‘MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE’
Please feel free to comment on my review.
The First Mission with Tom Cruise as Ethan Hunt
Your mission should you choose to accept it!
The ‘Mission: Impossible’ movies are fascinating bunch of movies to sit through. Not just because they’re based on a popular 1960s TV show under the same name, but because they vary in terms of quality, depending on who’s writing them and who’s directing them. I find the latest ‘M:I’ movies are better.
Despite the variance in quality, I’ve found enjoyment in every ‘M:I’ movie I’ve seen. Thus why I feel it’s best to share what I find good in a certain ‘M:I’ film as well as bad. And I’m not judging these films in whether they are faithful adaptations of the original TV show since…well, I’ve not seen it yet.
I’m judging each of these films in terms of how they stand up on their own. Every movie has a positive and negative to them, whether they’re original works of art or not. And the ‘M:I’ films should be judged accordingly. So, without further or do, let us check out the very first ‘M:I’ movie! 🙂
The ‘M:I’ movies of course star Tom Cruise as the main lead, Ethan Hunt. Tom Cruise has also co-produced the ‘M:I’ movies he’s been in so far. It’s amazing Tom Cruise was the ringleader producing these films as well as starring in them and doing his own stunt-work from watching the original TV show. 🙂
The first film, released at cinemas in 1996, was directed by Brian De Palma, with a screenplay by David Koepp (who went on to work on the first ‘Spider-Man’ movie as well as 2005’s ‘War of the Worlds’ with Tom Cruise) and Robert Towne, based on a story by David Koepp and Steven Zallian. 😀
I saw this movie on its original DVD release sometime in the late 2000s/early 2010s, but later saw the movie on Blu-ray on the 5th of March 2018 for my Mum’s birthday along with ‘Mission: Impossible III’. We enjoyed a meal to celebrate Mum’s birthday before we watched the ‘M:I’ movies.
At the time, we were getting into the ‘M:I’ movies after seeing ‘Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation’ on Blu-ray for Christmas 2017 and were catching up with them before seeing ‘Mission: Impossible – Fallout’ at cinemas in July 2018. I’m happy to be revisiting these films in their proper chronological order.
To answer your question, I don’t know why we missed ‘Mission: Impossible 2’ whilst watching the first and third ‘M:I’ films for my Mum’s birthday in March 2018. My Dad didn’t purchase it on Blu-ray at the time he shopped the films. Typical Dad. 😀 Don’t worry. I got ‘M:I-2’ for my Mum later in March.
To be honest with you, I don’t believe you need to see all the ‘M:I’ movies in chronological order. They’re pretty much standalone films and they can be easily enjoyed without any worry for continuity. ‘Rogue Nation’ was easy to get into as a film, thus this must apply for other ‘M:I’ movies.
In the first ‘M:I’ film, the plot follows Tom Cruise as Ethan Hunt, an Impossible Missions Force (IMF) agent, on a mission to uncover the mole who framed him for the murder of his fellow agents during a mission at a Prague Embassy and for selling government secrets. Will Ethan get to clear his name?
I must admit, I found this film complex to follow in terms of its plot with Ethan uncovering who set him up during the mission he and his agents were on. I don’t know if it’s because I’m not a fan of the original TV show and you’d need to know a lot of what happened in the show before seeing the film.
But I think this is a ‘M:I’ movie that you’d need to watch again and again in order to catch on to the many plot points that are going on and understand every detail by painstaking second. Thus, why I find the first ‘M:I’ film rather underwhelming compared to what I would see in later instalments.
Don’t get me wrong. That’s not to say the first ‘M:I’ film is unimpressive. Not at all. There are some amazing, suspenseful and tense action sequences that are highlights in the film. This includes Ethan’s infiltration of the CIA headquarters via wirework and the amazing climatic train chase in the film.
