Why “Mission: Impossible — Dead Reckoning” missed its own train

I have my reservations about the film as it wasn’t as good as the past three. Which is why I’ll start from the negatives and then go into why I still consider it my favourite running franchise, with “Mission: Impossible — Fallout” as my favorite blockbuster. Although “Dune: Part 2” gave me hope that after Part 3 or Messiah released a few years from now, Dune may take the baton.

How to set apart an action franchise?

“Dead Reckoning” was far too derivative of the very recent blockbusters out there. The desert sequence reminded me of “John Wick”, both third and fourth. Rome was heavily featured in the latest “Fast and Furious”, the Spanish Steps in particular. The climactic train sequence resembled the opening of the latest “Indiana Jones” instalment. All these films were released within three months prior to “Dead Reckoning”.

Could it be that Hollywood is running out of ideas when it comes to stunts? Considering “Dead Reckoning” was filmed earlier, perhaps the others were to ones copying. Eventually even if M:I executed the idea better (read: more realistically), the audience felt they had already seen the set piece. This makes it a hard sell from a marketing perspective. Not only for the marketing team, but also in terms of word of mouth.

James Bond’s latest “No Time To Die” was filmed before, however, but I’ll still point out some glaring similarities. Perhaps M:I was forced to lean more into Bond vibes by studio meddling. Given Bond’s consistently better box office performance, there’s certainly precedent for such a shift.
Elements such as cinematography and romantic undertones seemed lifted directly from “No Time To Die”. The soundtracks were both brass-heavy. Lorne Balfe is an apprentice of Hans Zimmer so maybe they lowkey collaborated? It was obvious Zimmer was more focused on Dune, so it’s not outside the realm of possibility.
Finally, the second act scenes in Venice and Cuba had antagonists reveal themselves as the hosts of the party. Attempting to trap the protagonists. The M:I antagonists this time around would have also easily fit into the Bond universe. Enjoyable, just a bit too theatrical.

In regards to the cinematography, it seemed to lean into more colors and at times, have a dirtier lens like “The Batman”. “Dead Reckoning” is the first film in the franchise to be captured completely digitally. Craig Fraser made digital work for the “Dune” movies and “The Batman”, but he’s proven to be a master at it. “Dead Reckoning” somehow looked “too Hollywood”. Don’t get me wrong. It was very vibrant, but lacking in its own visual identity. They should go back to film and also make sure their set pieces remain unique compared to other blockbusters being filmed concurrently.

How have they made each instalment feel different?

The main criticism on the M:I franchise is that they’re carbon copies of each other. I understand where such a criticism is coming from, but also absolutely disagree. As a producer since the first, Tom Cruise has always had a say. Obviously they play in the same sandbox and genre. But nowhere is their drive to make the movies different more apparent than the contrast between “Dead Reckoning” and “Fallout” five years ago. “Fallout” exuded a pristine, cold aura. A straightforward narrative and clear antagonist motives. In contrast, “Dead Reckoning” embraces colors and a certain roughness. Perfectly combining its romantically ominous vibe. Creating a juxtaposition with the futuristic themes it explores. Sci-fi usually takes place in modern settings, but here we are in an Italian historic setting and on an old runaway train in the Austrian countryside. In the next one, we seem to be going to South-Africa. An even bigger departure from the usual sci-fi setting.

With franchises like “John Wick” and “Fast & Furious”, an average moviegoer couldn’t tell you in which instalment a particular scene takes place. Sure, for many this is the case for M:I as well. But the other two come off the conveyer belt every couple years, while M:I makes one every five years. The team behind M:I seem to have full confidence that unlike Keanu Reeves and Vin Diesel, Cruise doesn’t age. So what’s the rush?

In all seriousness, M:I really does make a proper effort to set their movies apart from each other. Nowhere is it more evident than with the score, which always has its roots in Lalo Schifrin’s classic theme but is always evoking the very specific tone of that movie. And this is what I appreciate about the franchise. It creates limitations to foster creativity. The composer has to weave the theme in and out, but the way he does so is up to him.

Our writer/director Christopher McQuarrie sets “Dead Reckoning” apart from his previous two outings by invoking some of the 90s style. De Palma shooting style with Dutch angles and the vibe of paranoia, now induced by AI. Corny lines like ending the quick briefing scene on the helicopter with a completely unnecessary ‘This is not a drill’ and having the heads of intelligence finish each others sentences as they deliver exposition. Many are critiquing these exact aspects, without perhaps realising that this is exactly the difference in tone compared to his previous two outings that McQuarrie was going for.

