Directed by:
Christopher McQuarrieScreenplay:
Christopher McQuarrieCinematography:
Rob HardyComposer:
Lorne BalfeCast:
Tom Cruise, Henry Cavill, Rebecca Ferguson, Simon Pegg, Ving Rhames, Vanessa Kirby, Alec Baldwin, Sean Harris, Angela Bassett, Michelle Monaghan, Wes Bentley (more)VOD (4)
Plots(1)
When an IMF operation goes badly wrong, Ethan finds himself isolated and unsure of who to trust as he attempts to complete his original mission. With the CIA questioning his motives and deadly assassin August Walker (Henry Cavill) on his tail, Ethan recruits his old IMF team as they bid to save the world from impending disaster. (Paramount Pictures AU)
(more)Videos (32)
Reviews (15)
SPOILERS AHEAD. I find it a bit paradoxical to blame Fallout for being so reminiscent of Rogue Nation. Isn’t a certain degree of similarity, the certainty that we more or less know what awaits us, the reason that we like movie franchises, whether it’s Bond films, Marvel movies or the Star Wars saga? Besides that, Fallout offers enough specific elements to keep it from being interchangeable with its predecessor and it continuously highlights a certain cyclical nature that Ethan Hunt encounters in his life. ___ Unlike the previous instalments, this one makes greater use of a subjective narrative (dreams, ideas) and more frequently brings up the protagonist’s past, which suddenly began to burden him (similar to Bond in Skyfall). His dilemma – whether to help one beloved person or to save millions – is manifested especially in the female characters (Julie, Ilsa, the French policewoman). The central conflict established by the first scene (including a copy of Homer’s Odyssey, in which the mission is given to Hunt) is based on a desire for harmony, accompanied by concerns that he will irreversibly disrupt it with his actions. In fact, he “only” seeks inner peace (similarly to Ilsa wanting to return home). ___ Two and a half hours of the movie are then filled with various complicated deferrals of this goal (toward which it is necessary to work through several constituent tasks), which at first seems to be within reach (trading in plutonium), but gradually becomes more distant the harder Hunt and his team try to achieve it (basically in accordance with one of the meanings of the subtitle, they fall ever deeper). Hunt unwittingly contributes to the implementation of the villain’s plan and thus to the realisation of his worst fear from the opening scene. ___ The constant uncovering of the identities of double and triple agents who plot against each other (of which we are sometimes aware and sometimes not) shows how difficult it is to recognise reality in an unstable postmodern world of simulacrums (see also the scene in which Benji guides Hunt through a 3D space according to a 2D map) and offers – above all – more and more pretexts for the spectacular action on which this franchise is based and to which the logic of everything else is subordinated. So, yeah, the villain has to leave London from the tower of the Tate Modern gallery, Hunt has to ride around the Arc de Triomphe at full speed in the wrong direction, and he has to skydive into Paris from seven kilometres up, because it looks fantastic and will boost your adrenaline level. Suspension of disbelief. Alfred Hitchcock. If you have a problem with that, you will find it excessive and improbable, any you will unfortunately not fully enjoy Fallout. ___ By giving us the dizzying feeling of straddling the boundary between life and death, Fallout is reminiscent of great grotesques like The General and Safety Last! (though Cruise bases his performances on speed and strength rather than physical acrobatics). With their rhythm, use of deadlines, inventive incorporation of Schifrin’s motif and the way everything smoothly fits together in the end, the action scenes are incredibly intoxicating, while also being sufficiently diverse in terms of vehicles, combat methods, multiple storylines running in parallel (in this regard, the final action scene is very Nolan-esque) and the extent of our awareness of what’s going on, which contributes to the fact that we often do not know with certainty whether we are seeing the fulfilment of a premeditated plan or improvisation. ___ Life supposedly flows in spirals and Fallout is structured accordingly, as it repeats situations that we saw in the first half of the film (a shootout in the London underworld is strikingly reminiscent of the handover in Berlin) or in previous instalments of the series with a slight alteration of forces, which the characters are aware of, knowingly winking at each other (and at us) and making fun of their (again) seemingly zero chance of success and survival. The episodic narrative, composed of several outstanding action sequences with their own patterns of development and breathtaking gradation, is again not only utilised, but also reflected. There is no way for anything to end except with a spectacular cliffhanger. ___ Sure, Fallout could have been shorter, less overloaded with plot twists and more focused on the action than on the characters, but in terms of the development of today's world and the Mission: Impossible franchise, I find its more pronounced melodramatic nature (which contributes significantly to the longer runtime) and greater prevalence of postmodern doubt about what is actually real to be a logical way to raise the stakes without resorting to excesses likes those put out by the creators of Fast & Furious. Of course, it can’t be ruled out that Hunt will race with tanks and submarines next time. He evidently still has the physique for that. 90%
()
(less)
(more)
The last real movie star built a monument of adoration to himself, before which nothing can be done except to tip one’s hat. In the years when Hollywood forgot how to make blockbusters and how to shoot action movies, it was Tom Cruise who brought real amazement back to the big screen. Now that others are beginning to understand that no CGI colouring book or frantic shaky cam can replace the breathtaking dimension of physical attraction, Cruise keeps raising the bar that he set himself in the area of what someone is capable of actually doing in front of the camera for the audience’s amusement.