But that seems to be what the first ‘M:I’ film is focusing on. Action! There’s not enough story and character development to be invested in. That’s not to say Ethan’s character is uninteresting and difficult to be invested in. But as an introduction to the ‘M:I’ film series, I don’t find it a superb one.
Ethan’s already part of an IMF team when we barely know who he is and where he comes from. His teammates get killed off in the film’s first act when we barely get to know. And Ethan’s supposed to have a relationship with his team leaders; even though we don’t know much about them as characters here.
And yes, I appreciate the film is meant to rely upon twists and turns, as that was a common thing in the TV show with people wearing certain disguises like Tom Cruise’s character does. But it’s no good being surprised by the twists and turn when less time is spent on getting to know the characters. 😦
Despite the issues I have, I enjoyed Tom Cruise’s debut performance as Ethan Hunt, as he drives the story forward in the movie. It’s fascinating to see him as a young IMF agent in the first movie and what motivates him to drive forward and go through dangerous risks in order to solve a mystery.
I was pleased to see Jon Voight star as Jim Phelps in the movie. Jon Voight previously stared in the first ‘Transformers’ film directed by Michael Bay and he also did ‘The Odessa File’, which featured Mary Tamm from ‘Doctor Who’. It was a surprise when Jim Phelps was revealed to be a villain in this film.
There’s Emmanuelle Béart as Claire Phelps, who is Jim Phelps’ wife in the film. Once Jim Phelps is presumed dead during the Prague mission, Claire reunites with Ethan Hunt, presumably working as a potential ally and having an emotional attachment to him. Later, Claire’s revealed as a traitor too. 😮
Ving Rhames stars as Luther Stickell, who ends up helping Ethan to infiltrate the CIA headquarters in Langley. Essentially, Ving Rhames would play Luther Stickell in all the ‘M:I’ movies. It was fascinating to see how Ethan and Luther started in their spy professional relationship and became good friends.
Vanessa Redgrave stars in this movie as Max, an arms dealer that Ethan gets in touch with following the failed mission in Prague. It was fascinating to see Vanessa Redgrave in the first ‘M:I’ movie. This was after she did the 1974 ‘Murder on the Orient Express’ film and before she did ‘Call the Midwife’.
Henry Czerny stars as Eugene Kittridge, the IMF director who set up a second IMF team to monitor Ethan and his lot. I’m not sure what Kittridge’s motivation is behind this conspiracy, but for a while, I wasn’t sure whether he was supposed to be a baddie hunting Ethan or finding out who framed him.
Jean Reno stars as Franz Kreiger, another disavowed IMF agent like Luther Stickell, who helps Ethan and Claire to infiltrate the CIA headquarters in Langley. At first, I thought he was one of the good team helping Ethan in his mission in Langley. Quite a surprise once he turned out to be a backstabber in the film. 😐
There’s also Kristen Scott Thomas as Sarah Davies, one of Ethan’s former team members during the Prague mission. There’s also Emilio Estevez as Jack Harmon and Ingeborga Dapkūnaitė as Hannah Williams. A pity we barely got to know these IMF agents before they were severely bumped off.
One of the thrilling things about the ‘M:I’ movies is hearing the ‘M:I’ theme music carried over from the 1960s TV show, originally composed by Lalo Schifrin. The first film’s music was composed by Danny Elfman and you can hear the ‘M:I’ theme music both in the opening and the closing credits. 🙂
The Blu-ray special features are as follows. There’s ‘Mission: Remarkable – 40 Years of Creating the Impossible’, ‘Mission: Explosive Exploits’, ‘Mission: Spies Among Us’, ‘Mission: Catching the Train’, ‘Mission: International Spy Museum’, ‘Mission: Agent Dossiers’, ‘Excellence in Film: Cruise’, ‘Generation: Cruise’, a photo gallery of the film, a theatrical teaser trailer for the film; a theatrical trailer for the film, and many TV spots for the film.
The first ‘Mission: Impossible’ movie is not one I would rate very highly, since it’s very complex to follow and I wouldn’t call it a good introduction to the ‘M:I’ series. But with that said, it features some great and memorable action sequences as well as a great performance by Tom Hunt as Ethan.
