Review: Mission: Impossible - The Final Reckoning

Reckoning with the 8th 'Mission: Impossible' installment

Posted by: Andrew Lizotte  •  May 17, 2025 @ 12:40pm

Filed under: Reviews

As a film critic reviewing an action franchise, I feel like you already hate me. It's assumed that I'm going to dunk on this movie, because my tastes are inherently going to be pretentious. So, cards on the table: I teach script writing, and have worked for years as a script editor, but I'll have you know I have terrible taste.

Here are a list of other opinions I have that will make you hate me: 60s Batman is genius. Point Break is art house cinema. Looney Tunes animation cells belong in museums. Jackie Chan is the Charlie Chaplin of our time. Queen's best album is the Flash Gordon soundtrack. Ed Wood is Tim Burton's best movie... The point is I actually love genre movies and am a huge fan of camp. So if you're going to hate me, hate me for who I am as a person.

In the same vein, I'm going to be honest and say that while I have seen most of these films (6 out of 8), it is not my favorite action franchise. The first one came out when I was eight years old, it melted my face off, and was my first introduction to Brian DePalma. The third installment is genuinely one of my favorite Phillip Seymour Hoffman performances, and one of my favorite villain performances in general. The thing is: they stress me out. I don't know if I'm so much enjoying myself as having a cardiac event. I don't know if I can ever relax and enjoy myself, because I'm always thinking, "Did someone die to get this shot?" I REALIZE THAT THIS IS MY PROBLEM. This is what Mission: Impossible movies are. The intricate stunts are what gives the series a lavish wing in the Action Movie Hall of Fame. It is an astonishing technical achievement every time. People would be upset to go to one of these installments and discover that Tom Cruise had not almost killed himself making it (weird to say out loud, but true).

So you'll be happy to hear that I had a panic attack watching the full plane sequence in Mission: Impossible - The Final Reckoning. It remains one of the craziest things I've ever seen. If Tom Cruise is so bored with being rich and famous that he actively chooses to play a game of "Chicken or Go" with God, it's none of my business (*cough cough* late stage capitalism *cough cough*). For this reason, I knew my job going in was to achieve a zen-like state of equanimity. I accept Mission: Impossible for what it is and not for what I (and my doctor) want it to be.

First, let me start by saying that, if you enjoy the other Mission: Impossible movies, you will love this one. It is inherently fun, simply for the fact that it exists. Let's also be honest, one of the things that make action movies fun are the tropes themselves. So you will enjoy this film if you also enjoy: Tom Cruise, explosions, dramatic puns, chasing, espionage, people fighting in progressively less clothing, fun cameos, tons of fan service, the phrase "get me the president of the United States", exotic locations, and extreme stunts! This movie hits all over those demographics. It is exactly what it advertises itself as. After 30 years, I think the Mission: Impossible legacy is a really interesting time capsule of the evolution of the action genre itself.

It also feels very timely and relevant. For a movie series that was originally less about stunts and more about, "look at how cool computer generated images are!" in the first film, it is now ending on, "Artificial Intelligence will kill us all!" with these last 2 installments. On a personal note, as someone who has lost most of their livelihood to AI – and now is forced to take jobs training AI – I was more than happy screaming, "Kill it Tom, burn it to the ground," in a theatre full of strangers.

Now is it a perfect film? Of course not. I say this a Métis man... there is an Inuit character who barely speaks, and is only there to mime a polar bear and serve for comical reaction shots. I am going to let this go from the final review simply because this woman is about to become one of the greatest memes of all time. The backlash will be hilarious and pointed. This character makes Indiana Jones' sidekick "Short Round" look like Doctor Watson. Honestly, I'm only mentioning it because it would be weird if I didn't.

So then, what's the problem? I never thought I would say this about anything associated with Tom Cruise, but the flaw in this film is a lack of confidence in itself. The exposition almost never stops. If they aren't explaining the plot of the last film, they are explaining the current plot or how it relates to all the other previous films, which made me feel sad for a story that is supposed to be a send off victory lap of a job well done. To be frank, it assumes that its own audience has never seen any of these films, when it should be the opposite. We are here because we love the Mission: Impossible movies and especially in an age where everything is streaming, to some degree it's our responsibility as an audience to catch up. So why don't they trust us the way special agent Ethan Hunt trusts the rest of his team?

Now I'm not complaining about exposition and convoluted plot. Those are two great tropes of action films. (It also makes them great for drinking games.) Believe me when I say that it feels like some of the pacing is for the Netflix algorithm. It assumes the viewer is only half watching, so every scene has to reiterate whatever is happening. Basically, take however much exposition you already think I'm talking about and double it. Normally a film would intercut the exposition over the action, to keep the pacing of the film up (ie. keep the adrenaline pumping). However, streamers assume you are only half watching and intercutting would just get lost. The result is that exposition scenes are solely for exposition, and the action scenes stand alone entirely. This means that the overall pacing of the film is high action peaks followed by deep exposition valleys. Keep in mind that the characters are mostly talking about dramatic things that already happened, or exciting things they're trying to prevent in the future. This means very few times is actual action happening in the scene we are watching. I sincerely believe that with standard editing you could cut 20 minutes of the run time (3 hours) but not loose a single scene.

This is the part of the review where I do an emotional check in. How are you? Are you guys doing okay? Did I bum you out? Is it too long? Would it help you to know I originally wrote five pages and whittled it down to two? There was a whole section on the significance of a side character, the use of a plot device I'm not allowed to spoil, followed by a debate on entertainment vs. spectacle in the history of cinema. It's gone. You are welcome. Do you see how important pacing is?

At the end of the day, when it's firing on all cylinders, Mission: Impossible - The Final Reckoning is a really fun spectacle to behold. The stunts are the pinnacle of over-the-top adrenaline thrill rides. It will spawn many fantastic memes, and I hope a few drinking games. If Mission: Impossible could've gone out with a bigger bang, it's surely due to production notes and has no reflection on the passionate and capable crew that RISKED THEIR LIVES to make it. The last 30 minutes are incredible and utilize intercutting!

To make sure I'm not up on MY high horse about this, I always listen to the conversations in line for the bathroom afterwards, and this was my favourite experience ever. By the time I made it up to the urinals, everyone in the bathroom was whistling the theme music in unison. So I think you'll have a pretty good time.

3.5 stars as a standalone movie; 4 stars if you already love the franchise.

Tags: Tom Cruise, Hayley Atwell, Ving Rhames, Simon Pegg, Esai Morales, Pom Klementieff, Christopher McQuarrie, Mission: Impossible, Mission: Impossible - The Final Reckoning

Related Posts

Comments Posted ()

SBM on Social Media

ShowbizMonkeys.com on Facebook ShowbizMonkeys.com on Twitter ShowbizMonkeys.com on Instagram ShowbizMonkeys.com on YouTube