What really set this one apart from the previous instalments and other such franchises were the character arcs. What a novel concept (in action movies)! Usually we don’t get those. Ethan came to an understanding that he can’t quite keep his loved ones safe and should stop promising to do so. Grace realised that by becoming selfless she has more to offer than she thought, gradually becoming a part of the team. The two US agents constantly on their tail, along with the playful assassin played by Pom Klementieff, came around to believe in Ethan and his judgment.

Another one having a change of heart is Kittridge, with whom they had an antagonistic relationship in the very first instalment back in 1996. Here, Kittridge not only provides Ethan with his next mission brief but also delivers what can only be described as a pep talk. Suggesting Kittridge finds the dead body of his superior in the train, the one whose throat Gabriel cut. This revelation prompts Kittridge to reassess his loyalties and motives. Even if patriotic, the intent of his superior was malicious as he wanted to join forces with The Entity. Kittridge begins to comprehend that there are bad apples in every government who don’t care whether the actions of their nation are dictated by an AI, as long as they can reign supreme. He realises that Ethan’s fears of AI ending up the one in control are well founded and sides with him in wanting to destroy The Entity.

Antagonistic AI can still feel new

Making an apolitical faceless AI into the antagonist in a spy setting was the right direction to go. Cruise and McQuarrie as the writer also made drones the looming antagonist in Top Gun: Maverick. The world is already geopolitically tense so it is diplomatic not to single out any particular country as the enemy. During all of Top Gun’s runtime, they never mentioned who they were supposed to be attacking.

M:I has embraced the use of futuristic tools in espionage and doing it better any other spy franchise. The tech has also proven somewhat unreliable as they are obviously cutting edge prototypes. This time, not only is the tech failing but it is actively working against them. Although, I do think they should have held back on the AI being conscious. It should have been used by Gabriel to beat Ethan. Instead, it used him as an extension of itself.

The current extent of its powers would have been more realistic 10 years from now. People don’t genuinely believe AI would tomorrow become conscious and take over the world like Skynet. Even with the threat in Terminator, the actual thing we were afraid of was the nuclear explosion on Judgment Day. It played into people’s worst fears in the 80s and 90s. Had it been just about robots roaming the earth and subduing us, it would have had little effect because we don’t really consider such a scenario happening in our lifetimes. Any scenario we don’t consider probable in our lifetimes is just not as scary. That’s why it took decades for climate change to become a credible threat. Decision makers pre-2000 wouldn’t live long enough to experience the effects rising temperatures and sea levels would have. Which is why nukes have been used as the threat so often. It has been ever present since its invention and will surely continue to be.

In the case of The Entity, our base fears today have more to do with the way AI is being deployed. Take the current anxiety on the job market when it comes to writers and other creatives. The invisible hand being the most obvious example of subtly being controlled and the powerlessness that comes with it. Like many others, Yuval Noah Harari emphasises that nobody knows what the job market is going to be like. In the past you could at least be certain that if your field of study was relevant now, it will continue to exist in your lifetime. Sure, compared to troubles of the past it sounds like a first world problem. But our present day anxieties are made of problems that would sound entirely pseudo to someone hundred years ago.

Another base fear that could have been emphasised more is false information. This was still present, in how the powers of our AI antagonist were demonstrated. I particularly liked that they were somewhat limited. Right out of the gate, the submarine scene demonstrated in a non-expository manner that the AI cannot push buttons physically and launch torpedoes. Which probably means it cannot launch ICBMs, either. It can only choose to feed us information so that we would react in a predetermined manner. Aware of the strict code of conduct required to operate a submarine, it knows the course of action the crew will be taking. Sure, it would have been realistic for their own torpedo to simply hit without any warning. Why would it give the crew any heads up? But it wouldn’t be too cinematic as there would be no tension being ramped up. It’s the classic Hitchcock principle — the audience has to know there’s a bomb under the table, about to go off. If it suddenly just explodes in the middle of the conversation, why even bother with the conversation?