I’m astounded by how this ‘M:I’ movie series became popular, despite an underwhelming start, focusing more on action sequences rather than story and characters. But clearly the first ‘M:I’ film won a lot of people’s hearts. I’m just glad that the movies got better and better in the years to come.
Who knows? Maybe the next ‘M:I’ film will be very exciting! Hmm.
‘Mission: Impossible’ rating – 7/10
|
The next story is |
|
| Return to Mission: Impossible |
Bradley's Basement 
I see this film as a soft reboot to the tv series it’s closest in terms of tone to the original series & i remember fans didn’t like Phelps portrayed as the villain, it wouldn’t work in the tv series but for a movie i thought it a clever twist.
I remember seeing this at my local cinema upon release & enjoyed it but thought its pacing a little dull in parts, the action scenes are impressive but because this was a PG movie it was restricted to what they could do, so no big shootouts or kick ass fights.
I’m huge fan of these films, 3-6 are all top quality entries, i like the second film but John Woos style direction doesn’t translate to a M.I movie as his films always feature high body counts, double waving pistols, doves & slo-mo action which didn’t suit the style of a spy thriller.
Good review Tim, i enjoyed reading your thoughts on this movie & you weighed it up perfectly my friend, 7/10 spot on rating for this movie.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Hi Simon.
Glad you enjoyed my review on the first ‘Mission: Impossible’ movie.
I must check out the TV series to see how it differs compared to the movies. Interesting you mention that fans didn’t like Phelps turning out to be the villian in this movie. I’m sure they wouldn’t if he’d been depicted as a hero throughout the TV series.
I find it odd that the original DVD release for this movie says it’s PG-rated whereas the latest DVD/Blu-ray release says the movie’s 15-rated. Maybe the special features have something to do with it, but still it’s very odd.
I hope you’ll enjoy my reviews on the second and third movies when they come out on my blog soon. I’m currently looking forward to seeing the fourth movie next.
Many thanks for you comments, Simon. Glad you like how I rate the first ‘M:I’ film.
Tim. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
The Fugitive (1993) was the first to spark my cinema outings to movies based on classic TV shows (after Star Trek that is) and Mission Impossible was no exception. I bailed after the MI3 (with Philip Seymour Hoffman playing a most effective villain) and my fondest memories of the first film were my intro to the lovely Kristin Scott Thomas and the high speed train action sequence which is timeless. I know there was a lot of flack in regards to Jon Voight’s Jim Phelps being the villain as the opposed to the hero that Peter Graves made out of the role in the TV series. So in retrospect, the MI films wouldn’t be high on my list for movies that have been the best homages to TV shows. For another reason to call Tom Cruise a most unique action star, it’s claim to fame can still be well deserved. Thank you, Tim, for your review.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Hi scifimike,
Thanks for sharing your thoughts on the first ‘Mission: Impossible’ film. It’s been a while since I’ve reviewed this film, but I’ve enjoyed the third, fourth, fifth, sixth and seventh movies more than I’ve enjoyed the first and second films. My parents have been seeing the ‘M:I’ TV series on DVD, which I bought for my Mum for Christmas a couple of years ago and they’ve watched it whilst I’ve been at work. They’ve enjoyed the series, even though there’s a lot of episodes to sit through and they found them to be repetitive in terms of formula. I’ll have to check out the TV series sometime, especially as Leonard Nimoy from ‘Star Trek’ is in the TV series. I’m looking forward to when the eighth ‘M:I’ film is released, hopefully next year.
Best wishes,
Tim 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Mission: Impossible as a film series doesn’t really find its feet until Christopher McQuarrie takes the helm in Rogue Nation. There are a lot of auteur directors that take the helm for a long time. Brian DePalma, John Woo, J.J. Abrams and Brad Bird all put their own distinctive signature on what these films could and should be.
