Mission: Impossible III

The intricate espionage games like in De Palma's first film take a back seat, Abrams presents a pure action spectacle, during which you can calmly sit through an unintentionally self-parodic resuscitation scene and the fact that Hunt's emotional relationship with his wife is brought to life through some really toe-curling dialogues, and I, as an ordinary viewer, will hardly care if they are just a mockery of a genre cliché (which I may or may not believe). Leaving aside the recent and brilliant The Bourne Supremacy, the last time I enjoyed a similar ride on the big screen was perhaps twelve years ago with de Bont's Speed. The impressive opening, which introduces Seymour Hoffman as a truly amazing, uncompromising bad guy, is followed by a slowed-down breath to a big continuous action whirlwind that, with a few cool plot twists and very little respite, only ends with the onset of the closing credits. I really enjoyed myself. PS: Cruise seems to be a capable producer and lately a better and better actor, but here again he chose a weaker moment with his sometimes theatrical speech. (05/24/2006)

Hunt's most balanced escapade. Innovator J.J. Abrams managed to revive a somewhat worn-out series into a position of a strong blockbuster player, and thanks to fast editing, well-developed characters, and a close portrayal of Ethan's character, he achieved a nearly historic success. Despite his specific approach, he never lets us forget which action hero we are watching, taking the best from the cleverly targeted mood of the first installment and the action-packed sequel. This time, I found myself holding my breath for the central adventurer, rooting for him intensely, and trembling during all the action sequences. Until the period when Christopher McQuarrie took the series under his wing (forever?), I actually liked the third installment the most among the entire M:I franchise. As the years go by, it loses some of its uniqueness and irreproducibility, but fortunately, not the entertainment value, tangible drive of the story, likable attempts to deviate from genre conventions, and last but not least, the atypical (and all the more cunning) villain. (07/30/2006)

With the third installment, I finally got a great spy film. It had immensely more action than the first one, but was also far more thoughtful than the second film. J.J. Abrams took over as director, and I could feel the change right from the first few minutes. The beginning amazed me, and as the minutes went by, I kept wondering when the pace would slow down. But it didn’t. On the contrary, the pace and action gradually built up. I also praise the story, which wasn’t very predictable and mostly maintained its coherence while avoiding logical flaws. One of the many positives is the cast, especially Tom Cruise, though Philip Seymour Hoffman might have outdone him. I haven’t seen such a slick and intelligent villain in a long time. For me, the third film is the best in the series. I give it 90%. EDIT 08/2023 - This is the best Mission: Impossible! By a clear margin! While the newer installments seem overcomplicated, Abrams' third film is the most balanced in this regard. Perfectly balanced high-tech gadgets with brutally impactful action (like... the bridge heist? WOW), supported by a nearly intimate story where Ethan has to save his wife. And Hoffman is, in a word, brilliant. I haven’t seen a better-written and portrayed villain in action films for a long time. I still stand by my 9/10 after all these years :) (08/08/2023)

There is one positive thing I have to admit about this film. Out of the three sequels about the indestructible agent, it is the best one, but I have a problem with the whole series, just as I have a problem with the majority of action movies. It is simply an unrealistic fairy tale, where you need to turn off your brain and not think about the numerous holes in the logic. Unlike the series of James Bond films, it lacks style and humorous exaggeration. The third part is the most mature in terms of filmmaking, but paradoxically it lacks a truly worthy opponent compared to the previous two films. Philip Seymour Hoffman is a great actor, but he doesn't get enough space and the script doesn't demonize him enough, and if it weren't for the betrayal, he would play a rather embarrassing role as a quickly defeated opponent. If someone is to stand up to such a brilliant invincible agent like Ethan Hunt and the American Secret Service equipped with hi-tech technology, it must be truly a devil in human form, who aims at least, but I emphasize at least, to take over the world... Overall impression: 45%. (04/14/2009)

It’s been a long time since I came across such an exciting and unpredictable action thriller (I really didn’t expect to see Pavel Sobotka appearing in it :). Some things were predictable, but Abrams distracts from them more than perfectly and keeps you in constant suspense. It's also nice to humanize, and show the imperfections of Ethan Hunt, who is still as cool as before, but he's unlucky and not everything works out (running out of ammo at key moments are prime examples). Another great change is the team. Finally, we get to see all the team members in action and not just Hunt. This time he relies on them and fully cooperates with them, which is quite different from the previous parts. In addition, Hoffman is a fantastic villain, completely uncompromising and, most of all, believable. Cruise is more or less in good form, as is the rest of the cast. The best installment in the Mission: Impossible series to date (and quite possibly the last). (09/22/2006)