Moreover, informing the crew of their unavoidable deaths tells us something about its “personality”. Which coincides with it later telling Ethan that he will never make it to the Minich bridge in time. There is no reason it should. Imparting any such information to the naval crew or later Ethan will gain it nothing. But just like Gabriel, it can’t help but be psychologically abusive even when it’s not necessary. Causing what I would call an emotional collateral. As Ethan puts it “It’s not the killing he enjoys. It’s the suffering it causes.” I assume its sadistic nature will eventually be its downfall. It gives Ethan a fighting chance to see him struggle, which results in it being beaten. The biplane stunt will probably be the peak showcase.

I do hope they will also delve into AI manipulating someone by making them think it has captured their family by imitating the respective voices, even though the family is actually safe. This would be a commentary on the classic thought experiment, where AI manipulates a creator to “let it out of the box” using the identity of a dead close one (prelude “Life 3.0”).

Yuval Noah Harari has made a strong point for the implausibility of global cabals like Spectre in the Bond movies. A singleton AI, on the other hand, could orchestrate events as it pleases. Mainly because it is singular in its goal, in contrast to our world leaders. And secondly, it doesn’t need to expend any effort to keep itself secret as there is no need for coordination between factions. It simply has to manipulate people through false information to do its bidding.

Why I continue to love this franchise

Even against the insurmountable odds in dire situations, they still soldier on. To my surprise, rarely does the audience find these films motivational. We often feel there are situations difficult to get out of, even if that’s actually not the case. M:I makes it clear that we tend to overthink, by presenting us with situations that truly are close to impossible. Often do we have a semblance of a plan but real life rarely adheres to that as the world is changing too fast. Which is where the “figure it out” mentality the team has can really be applicable. What in particular the past year has shown us is that we really don’t know who will be out of a job in five years. So we have to get used to the idea of figuring it out and recalibrating as we go along. More so here than any other action film, the situation only gets worse as it goes along. It is only in the end that they win the day. Also, in McQuarrie has often emphasised the importance of the team. Especially compared to Bond and Bourne, who fly solo. Giving credit to the idea that one shouldn’t face problems alone. #lifelessons #unexpectedinspiration

I don’t know why M:I seems to be the only franchise that learned from “Die Hard” that being an action hero should be a constant struggle. They should always be on their back foot. More than ever, Ethan here is often disappointed by the outcome or just mentally and physically exasperated. It requires an action star being okay with being somewhat emasculated, like when blushing red trying to hold on to Grace in the end of the train sequence. Many times he was visibly afraid, especially before the big jump. His whole demeanor during this sequence was “Am I really about to do this?”, which we haven’t seen enough in action movies.

Most of the time, Ethan’s not on top of things. And when he is, we know something is about to go awry. This heist element of knowing the plan and then being forced to take crazy alternatives is what sets M:I apart from other franchises. Sure, in other action films there might be a surprise attack by the bad guy. But this is so unimaginative as it results in just another gunfight and explosion fest that I just can’t give a rat’s ass about.

This is why I prefer Hunt as an action protagonist over any other. They are just way too stoic, not showing any exertion or fear. Craig’s Bond started off struggling in his action scenes, but in later movies became another suave guy who doesn’t care if he’s being shot in plain sight. It’s as if he’s read the script and knows he won’t get fatally wounded. As if he knows that it only makes sense “dramaturgically” only for the main antagonist to wound our hero. This utter lack of fear when it comes to random goons just takes me out of the movie every time. “No Time To Die” was once again an offender in that regard. In the very final one shot action sequence, going up the stairs, he was shot by several machine guns from a couple meters away and remained unscathed. Then the main antagonist shoots him from far away one-handed and every bullet hits its mark. The random goons should be able to keep going just like our hero would. A great example of this is “Atomic Blonde”, a somewhat realistic scene of a skilled female protagonist faring against goons fighting for their lives.

Here, the female characters are treated superbly as always. Which is a actually an unpopular opinion when it comes to M:I. Even if they are killed off more often than male characters, they are actually made out to be more competent. I’ll go into this some other time, but I do have couple notes on…

Grace

They got lucky that Hayley Atwell is just beyond charismatic because Grace was made out to be fairly ruthless (on paper). Especially in Rome where she left Ethan on the train tracks after they had a fully cooperative elongated action scene together. It would have served her character better if we had a reaction shot of her realising that there’s a train coming, just as she’s running away from the train tracks. If we saw her react with regret, even for a millisecond, it would have telegraphed that she assumed Ethan would escape in time. Action scene has to tell a story and that was supposed to be them bonding. So it felt weird that the movie has us assume Ethan now feels affection for her, while she obviously doesn’t. It should have been two-sided, for the following Venice action scene to work better.

