Bristow.
J.J. Abrams does a competent job with his directorial debut (which is good news for Trek fans, as he’s slated to direct the next film in that franchise). However, he played it too safe in using so much of what he already knows. This mission was more of a team effort, befitting the Mission: Impossible name, but it felt like a longer episode of a TV show - which, ironically, is exactly what these films have always been. Is this because Alias owes so much to entries in the spy genre like Mission: Impossible, or is it because Abrams is so familiar with the flow and structure of his show that he had a hard time getting away from that for his big screen debut? Still, M:I:III is a solid summer action film. The stunts are cool, the action sequences are fun, there are a couple of intense moments between the hero and the villian, and it’s all wrapped more authentically than the second film.
But I prefer the Ethan Hunt of the first film. He was driven, intense, focused, and had no time for distractions. Since then, each subsequent director softened Agent Hunt; ostensibly to make him more relatable as the hero. In the second film, Hunt attained a debonair suaveness that gave him, and the film, a Bond like feel. In this outing, he has attachments. Agent Hunt has settled down and left field work in order to establish a normal life. Of course we all know that won’t last; mainly because we’ve seen the trailers with Philip Seymour Hoffman threatening Hunt’s loved ones. This version of Agent Hunt is more Tom Cruise than the others. I miss the real Agent Hunt from the first film. Hoffman is excellent: his cold, merciless villain plays strongly against the softer Agent Hunt. Ving Rhames finely reprises his role as Luther, and it’s nice to see that his character hasn’t changed much over the years. In fact, the entire cast is solid, including Michelle Monaghan whose only real purpose is to give Agent Hunt someone to care about so that the villain can threaten her.
This could be the biggest weakness of the film. The central conflict is how Hunt’s job can never allow him to have a normal life as long as someone he cares about can be exploited by his enemies. And Luther also points out that it’s impossible to have a normal relationship when you’re constantly lying to the one you love (which, by the way, is sage advice). But Julia is nothing more than a plot device. Her role would have worked just as well if she had been named Love Interest, but that would be too impersonal I guess. Still, she’s only there to drive Hunt to the edge as he tries to rescue her from a fate he can't prevent. Along the way there are plot twists (none terribly surprising), exotic locales (all exotic but completely unneccessary to the story) and of course lots of action. Though fun, it’s by the numbers and doesn’t rise above the best episodes of Alias.
You know, call me crazy, but as I watched Hunt’s attempts to save Julia from the vindictive Davian, I was reminded of how God put everything on the line to save us. We’re His love interest, and Satan knows it. When Satan realized he would never defeat God, he decided to do the next best thing: hurt the ones God loves most. So he tempted humanity in Eden, caused us to fall into the death trap of sin, and generally set out to utterly destroy us. Of course God wouldn’t allow that and so, not unlike agent Hunt, God risked everything - He sacrificed His only Son to save us from the bad guy who wanted to destroy us out of spite for God. Doesn't that sound similar to M:I:III? That may be a stretch, but you might be surprised at how many movie plots are similar to Bible stories.
The bottom line is that M:I:III is a good time at the movies, without giving you much to hang on to after you leave. It’s fun, if not particularly memorable. And, as I reflected on how God’s mission to save humanity is similar to this latest Mission: Impossible, I realized that a summer action film isn’t nearly as exciting as real life; if we’re willing to accept the mission.
— Overview
—2. Cast and Crew
—3. Photo Pages
—4. Trailers, Clips, DVDs, Books, Soundtrack
—5. Posters (Tom Cruise)
—6. Production Notes (pdf)
—7. Spiritual Connections
—8. Presentation Downloads
What would the TV show Alias look like with a bigger budget, longer running time, and a male lead? The answer: Mission Impossible 3. Take Alias, add in a generous helping of True Lies, and you know all you need to about the latest outing for IMF agent Ethan Hunt and his team. This isn’t to say that M:I:III isn’t fun; it is, in fact, quite fun. But you may be hard pressed to differentiate it from last week's adventure with Sydney Bristow.J.J. Abrams does a competent job with his directorial debut (which is good news for Trek fans, as he’s slated to direct the next film in that franchise). However, he played it too safe in using so much of what he already knows. This mission was more of a team effort, befitting the Mission: Impossible name, but it felt like a longer episode of a TV show - which, ironically, is exactly what these films have always been. Is this because Alias owes so much to entries in the spy genre like Mission: Impossible, or is it because Abrams is so familiar with the flow and structure of his show that he had a hard time getting away from that for his big screen debut? Still, M:I:III is a solid summer action film. The stunts are cool, the action sequences are fun, there are a couple of intense moments between the hero and the villian, and it’s all wrapped more authentically than the second film.
But I prefer the Ethan Hunt of the first film. He was driven, intense, focused, and had no time for distractions. Since then, each subsequent director softened Agent Hunt; ostensibly to make him more relatable as the hero. In the second film, Hunt attained a debonair suaveness that gave him, and the film, a Bond like feel. In this outing, he has attachments. Agent Hunt has settled down and left field work in order to establish a normal life. Of course we all know that won’t last; mainly because we’ve seen the trailers with Philip Seymour Hoffman threatening Hunt’s loved ones. This version of Agent Hunt is more Tom Cruise than the others. I miss the real Agent Hunt from the first film. Hoffman is excellent: his cold, merciless villain plays strongly against the softer Agent Hunt. Ving Rhames finely reprises his role as Luther, and it’s nice to see that his character hasn’t changed much over the years. In fact, the entire cast is solid, including Michelle Monaghan whose only real purpose is to give Agent Hunt someone to care about so that the villain can threaten her.
This could be the biggest weakness of the film. The central conflict is how Hunt’s job can never allow him to have a normal life as long as someone he cares about can be exploited by his enemies. And Luther also points out that it’s impossible to have a normal relationship when you’re constantly lying to the one you love (which, by the way, is sage advice). But Julia is nothing more than a plot device. Her role would have worked just as well if she had been named Love Interest, but that would be too impersonal I guess. Still, she’s only there to drive Hunt to the edge as he tries to rescue her from a fate he can't prevent. Along the way there are plot twists (none terribly surprising), exotic locales (all exotic but completely unneccessary to the story) and of course lots of action. Though fun, it’s by the numbers and doesn’t rise above the best episodes of Alias.
You know, call me crazy, but as I watched Hunt’s attempts to save Julia from the vindictive Davian, I was reminded of how God put everything on the line to save us. We’re His love interest, and Satan knows it. When Satan realized he would never defeat God, he decided to do the next best thing: hurt the ones God loves most. So he tempted humanity in Eden, caused us to fall into the death trap of sin, and generally set out to utterly destroy us. Of course God wouldn’t allow that and so, not unlike agent Hunt, God risked everything - He sacrificed His only Son to save us from the bad guy who wanted to destroy us out of spite for God. Doesn't that sound similar to M:I:III? That may be a stretch, but you might be surprised at how many movie plots are similar to Bible stories.
The bottom line is that M:I:III is a good time at the movies, without giving you much to hang on to after you leave. It’s fun, if not particularly memorable. And, as I reflected on how God’s mission to save humanity is similar to this latest Mission: Impossible, I realized that a summer action film isn’t nearly as exciting as real life; if we’re willing to accept the mission.
— Overview
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home