MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE - THE FINAL RECKONING

Film making is so complex and involves so many people that it’s a wonder any good films ever get made. This gives us an idea of why usually good and clever film makers make bad films. As a film director, you just can’t control everything. How does the director of DUNKIRK also direct TENET? The difference in quality boggles the mind.

While I don’t think Christopher McQuarrie’s film directorial quality variations are anything like that extreme, we must wonder how the director (and producers – Tom Cruise among them) of MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE - FALLOUT also made MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE - THE FINAL RECKONING. That’s not to say that I think the latter failed as a film; it’s to say that it’s obviously flawed as a story – authored by the screenwriter/s.

For me, the flaws in MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE - THE FINAL RECKONING were masked by the amazing action scenes, and my sheer buy-in. I go back to 1996 with these guys. No wonder I was crying when (spoiler alert) what happens to Luther (Ving Rames) happens to Luther. No wonder this was as much an emotional roller coaster for me as it was an action spectacle. No wonder I wish everyone involved very well, and take my hat off to them.

But this was a flawed screenplay.

Too much dialogue overall, and expositional dialogue particularly. Bad pacing caused by self-indulgent editing. A plot that made little sense. A non-human nemesis. And miscasting: for me, Esai Morales was wrong for Gabriel (the name of an angel – geddit?). He’s too good looking, and not remotely dangerous looking. The character was also redundant. Or rather: he was a cipher for the actual nemesis – the Entity (AI). But the film had to have someone for Ethan Hunt to, well, hunt. And punch. And throw out of a biplane. For real.

So that means the bad guy (AI) was poorly chosen in dramatic terms – though very well chosen in real-world terms: AI is wrecking creativity, screenwriting included. And of course Tom Cruise is a throwback to a time when people made films for other people. Tom Cruise does indeed seem like the last action hero. Indeed, the last film star.

It seems so sad.

But of course there will be others, and the push back against AI is already under way.

This amazing film? Should have been at least half an hour shorter. I would have deleted much of the dialogue had the screenplay come to me for doctoring.

So why didn’t the producers of MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE - THE FINAL RECKONING do what I would have done with the screenplay? It remains a mystery, like the same person directing and overseeing DUNKIRK and TENET.

There is, I think (and Peter Jackson proved this with THE RETURN OF THE KING), a tendency to go on for too long with your finale. Beethoven had trouble ending some of his pieces. They just went on too long. So an element of that was likely in play with MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE - THE FINAL RECKONING. It felt it could outstay its welcome in the audiences collective subconscious.

But overall? MI fan me didn’t want this thing to end. I wanted more popcorn. Because the end of this film would mean saying goodbye to my pals on-screen. My fellow humans - scared and unsure as they were. Just like the rest of us. Mortal and mightly.

The genius of this film, and indeed the whole MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE franchise is that they make the team feel like our pals. They make us feel like we are one of the team.

So when that teams triumphs, as we know it will, we triumph too.

And that’s smart film making.

I need you to trust me.

One. Last. Time.

Happy screenwriting.