On the other hand, I understand her position in believing Ethan wants something from her but has no regard for her wellbeing. She doesn’t have six movies worth of backstory like we do. She has encountered such two-faced people before, who she knows to run away from. With all the masks in play, Ethan’s got way more than two faces to play with. From that perspective, it makes sense why she would begin trusting Ethan only after Venice. Once she has met the antagonists, she realises he is nothing like Gabriel. This is further emphasised by Ilsa’s death.

My issues lie with not knowing what to make of Ethan’s relationship with Grace because they had a romantic thing going with Ilsa. She felt cheated on whenever there was a romantic undertone with Grace. Instead, alluding that Ethan’s daughter would have made their dynamic more fun and deciding between the two heavier. Not literally, but at least figuratively. Ethan’s like a father figure desperately trying to get her out of trouble and she behaving like a little brat. But in an endearing manner, like Atwell did in the film. In the Venice club scene Ethan’s decision between Ilsa and someone who feels like a daughter or at least an apprentice would’ve been more potent. Someone who didn’t choose to be in this game, unlike Ilsa. Right now it still felt like Grace was one of the adults, even though consciously we knew that she was unaware of the world she’s about to enter.

Grace representing the younger generation would have improved certain moments. Like Ethan trying to get the yellow car to run by pushing around buttons, as if he was an elder not quite getting the new tech and Grace having to assist him. And vice versa, Ethan telling her to stop the super old train and she yelling out loud “How?!” A clearer age gap would have made it all better.

Someone on Reddit did suggest she might literally be Ethan’s daughter. Mother being the woman Gabriel shot in the flashback. So perhaps they did intend for a father-daughter dynamic, but I guess we’ll see in Part 2. A bit soap operatic perhaps, but I wouldn’t mind the reveal as it would explain why the AI chose Grace for her task. Once again, to have one more thing over Ethan and throw him off his game. After all, just like other villains it sees personal connections as a weakness. Failing to realise that at every turn, this has served as a necessary push for Ethan to take the necessary self-sacrificial leap. In all of McQuarrie’s movies, his close ones being threatened has been the necessary push for him to do something that the antagonist wouldn’t anticipate. In Rogue One, the hostage suicide bomber situation with Benji. Going after the helicopters in Fallout. Now, with the big motorcycle stunt it was telegraphed more than ever.

To cap off this section, Ethan really shouldn’t have a new romantic interest every movie. By now, he should realise there’s no room for that in his line of work.

PLOT

Submarine

I loved that they pulled a “Hunt For Red October” with the change from Russian to English on a submarine. Also, the directing of this non-action scene was definitely the best in the the film. Starting with the naval team performing like a well-oiled machine run by adults, only to be reduced to panicking children who were completely terrified. With good reason, as they were completely caught off guard several times. The enemy vessel appearing out of nowhere, detecting them even in their invisibility, the enemy disappearing and then their own torpedo directing itself back. All of which they considered impossible.

By having no windows, submarine is a perfect metaphor for being completely at the mercy of your tools used to relay information. Whatever data you read on the monitor is the one you have to perceive as reality. Just like we have to regard our news as the truth, as we don’t actually know what’s going on across the globe. Which is a great base fear that we are slowly developing, with the bots online becoming fairly lifelike when it comes to spreading a message.

I must admit to still being a bit confused who exactly created The Entity. Excuse my density but didn’t the Americans admit to it, in the end? Then why exactly was it housed onboard of a Russian sub, if the Russians themselves weren’t the creators? Did it “escape” the Americans when it gained consciousness, afraid that they would kill it according to their more ethical guidelines? Perhaps it figured desperate for a lead in an AI arms race, the Russians would more likely allow it to exist? Sure, they would allow The Entity to exist as long as they believe it can be controlled. So the question becomes, how will they interpret what happened with the sub? Will they make the correct conclusion that the AI blew up their own submarine? Or will the generals who still wish to use it turn a blind eye, making the case that it was just a one-time malfunction and will never happen again? A clear parallel to “Oppenheimer”. Do the ends of winning the war justify the means of hoping to harness a power beyond our understanding? In Oppenheimer’s case, they weren’t sure if they would blow up the world. According to the doomsayers, we have a similar dilemma with a psychopathic AI. As opposed to the Trinity Test, the probability of blowing up the world in the case of such an AI is higher than “near zero”. I would love to see a scene like that in Part 2. Something akin to one in “Chernobyl”, with the heads of state butting heads with the scientists.