McQuarrie, though, somehow managed to make it a cohesive flavour all its own. We know what makes an EON Productions James Bond film. It wasn’t just down to an art, it was down to a blueprint. The dialogue was immaculate, the scenery was breathtaking, the stakes were sadistic, and our anti-hero became deceptively complex over the decades.
The series is quite a different experience, but the aim of the films was to tell the exploits of Ethan Hunt, aided by a team of experts who were often interchangeable. The Mission: Impossible films began as a James Bond copycat, short and simple.
But, then, a good question arises — why see a Mission: Impossible film? What does it have that Bond didn’t? Well, over time, McQuarrie seems to have been able to pin it down to three things — suspense, spectacle and the squad. As the Craig films went more for a “beer” tone, the M:I films went more for the “martini” flavour.
For Mission: Impossible (circa 1996), Bond had reinvented itself with GoldenEye. More down-to-earth, in some ways, but it took onboard that techno-thriller edge of the ’90s and played deliberately to style and elegance in unstylish and inelegant settings. Monte Carlo casinos and the the Russian Lubyanka. Breathtaking Turkish baths and sweating jungle canopies. It’s all contrasts.
But, GoldenEye didn’t go “back to basics”, as I think many expected. It updated itself for the ’90s. It took everything that worked from previous decades and brought it forward. Confronted it, addressed it, and grew from it. Mission: Impossible, the film, is what would’ve happened if Bond had zigged, instead of zagged.
If it really had gone back to its basics. Those basics being — the Alfred Hitchcock thriller.
For Mission: Impossible, Brian DePalma pulls on Alfred Hitchcock to deliver a film almost keyed to that director’s style. We have the lavish set pieces, the rather brutal betrayals, the lone man on the run for a crime he didn’t commit (that’s pure North By Northwest). It’s a very, very calculated effort to replicate everything that made those ’50s thrillers work.
The only concession to changing times is the use of technology. Even that’s fairly sparse. Remember the days where a character could be murdered over a floppy disk? That happened a lot. The most memorable part of the film — the high-wire infiltration of the CIA servers — is perhaps the only part that couldn’t have been done in previous decades.
Mission: Impossible a wonderful film for spectacle. The plot… Well, the plot is a classic twist-and-turn of North by Northwest, To Catch a Thief, Rope or Torn Curtain. It’s meant to make the viewer squirm, second-guess and overthink the story, which is terrific on a first viewing. The systematic killing of Phelps’s team was a frightening shock. Pure stomach-twisting horror.
Repeated viewings, though, are not kind to this first film. The script is written by Robert Towne, who did one of the best The Man from U.N.C.L.E. episodes, and Chinatown. The latter is a film that is legendary for its complexity. To quote the famous, final line: “Forget it, Jake, it’s Chinatown.” There are a lot of red herrings in Mission: Impossible to make it work.
The first film also suffers from a saturation problem. Like The X-Files or Die Hard, it did this sort of story, first, and then everyone mimicked it afterwards. It’s an unfortunate occurrence in older media. It’s cutting-edge, spellbinding, and revolutionary… So, everyone starts doing it. Eventually, to the point that it’s not perceived as cutting-edge, spellbinding or revolutionary anymore.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Hi Wolfie,
Thanks for sharing your thoughts on ‘Mission: Impossible’ and the film series overall. Interesting comparisons you’ve made between ‘Mission: Impossible’ and the James Bond films. I like your comparison of the Daniel Craig 007 films taking a more ‘beer’ tone whilst the ‘M:I’ film take on a ‘martini’ flavour. I prefer how the plot and characters work out in the ‘M:I’ films compared to the James Bond films, especially in the Christopher Quarrie-directed movies. Interesting how you compared director Brain DePalma to Alfred Hitchcock, and how on repeated viewings, people aren’t so kind on the first ‘M:I’ film compared to the first time it came out in 1996.
Many thanks for your comments.
Tim 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person