Mission Impossible Iii

Posted : admin On 5/15/2019
Mission Impossible Iii Rating: 4,9/5 6314 reviews
An IMF agent kidnapped, a helicopter chase through windmills, a weapon of mass world destruction that cannot even be comprehended, hot new cars exploding, bridges blowing up, complex architectural geometry---metric system style, a Hannibal Lecter-styled restraining mask and of course that lit fuse that has always been the trademark of this television series/cinematic idea. Life is good for Tom Cruise in Virginia. His IMF days are relatively calm as he trains specialists while posing as an ordinary guy with new fiancé Michelle Monaghan. However, things are about to shatter in striking fashion as a crazed international arms dealer (recent Oscar winner Philip Seymour Hoffman) is after an elusive device deemed as an anti-god weapon only known as the 'rabbit's foot'. Thus it is up to Cruise and his new team (franchise alum Ving Rhames and newcomers Maggie Q and Jonathan Rhys Meyers) to attempt the difficult and accomplish the impossible. IMF leaders Laurence Fishburne and Billy Crudup round out the high adrenaline mix. From Berlin to the Vatican to Shanghai, 'Mission: Impossible 3' takes out all the stops and winds itself up into a heated frenzy from its shocking opening sequence all the way to its dramatic, action-packed conclusion. Making the audience forget the disaster that was 'Mission: Impossible 2', first-time director J.J. Abrams (best known for ABC's breakout television hits 'Alias' and 'Lost') gets back to what made the original in 1996 so great and interesting---liquid mercury flow and pace. Cruise is near the top of his game and Hoffman is a legitimate scene-stealer in every sense of the term (even though his screen time is somewhat minuscule when you stop to think about it). The premise did not end up being Jerry Maguire vs. Truman Capote though as the duo gets into a crazed match of wits and verbal exchanges that culminates into sparks that are just as well thought-out and executed as the most intense of action motifs. As summer blockbusters and entertainment vehicles go, you can't do much better at the movie house than this winner. 4 stars out of 5.

In 'Mission: Impossible II' (2000), Ethan has to stop a villain who possesses a deadly virus: Twenty-four hours after exposure, you die. The heroine (Thandie Newton) does, however, survive at the end of the movie, leaving her available for the sequel, although by 'Mission: Impossible III,' Ethan Hunt is engaged to a sweet nurse named Julia (Michelle Monaghan), who thinks he is a highway traffic control engineer. Convert jpg to pdf free.

Helicopters are again involved, and Ethan falls for the old latex mask trick again, and even uses a latex mask himself, so that others can be fooled and he doesn't have to feel so bad. In a nice visual pun, the helicopters encounter giant energy-generating windmills in deserts near Berlin that uncannily resemble deserts near Palm Springs. It's kind of neat when one propeller slices off another, wouldn't you agree? Observing the curious landscape outside Berlin, I was reminded that Citizen Kane built his Xanadu 'on the desert coasts of Florida.'

Ethan Hunt's assignment in 'M:I III' is to battle the villain Owen Davian (Philip Seymour Hoffman) for control of the Rabbit's Foot. In Ethan's final words in the movie, after countless people have been blown up, shot, crushed and otherwise inconvenienced, he asks his boss Brassel (Laurence Fishburne), 'What is the Rabbit's Foot?' Ethan should know by now it is a MacGuffin, just like the virus and the computer file.

Why does Ethan risk his life and the lives of those he loves to pursue objectives he does not understand? The answer, of course, is that the real objective of all the 'M:I' movies is to provide a clothesline for sensational action scenes. Nothing else matters, and explanatory dialogue would only slow things down. This formula worked satisfactorily in 'M:I,' directed by Brian de Palma, and 'M:I II,' directed by John Woo, and I suppose it works up to a point in 'M:I III,' directed by J.J. Abrams, if what you want is endless, nonstop high-tech action. Even the deadlines are speeded up this time. Instead of a 24-hour virus, we have an explosive capsule that detonates five minutes after it zips up your nose.

The action takes us to Berlin, Vatican City, Shanghai and the Chesapeake Bay Bridge, although there seems to be no real reason to visit any of those places except to stage stunts involving their landmarks using computer-generated imagery. I did smile at a scene where Ethan parachutes from a building and ends up hanging upside down in his harness in front of a speeding truck. I liked a moment when he jabs a needle of adrenaline into a woman's heart to bring her out of her drugged stupor; Quentin Tarantino should send him a bill. And there is the intriguing speech by an agency techie about the Anti-God Compound, a deadly byproduct of technological overachievement, which might simply destroy everything. If there is an 'M:I IV,' I recommend the Anti-God Compound as the MacGuffin.

I didn't expect a coherent story from 'Mission: Impossible III,' and so I was sort of surprised that the plot hangs together more than in the other two films. I was puzzled, however, by the nature of Ethan's relationship with Julia, his sweet fiancee. If he belongs to a secret organization that controls his life and can order him around, doesn't she deserve to know that? Or, if not, is it right for him to marry her? And when she meets his co-workers from the office, do they all talk like he does, about how if you hit the brakes, it can cause a chain reaction slowing down traffic for hundreds of miles?

Such questions are beside the point. Either you want to see mindless action and computer-generated sequences executed with breakneck speed and technical precision, or you do not. I am getting to the point where I don't much care. There is a theory that action is exciting and dialogue is boring. My theory is that variety is exciting and sameness is boring. Modern high-tech action sequences are just the same damn thing over and over again: high-speed chases, desperate gun battles, all possible modes of transportation, falls from high places, deadly deadlines, exotic locations and characters who hardly ever say anything interesting.

I saw 'M:I' and 'M:I II' and gave them three-star ratings because they delivered precisely what they promised. But now I've been there, done that, and my hope for 'M:I IV,' if there is one, is that it self-destructs while mishandling the Anti-God Compound.