On a separate note, I wonder if the submarine scene itself would have fit better as the cold open for Part 2. Because right now we learned in the very first scene what Ethan learned in the very last.

The AI taking over a submarine and not drones or anything otherwise futuristic, is about blending a sci-fi concept with a setting from the past. It serves the film well in making it timeless. You’ll see the same ideology with the locations chosen and the set design.

Briefing Room

That also goes for the national security briefing room later on — it has a timeless feel to it. Could have been one 20 years ago or 20 years into the future. Speaking of merging the futuristic topic with the past, there’s a clear reference to Dr. Strangelove. Kittridge’s right hand man, who Ethan masks as, clearly resembles Strangelove with the glasses on. In the shot right before he throws the concussion bombs.

Great pick on the actor, by the way! He looks like a terminator not to be trifled with, which makes us believe it’s the antagonist. The scene was very much framed as a disciple of The Entity effortlessly breaking in. Down to the musical cue of the antagonist. This is the first time we see the bombs, so we didn’t even know if those particular gadgets were meant to render the people unconscious or kill. The scene keeps ramping up the tension, right up until the moment Ethan removes the mask.

There’s a common theme of many scenes starting out middling, but ending great. This one started off too expository and corny, with everyone finishing each others sentences. It also would’ve been better if we learnt more about the Entity’s abilities through action throughout the movie, rather than exposition delivered here. McQuarrie likes to say that the information should be fed beforehand, so it wouldn’t interrupt the action. He likens it to feeding us the vegetables, before getting to the good stuff. But here he went a bit too far and inorganic with the broccoli.

We should have been surprised by the abilities of the AI, one action scene at a time. From the submarine to the nuke and deleting Gabriel’s footage in the airport and taking over comms in Venice. But they told us how powerful it is from the get go, so there wasn’t much to be surprised about.

I did like that they left the motives of AI ambiguous, which is how it should be. The enemy that we can’t see and don’t know anything about with unclear motivations would be the scariest of all.

Airport

The Entity obtaining Benji’s voice as he defuses the nuclear bomb seems to be high stakes with thousands of lives on the line that turns out to be a misdirect. I feel there’s a certain screenwriting commentary attached to it. Benji’s voice is later used in Venice for another ruse where only one or two people are threatened. But as we know them more intimately, we are also more emotionally invested. Sounds like a critique for how blockbusters have world ending stakes that are not personal enough, so there’s nothing for the audience to relate to.

The one moment that got a chuckle out of me was Ethan’s reaction to the nuke being discovered. “Nuclear bomb is something you bother me with, immediately.” His micro reaction to learning they have 20 seconds left. In less than a minute, their whole situation went downhill so fast that they had no other option but to abort.

Rome (car chase)

Compared to other movies like Spectre and The Man from U.N.C.L.E and Fast X, Rome was utilised well! But… even though their chemistry with Grace was good, there was no reason to have so many inside shots with the camera mounted on the car. It’s a thing “The Batman” did as well and honestly, I’d like this wave to blow over. Show me the sweeping shots of action and spare the reaction shots for when there’s enough reason for them to properly react. The chase looked great, showcasing how difficult it must be to drift on the cobblestones. With the small but powerful yellow one, in particular. The camera moved swiftly but comprehensibly, just like the Paris chase in Fallout. The CGI was once again well hidden. But here there were too few of those beautiful sweeping shots.

Venice (foot chase)

Let’s start with the scene before the party, discussing The Entity. Luther and Benji should have given better advice than spout some generic stuff about 4D chess. There should have been a debate about being unpredictable — this is when the AI least controls you.

The Venice club scene might unfortunately be my least favourite in all of M:I franchise. It might have to do with the pandemic, with some of it shot in isolation using green screen? Whatever it was, in the end Gabriel’s acting was the only one that didn’t feel somewhat awkward. A complete opposite of the club scene in Fallout, which elegantly introduced us to White Widow. Here it all felt too claustrophobic, which might have been the intent but it was just weirdly executed. Too many Dutch angles. Somewhat overacted, with too many head tilts. Overwritten, with every line a riddle.

