Impossibly frustrating: why Mission: Impossible 8 was a major letdown

TruthLens AI Suggested Headline:

"Mission: Impossible 8 Faces Criticism for Disjointed Narrative and Lack of Action"

View Raw Article Source (External Link)
Raw Article Publish Date:
AI Analysis Average Score: 5.2
These scores (0-10 scale) are generated by Truthlens AI's analysis, assessing the article's objectivity, accuracy, and transparency. Higher scores indicate better alignment with journalistic standards. Hover over chart points for metric details.

TruthLens AI Summary

The latest installment in the Mission: Impossible franchise, titled "The Final Reckoning," has sparked disappointment among fans and critics alike, marking a significant shift in the series' trajectory. While the first half of the franchise, from Brian De Palma's original in 1996 to 2011's "Ghost Protocol," is often underrated, the latter films, beginning with 2015's "Rogue Nation," have garnered excessive praise. Public screenings of the eighth film reveal a growing consensus that it fails to cohesively tie up the story of Ethan Hunt and his IMF team, resulting in a film that feels disjointed and lacks the thrilling action sequences that have become synonymous with the franchise. Audiences find themselves watching lengthy conversations in mundane settings, which detracts from the high-stakes action that fans expect, leading to a narrative that feels more akin to a podcast than a blockbuster film.

Director Christopher McQuarrie's approach in previous films, focusing on character development and dialogue, has backfired in this finale, overwhelming the action with too much exposition. While the franchise initially thrived on its spectacular set pieces, such as Cruise's gravity-defying stunts, this latest film features a lackluster climax and fails to deliver memorable moments. Supporting characters, including notable actresses like Rebecca Ferguson and Vanessa Kirby, are underutilized and overshadowed by Cruise's dominant presence, which detracts from the ensemble's potential. Moreover, the film struggles with its thematic elements, particularly the use of artificial intelligence as the antagonist, which remains underexplored and abstract. Despite Cruise's enduring star power and the franchise's past successes, "The Final Reckoning" has been criticized as a creative misfire, struggling to compete with other films, including a live-action adaptation of "Lilo & Stitch," that have outperformed it at the box office. This installment serves as a reminder that while Cruise's stardom remains intact, the film itself lacks the explosive energy and compelling storytelling that initially captivated audiences.

TruthLens AI Analysis

The article critiques the latest installment of the Mission: Impossible franchise, expressing disappointment in its execution and overall coherence. It reflects on the evolution of the series and the varying public perceptions of its earlier films compared to the most recent one. The piece seems to aim at generating a critical discourse around the film's performance and the expectations of its audience.

Purpose of the Article

The primary intention behind this article appears to be a critique of the film's storytelling and pacing. By highlighting the disjointed nature of the plot and the audience's dissatisfaction, it encourages readers to reflect on their expectations versus the film's delivery. This may suggest a broader commentary on the state of modern filmmaking, particularly in franchise cinema.

Public Sentiment and Perception

The article seeks to tap into a growing consensus among audiences that the concluding chapter of the franchise does not meet the established standards. By using terms like "disjointed" and "letdown," it aims to resonate with viewers who may feel similarly disappointed, potentially fostering a sense of community among disgruntled fans.

Hidden Agendas

There does not appear to be any obvious information that the article seeks to obscure. However, the focus on criticism could detract from positive discussions surrounding the film or from other concurrent cinematic releases, thereby shaping a particular narrative around the Mission: Impossible brand.

Manipulative Elements

While the article expresses genuine critique, the language used could be perceived as manipulative due to its strong negative framing. Words like "frustrating" and "disjointed" are emotionally charged and may influence readers' perceptions before they even view the film.

Truthfulness of the Claims

The claims made in the article are subjective, based on the author's interpretation and the sentiments of select audiences. While they may reflect a portion of viewer opinion, they do not encompass the entire spectrum of responses to the film.

Cultural Implications

The article touches on broader discussions within the film industry regarding audience expectations and the quality of blockbuster franchises. By framing the latest Mission: Impossible as a disappointment, it may influence future productions to reassess how they engage with their audiences.

Target Audience

The article is likely to resonate more with dedicated fans of the franchise and moviegoers who value narrative coherence and character development over action set pieces. It might also appeal to critics and cinephiles who are interested in dissecting the quality of modern cinema.

Market Impact

This kind of critique could impact the box office performance of the film, especially if it gains traction among audiences. Negative reviews might discourage potential viewers, thereby affecting the film's overall financial success. It could also influence stock prices of companies involved in the production or distribution of the film.

Geopolitical Relevance

While the article does not directly address geopolitical issues, the underlying themes of audience expectation, cultural representation, and the evolution of major franchises can reflect wider societal trends and dynamics in global entertainment.

AI Influence

There is no clear indication that AI was used in the writing of this article, although certain AI models might have assisted in generating content or ideas. The narrative style and tone suggest a human touch, focusing on nuanced critique rather than algorithmic neutrality.