()
The sixth movie has only one weak point, it comes after a perfect fifth movie. And so, unfortunately, it tries be better in the classic way of all Hollywood sequels “more of everything, too much of everything, with old and well-known character and this time it´s all about the saving the world, as always". The result is a much more straightforward (ok, blunt) script, which this time only serves as a link to let Tom jump on the rooftops of London for two and a half hours, drive two kilometers in the opposite direction in streets of Paris or hang hundreds of meters above the Kashmir mountains. So loved nice spy dialogs of the last part are not seen anymore, here is everything about nuclear bombs, cutting colored wires and hundredths of seconds. So much for the shortcoming. Otherwise, it is not about anything; dead adrenaline constantly (but as a matter of fact constantly) graded diverse event based on clarity, choreography and stunts. So, this time it's “only" a phenomenal big-budget real action movie and an average spy movie. Last time this symbiosis worked really well. But not this time. Even so, it is undeniably a genre movie event of the year, that´s for sure.
()
I totally appreciate the craftsmanship, the totally awesome Tom Cruise, the great action scenes and pacing. I'd be bullshitting if I said I was bored, but at the same time I felt all along that most of those things were done a little better by the previous film. Whether it was the chases, the work with the bad guy (it's all too transparent here) or the sort of embellishment that makes a great scene stand out (I missed the opera this time). It's great, but not as great as last time, and I really can't imagine that if I had to choose which of the last two M:I episodes to watch now, I'd reach for the sixth one. Not to sound overly disappointed, but it's like choosing between The Dark Knight and The Dark Knight Rises. I'd give Ledger the edge, but if I can't find him, Hardy certainly won't offend me. It's just... it was just a little more interesting last time. In every way.
()
I felt an orgiastic enthusiasm, spoiled by moments of bitterness that a second or third viewing might or might not mitigate. Nolan himself would have been ashamed to conceive it in such a Dark Knight fashion, because he would be accused of copying himself. In particular, Balfe merely changed a few notes of the Dark Knight scores to give the dialogue tension and lend the storyline a continuously pulsating momentum. However, most of the action mega-scenes, which are almost groundbreaking in the given genre, and the brutal physical fights are not backed with music but – as the current trend dictates – only with raw sound, which gives them realism. These modern elements of deafening musical urgency and epic yet realistic action create a combination that make us pee our collective pants in joy, but it is spoiled by an overly complicated plot with repeated unmasking and changes of identities, where we manage to understand the basic storyline but keep getting lost in the individual plot twists. At least that’s what happened to me. And probably not because I’m stupid, but because of the script and its attempts to make everything dramatic at all costs, even at places where no dramatization is necessary. For this, I give it four stars, and elevate the more moderate and elegantly beautiful Rogue Nation to five. By the way, of all of Fallout’s scenes, I liked the sentimental one with the French woman cop the best. Cruise has some really beautiful women here, prettier than in many Bond movies.
()