It also could have been more clear what exactly was Gabriel threatening White Widow with? In order to better understand her decision to support The Entity. I assume it could have rewritten her file/history, so that no associate of hers would no longer want anything to do with her. Creating lies indistinguishable from the truth.

There might have been a commentary intended, in regards to her decision. White Widow needed what the AI had to offer, whilst being afraid it could ruin her life. As we’ve already seen with ChatGPT and the rest, we’re aware that if we don’t use AI we will be left behind. Just like her, it’s not like we want to support the AI takeover but we might not have a choice. Which is what her decision comes down to. Symbolically, Ethan/Cruise and McQuarrie are trying to kill it as they only see art created by humans truly having merit.

On to the foot chase. The Entity obviously chose Venice for a party location so that it could observe rats within a maze in labyrinthian alleyways. So much so that Benji has to tell Ethan where to go at every turn. Which plays into The Entity’s plan of controlling the narrative. The shots of Ethan running also get increasingly claustrophobic as we get closer to (spoiler)…

Ilsa’s death. Editing and music during her last stand were great but the fight itself was slightly overchoreographed. It felt too much like a dance between the two actors. It would’ve made sense for Ilsa to keep her distance with the long sword. Her fight in “M:I — Rogue Nation” was more realistic, as they both carefully tried to jab at each other with knives while taking their time in between.

Many expressing their opinion online seem to be of the opinion that Ilsa’s death didn’t have enough gravity, as if she was “fridged”. Surely it can be frustrating to lose a beloved character, but it made narrative sense. Ethan having his need for revenge take precedence over the mission (on top of the train later on) indicates her importance. That’s why he goes go for the kill once he has Gabriel pinned down on top of the train. Robert McKee has said : “the greater the pressure, the deeper the revelation, the truer the choice to the character’s essential nature.” Ethan’s need for revenge was the opposite to his nature to always prioritise the mission. Thus, it showed how much he cared for Ilsa.

Apparently they also had a proper dialogue scene on the Venice rooftop that went on for (p)ages. But with such good chemistry they were able to evoke that same emotion. Good acting is all about making lines work with just looks. For “Sicario”, Benicio Del Toro removed his lines by telling Villeneuve he can do it with a look. The movie is all the better for it, by shifting Emily Blunt’s character into the role of a protagonist. This also tells you just how much faith the filmmakers had in the Ethan/Ilsa pairing. How they believed having her perish would deliver the necessary gut punch to the audience, even if she wasn’t in the movie that much.

Austria (the train)

We didn’t mention The Entity taking over comms in Venice because it should have happened in the third act. Right now, how we got to the bike jump off the cliff felt forced. Benji knowingly directing Ethan to dive off the ledge made him look stupid. He should be aware that anything Ethan has pulled off in the past is still plausible (which we will get to in a minute). Jumping off the ledge and landing on the train is not, unless Benji has managed to calculate the exact trajectory and guides Ethan there. This should have been the very last resort, not a plan B once plan A to jump on the train at a turn failed.

How would we get to that “last resort”? In Venice, The Entity should have told Ethan to take a couple wrong turns just to misdirect him just enough. But not in a way that would alert the team their comms have been compromised. As Luther said, The Entity was knocking down satellites for them to use. So why can’t it give wrong directions to Ethan? Ethan wouldn’t know it’s not Benji. And while Benji is occupied with finding another satellite, he wouldn’t know that Ethan is not running on his own accord but is taking direction from The Entity. Ethan would have found Luther and Benji partially responsible for Ilsa’s death, delivering a more emotional gut punch. Right now, it didn’t have much of an effect other than the team sulking for five minutes. Ethan thinks there was no interference by The Entity and that they just failed to do their job. Creating a bit of a strife between the team before the third act.

AI would then completely take over comms in the third act to get Ethan to that ledge. Directing him as Benji, just like in Venice. As a result, having a bigger build up to taking that leap. As Ethan reaches his destination just like in the movie, The Entity taunts him thinking it has won. So Ethan throws away the earpiece and decides to defy all expectations The Entity has. Another demonstration of human spirit against the machines.

No matter how many ludicrous things Ethan has done, they were all in the realm of plausibility. The probability of that movie scenario playing out were near zero. Ethan started defying such odds with his final maneuver in the Rome chase that allowed them to finally escape. Reversing with such precision into the underground railroad pass was almost as unlikely as crashing through the window into that exact spot in the train. Such a deus ex machina belongs to “Fast & Furious” and not in ‘the missions’.

