I’m going to state my biases upfront: I think Mission: Impossible is, without a doubt, one of the most impressive film franchises of all time. If you listened to the latest episode of Talkies, you already know I think it’s only gotten better with age too. We recorded that episode the day after watching all seven previous movies back-to-back in a single day, a 16.5-hour marathon with only brief breaks for snacks and bathroom trips. Worth it! 

Based on the 1960s TV series, the first Mission: Impossible film hit theaters in 1996 and marked a major turning point for Tom Cruise. Not only did he star in it, but he also took on the role of producer for the first time in his career.

What’s made this franchise stand out over the decades is its evolving creative leadership. Each of the first five films had a different director: Brian De Palma, John Woo, J.J. Abrams, Brad Bird, and Christopher McQuarrie. Starting with Rogue Nation, McQuarrie took the reins as both writer and director, a role he’s continued through to today’s entry: The Final Reckoning.

The mission we’ve chosen to accept here at Screen Love Affair is to give you a spoiler-free review that still delivers the key takeaways. So if you’re worried about plot reveals, rest easy, no intel will be compromised here.

And for those eager to dive deeper into the classified stuff, don’t worry! We’ve got a full spoiler-filled episode of Talkies on the way, where Brandon, Adriana, and I break it all down. 

So without further ado: does The Final Reckoning light the fuse and go out with a bang or just fizzle out?

My Thoughts

Unsurprisingly, I have a TON to say about this movie and I’ll save most of it for our spoiler chat on Talkies, but let’s kick this off with the obvious part: the big set pieces.  

Holy moly. I’m not going to even talk about what they are (though if you’ve seen the trailers or the posters, you’re probably aware of at least one), but the first major set piece really surprised me. I didn’t expect this particular sequence to even really be such a significant one. Oh, what a fool I am. Frankly, I should’ve known better. As someone that lives and breathes the franchise, I’ve listened to hours and hours of interviews with Cruise and McQuarrie about their approach to these films. 

One such point was how they challenge themselves through challenging the characters. For example, in Dead Reckoning, there is a car chase sequence in Rome. But in classic Mission fashion, we can’t just have a great car chase sequence in Rome. Ethan (Tom Cruise’s character) has to be handcuffed to another person as well! That, in essence, is how Crusie and McQuarrie approach Mission. Anyway, you’ll know the sequence when you see it because it will absolutely fry your nerves. Adriana and I both watched it while holding our breath and wincing. And this isn’t even the sequence that’s all over the marketing materials!

I have to admit, by the end of that first set piece, I was welling up too. Something about Ethan Hunt’s sheer determination fused with the movie magic unfolding on screen hit me hard. This is why I go to the movies!

My only real gripe with the set pieces is that there just weren’t enough of them. For a movie that runs close to three hours, I wouldn’t have minded one or two more standout moments. That’s probably just me being greedy, though because the two we do get are arguably among the best in the franchise, and honestly, some of the best ever put to film.

I mentioned Dead Reckoning earlier, and that brings up another point worth clarifying for those that might not be aware. Initially, the title of the last film was Dead Reckoning: Part One, but eventually the “Part One” was dropped. However, that doesn’t mean these movies aren’t still part of the same story, because they very much are. From the key that was the focus of Dead Reckoning, to the Entity and Gabriel, all of those elements are back. But it’s not *just* a Dead Reckoning sequel. It’s very much focused on the whole franchise, and I think this is where the movie stumbles a bit for me. 

In those hours of interviews and podcasts, one thing I’ve heard McQuarrie say is that he never wants an audience member to have to experience other movies in order to enjoy this one. With Mission 5-7, I think this was executed brilliantly, but in The Final Reckoning, they struggle to fit all of these links to the previous films in a more organic way. Especially in the first act, the movie really feels bogged down by the implications of its title and it struggles to weave a natural thread through all seven previous movies. Many of the previous movies are very distinct in their own right, and are part of a franchise that has resisted the urge to be a more serialized entity (pun intended). 

There’s even a montage of the earlier films near the beginning and much of the table setting in the first act is to ensure a new audience could be brought up to speed for The Final Reckoning, even if you haven’t seen the seven other movies that preceded it. Unfortunately, this is the first time I felt like my experience as a longtime fan was compromised in favour of accommodating a less invested audience.

Now, I will say, as clumsy as some of this table-setting is, some other aspects callbacks are perfect. On the bad side, this amounts to a bit of a bloated first act and a moment in particular that just didn’t work for me, that felt more akin to an MCU-esque moment that surely only old fans of the franchise would even care about (which I guess makes my MCU comparison even more apt).