In summary, while the article presents a strong critique of Mission: Impossible 8, its subjective nature and emotionally charged language raise questions about the objectivity of its claims. Readers are encouraged to consider multiple perspectives before forming a definitive opinion on the film.

Unanalyzed Article Content

If the title is sincere, and this really is the final reckoning, then it’s been a franchise of two halves.Mission: Impossiblediehards tend to underrate the first half (which ran from Brian De Palma’s brisk 1996 original to 2011’s fun Ghost Protocol) as much as they overrate the second (which launched with 2015’s Rogue Nation). Yet the rumbles and grumbles emanating from public screenings suggests a disgruntled consensus is forming around the concluding instalment: that this is an altogether disjointed way to resolve the affairs of Ethan Hunt and his IMF crew, and a shaky way to ignite the movie summer season. Ninety minutes in which nothing happens over and over again, followed by 70 minutes of M:I B-roll.

To better diagnose this latest glitch in the Hollywood machine, we need to return to the relighting of the fuse. This was the franchise to whichTom Cruiseretreated in the wake of the commercial underperformance of 1999’s Eyes Wide Shut and Magnolia – the two most rigorous turns of this star’s career, films in which Cruise allowed himself to be rattled and seen to be rattled, only to be met with widespread public and awards-circuit indifference. The Mission: Impossibles, by contrast, would be the sort of 4DX-coded sure thing for which audiences have routinely turned out, a creative safe space, even as the films’ constituent set pieces pushed their prime mover into performing ever riskier business to ensure bums on seats.

In those early films, the character of Hunt was as much martyr and marked man as saviour or secular saint, targeted at every turn by directors with comparably forceful visions. The sensationalist De Palma revelled in the set-up’s potential for spectacle; and while, in retrospect, the motorbike-and-mullet combo of 2000’s M:I 2, directed by John Woo and set to a bruising Limp Bizkit beat, was bound to date rapidly, the sometime animator Brad Bird, in Ghost Protocol, had the bright idea of turning the series into a live-action cartoon, with Cruise defying gravity and nature alike by hanging off the side of the Burj Khalifa and personally outrunning a sandstorm.

The last four films, however, bear the imprint of screenwriter turned director Christopher McQuarrie, who concluded that what this series needed was a little more conversation, overseeing the construction of a vast story framework for his star to dangle off one-handed. That approach reaches its apotheosis inThe Final Reckoning, but the scaffolding now overwhelms the spectacle. The attempt to solder eight films together ends in much-rewritten incoherence – see Ving Rhames’s confused sendoff – and, worryingly, results in missions being described rather than shown. You wonder whether the insurers blanched after Cruise crocked an ankle shooting 2018’s Fallout; now we’re left with folks talking at length in nondescript rooms. Is this a Mission: Impossible movie, as advertised, or some M:I-themed podcast?The spectacle, when it tardily follows, is subpar; nothing rivals the train derailment in 2023’s Dead Reckoning, which perversely benefitted from McQuarrie’s yen for stringing matters out. A soggy deep dive, cramped and claustrophobic, offers another (this time depressurised) chamber piece; during a rote subterranean shootout, we learn world-ending AI generators can apparently be stored in complex cave systems. (I mean, how long’s the extension cable?) The biplane conclusion feels more like the M:Is of yore, but chiefly reminds you of Top Gun: Maverick’s superior engineering. Too often, McQuarrie has deferred to Cruise and his exhausted stunt coordinators; as a result, the series’ bank of memorable images has dwindled.

At this length, other flaws become apparent. While the cast expanded once the series set up shop in London, the supporting players now have far less to do, save raise sporadic eyebrows in Hunt’s direction. McQuarrie has penned great intros for his women (Rebecca Ferguson, Vanessa Kirby, Hayley Atwell), but they’re then stranded because Cruise is neither Cary Grant nor Colin Farrell. (Onscreen chemistry remains his most impossible mission.) Making artificial intelligence (AI) the villain in 2025 is a resonant choice, but it’s never developed beyond abstract concept; the human big bad (the ever-underused Esai Morales) is an afterthought. Late M:I is mostly All About Tom, or as the credits frame it: Tom Cruise in A Tom Cruise Production.Maybe the star still has enough goodwill in the tank to get the series over the line financially, but creatively, The Final Reckoning is a busted flush: the fact it’s been outperformed on opening weekend by alive-action Lilo & Stitchseems in some way telling. For his part, Cruise has earned the right to stand alone and unbowed atop the BFI Imax like the world’s most celebrated Antony Gormley figure; his stardom has only been reaffirmed over the course of the past quarter-century. But it’s a problem when your publicity stunts generate punchier images than anything in the film you’re promoting. That long-lit fuse flickered out before it reached the explosives; and in any event, the gelignite has been swapped for flannel and waffle.

Back to Home
Source: The Guardian