We should have followed his leap and after the parachute deploys, the glide along a moving train. Ideally, there should have been someone guiding him for the exact trajectory with the train so that he could reach it, and release himself on top of it. It would be difficult to tell what was done for real and what wasn’t, which is the hallmark of a great stunt. We would have had to suspend our disbelief just as much as in Fallout. The perfect amount.

A stunt being outside the realm of plausibility is why I believe they cut a couple of stunts from Fallout, that were present in the screenplay. I applaud them for “killing their darlings”. Movie is made three times, after all: writing, shooting and in the edit.

This shot from the trailer is a snippet of this sequence…

Another shot from the trailer, from an even more is ludicrous idea…

Screenplay has several vehicles swerving off the road, until Ethan somehow manages to get the helicopter airborne. Again, they might have even done it for real but my mind instantly goes to VFX and shooting on a sound stage. Those ideas might have sounded good on the paper and looked great on storyboards, but once edited together… this is not how they intended the audience to feel. Which is all that matters, in the end.

Don’t get me wrong, solid ideas all around. But they simply swerve too much into the “Fast & Furious” territory, which “Dead Reckoning” unfortunately entered a couple times. With too much luck involved.

My scenario of The Entity directing Ethan to the cliff would have been in line with the villains thinking that he wouldn’t pull off a massive stunt. They like to watch him struggle, instead of just killing him. The Entity would think that he can only watch from afar as the train rides by, unable to do anything. Only for Ethan to pull off the jump and miraculously end up saving Grace at the last second. Then in Part 2 we would have them using analog comms that they did in the third act here. It would make more sense to come up with this solution between movies, having learnt from their mistakes.

Also, Ethan was missing a proper ticking clock. We should have had Benji (revealed to be The Entity) give him directions as we follow him doing a 1-minute ongoing run with the motocross as the time runs out. Then we learn that it’s The Entity and have him go another minute on a different terrain, until he reaches the cliff. Right now we had random snippets, but with a great soundtrack it would have rivalled other motorcycle scenes in the franchise. He could have had Grace’s situation in his ear because I don’t understand why that wouldn’t be the case. Haven’t they had invisible microphones in their ears or anywhere on them since forever? Right now they had no idea what was going on inside the train. The leap should have happened because Ethan knows for a fact that the deal with Kittridge is done. Which means she has taken the key from him as planned and is about to be caught. What I’m getting at is if the character’s urgency is unjustified, it disconnects the audience from his sense of urgency. It’s like a friend looking for something but until he doesn’t clue you in to the gravity of the situation, you’ll never empathise with his frantic state.

Directing Ethan to the ledge, The Entity should have simultaneously been kidnapping Benji in his autonomous vehicle. We would learn of it afterwards. Only once Ethan is on the ledge would he learn that Benji has been taken. So that he takes the leap at a moment where everything seems truly lost. Going into Part 2, Benji would have been taken hostage. Well, perhaps it didn’t take over the car because they wanted to show that it does have limits. As was the case with the submarine, where it also didn’t have full control.

Speaking of limits, I did like the well-timed plan antagonists had that isn’t out of the realm of possibility. But the fall to the mattress Gabriel did at that speed? That kinda stuff takes me out of the movie. He should have fell into a river because the physics here just made no sense, which is very unlike ‘the missions’. Plus, I don’t get why the bad guys always have to have these super thought out plans that make everything look so easy. Aren’t they supposed to be fanatics, willing to die for their mission just like the good guys?

That being said, I thought the actor Esai Morales did a great job with what he had. The small gesture checking his watch before the fight on top of the train, as if wondering whether he has a minute to use a restroom before heading out. “Sure, I have a minute to kill” sort of a moment. Only small nitpick I had was about one or two jumps he did on top of the train. In such a situation, you might wanna keep your weight down.

Nicholas Hoult was the initial choice for Gabriel, a supposed younger mirror to Ethan as he looks more like Cruise. He also has a steely look suitable for an AI henchman, which is surely why he will be our new Lex Luthor in James Gunn’s “Superman: Legacy”. But I think the dynamic here with Morales is more interesting. He brings a warmer presence representing the AI, which makes it feel all the more manipulative. The movies will have an increasing amount of antiheroes because this is the most popular character archetype in the current Golden Age of Television. Thus, I see future antagonists not being so damn obvious in their demeanour. There should be a reason why governments and other third party factions would want to side with them. Their intentions should seem benevolent.