On the positive side, the use of some plot points and other things from previous Mission movies had me giddy and giggling like a child, and served as significant sources of emotion in the movie, so as a whole, I’d say it was a net positive. 

The good news for newbies to Mission is, if you’ve never seen a Mission: Impossible movie in your life, I definitely think you can watch this one without feeling you’re missing any essential information.

What surprises me even more, though, and speaks to the quality of the rest of the movie, is that I never felt the near 3 hour runtime at all. While I felt the exposition in the first act was clunky, I think the movie itself benefits from dropping that all at the beginning instead of sprinkling it throughout and causing frequent starts and stops. 

I also wanted to touch on some of the noise after the first wave of screenings and reviews dropped. Franky, much of the negative comments left me wondering if these people had really seen a Mission movie before. While I agree that The Final Reckoning is a bit messy and talky, it’s also not a radical departure from the formula of the franchise that has evolved over time, and that McQuarrie and Cruise absolutely mastered with the previous entries. Again, it’s a little less natural and organic than it is in Fallout, for example, but it’s still in-line with the franchise and it didn’t feel like a radical departure for the franchise that some claim.

It’s actually also what I think makes McQuarrie such a great writer. In all of his Mission films, the audience is very clear on the stakes, the plan, and the details. Not only does it make it easy to follow, but what it does best is allow the audience to immerse themselves into those stakes. That set piece I mentioned earlier that took my breath away is prefaced by plenty of dialogue designed to give Ethan, and by extension, the audience, the information we need to really understand what’s going on and what the risks are that we need to be aware of. The fact there are this many scenes of plotting, planning, and exposition that work so well and don’t bog the pace of the movie down is an impressive feat all on it’s own. It’s a testamanet not just to McQuarrie’s ability as a writer, but also the exceptional use of character actors that they use for these moments as well.

Also keeping in line with the franchise norms, the villain here is weak. Gabriel and the forced backstory they included for him in the previous film do nothing to make me more invested in his character or their story. To this movie’s credit, they don’t dig us deeper into that backstory, only briefly showing the same flashbacks from the last movie. Honestly, though, who could actually be a real foil for Ethan Hunt and frankly Tom Cruise at this point? There’s nobody on the planet that is willing to do the things Tom Cruise is for the movie, so I imagine it’s tough to be able to develop a truly compelling character that can oppose Ethan, especially at such a climatic point in the franchise. Ultimately, I found the over-the-top performance amusing, if not a little out of place. Luckily though, the movie doesn’t need Gabriel to be much more than a nuisance, as the Entity is really the one driving the plot forward. 

Speaking of The Entity, while there is one solid moment with it in The Final Reckoning, I couldn’t help but feel like I was missing some of the humorous aspects of it from Dead Reckoning. 

This was true of the movie as a whole too. This is arguably the most grim film in the franchise from a tone perspective. I’ve always found these movies incredibly fun to watch, whether it’s the dynamics between the team, the joy of the set pieces, or some all-timer line deliveries. I still think that’s true for The Final Reckoning, but certainly less so. These are the biggest stakes in the franchise, and once again the weight of the film’s title becomes apparent. Its effort to bring together so much means that this film at this point in the franchise is more serious than the others. There are moments of levity in here for sure, but much fewer than previous entries. I understand why they made this choice, but it was a noticeable difference for me. 

Finally, I want to close this section of the review by clarifying something; nothing I’ve outlined here significantly hurt my viewing experience. When I think of the Mission: Impossible franchise, particularly the three most recent entries of Rogue Nation, Fallout, and Dead Reckoning, I think they are some of the most perfect action movies of all time. The baseline McQuarrie and Cruise have set for me is perfection and so when there’s a few dents in the armour, they stand out a bit more. 

Despite the messiness, this movie delivers on the spectacle you’ve come to expect from the franchise but also manages to have a bit more genuine heart to it too. There are moments of real emotion here, and for a generation of moviegoers that maybe aren’t as familiar with “the actor” Tom Cruise (as opposed to the death-defying movie star), they will get to see how he uses these serious and elevated stakes to deliver a bit more of an emotional performance as Ethan Hunt this time around. 

Verdict

Now that I’ve seen The Final Reckoning three times, I can confidently say that despite its flaws, I still loved it. The movie may buckle a bit under the weight of its title, but it handles that pressure with an earnestness that reflects deep reverence for a franchise fans have cherished for over 30 years. It also delivers some of the most jaw-dropping stunts and set pieces ever put on the big screen. They don’t make movies like this outside of the Mission franchise anymore, if they ever really did. 

If The Final Reckoning marks the end of an era for Tom Cruise and Christopher McQuarrie, I don’t envy whoever will inevitably be tasked with carrying the torch next. That’s one mission I definitely wouldn’t choose to accept.