I was still a bit confused what exactly did they need to know from Gabriel. “What the key unlocks?” Why not just go to the submarine, unlock the damn thing and see for yourself? Maybe I’m missing something super obvious here, but I feel a better reason would have been to know where it is and how to unlock it. It could have been that Ethan doesn’t know how to pull off a heist on the submarine. He has no blueprints and it’s a bit difficult to to plan a heist without knowing the security measures for you to beat. The countries would still have that information, so in Part 2 Ethan would have to work with Gabriel in order to stay one step ahead. The tension would come from the audience thinking that this is exactly what The Entity wants — for them to break in together. But again, I digress.

All that Gabriel business aside, it’s always compelling for the protagonist to be choosing between the mission and revenge. Which is what the whole third film of my trilogy will be about. Speaking of which, to conclude the review…

Missions of my own

Dear Reckoning has one very surprising similarity to the M:I trilogy I’ve been developing since 2018 and particularly to the TV show included in the trilogy. Namely, “Dead Reckoning” retconned Ethan and the rest of the IMF into former criminals. Which begs a question — why would the heads of the agency ever trust such a person? They must have better sources for finding willing bodies. Especially back in the 90s, when Ethan was getting started, nationalism prevailed over individualism.

Set in 2030s, my own trilogy will be dealing with the lack of operatives like Ethan. Due to certain socioeconomic trends, the intelligence agencies will have a small pool of candidates to pull from. As a result, they are forced to settle for those without a choice. My trilogy compares the psychology of such criminals who were recruited through coercion in the 2010s and 2020s to the new protagonist with an actual sense of purpose. Ethan falls into both categories. I explore how those with nothing to lose would be too careless with their lives.

At first this nonchalance towards one’s own life was thought to be the most valuable trait Ethan had. The reason he went for the crazy stunt over sacrificing even one person, which has become his defining characteristic. But this eventually turns out to be a false assumption. Other highly trained agents they recruited in 2010s and 2020s had suicidal tendencies and as such, they have a short life expectancy. Costing the agencies a lot of money because as they said about Jason Bourne, he’s a “30 million malfunctioning weapon”. A simple wish to live has been driven out of them due to their rigorous training program. They have nothing but work and in contrast to the 90s, they don’t feel any camaraderie. They also lack sense of purpose because an average person nowadays does feel increasingly powerless. Mirroring why real people who are alone and burn out often fall into depression. As a result, just like any civilian might have a heart attack or become suicidal due to work, the operatives here wouldn’t care if they were to die during a mission.

By the 2030s, the agencies have altered their views. They had missed a crucial ingredient that was alluded to in Fallout by Julia (paraphrasing): “who’s watching over the world while Ethan’s watching over me?” Trying to create more Ethans, they realise that in addition to courage he also knows he has to survive. He cannot trust anyone else to have a good enough moral compass. So subconsciously he would still take calculated risks. Instead of criminals, they instead start looking into civilians with certain altruistic aspirations and natural talents.

My protagonist fits the bill. But then the next question arises. Is it better for him to have something or someone to fight for? Or is it better if he has nothing left to lose? A similar character study to “The Dark Knight Rises” where they asked “How can you fight longer than possible without the fear of death?” But at the same time, to live this life and pull off stunts like Ethan, he has to have some amount of indifference regarding his own life. So there’s a fine line between the two mindsets that our protagonist will be walking. Him fluctuating between the two depends on how strongly he believes that he can return to his former civilian life. Surprisingly similar to Grace’s tipping point in “Dead Reckoning”.

Once Grace realises her former life is over, she becomes much more self-sacrificial and ready to risk her life on the train. Going so far as to agree to go without lenses. Yes, that is the biggest overlook in the movie. Why did she have wide brown eyes completely dissimilar to White Widow that she’s supposed to be playing?! Alright, I’m done ranting.

Even though this here will fall on deaf ears because of how long this review is, hopefully it is crystal clear that I still immensely enjoyed the movie. Having now seen it enough times to be all analytical about it. But as a fan of the franchise, I needed to properly vent. Looking forward to the next one. In other words… keep ’em coming, Cruise & McQuarrie.