May 22, 2025

The Highs and Lows of Action: Reviewing 'Mission Impossible: The Final Reckoning'

The Highs and Lows of Action: Reviewing 'Mission Impossible: The Final Reckoning'
Apple Podcasts Spotify Youtube Music Spreaker PocketCasts TuneIn Overcast Castro RSS Feed
Apple Podcasts podcast player icon Apple Podcasts Apple Podcasts Spotify podcast player icon Spotify Spotify Youtube Music podcast player icon Youtube Music Youtube Music Spreaker podcast player icon Spreaker Spreaker PocketCasts podcast player icon PocketCasts PocketCasts TuneIn podcast player icon TuneIn TuneIn Overcast podcast player icon Overcast Overcast Castro podcast player icon Castro Castro RSS Feed podcast player icon RSS Feed RSS Feed
Season 1

In this episode of *Movies First*, we dissect the latest installment of the iconic *Mission Impossible* franchise, *The Final Reckoning* , which has grossed over $4 billion across eight films. Despite the thrilling stunts and breathtaking visuals—like Tom Chris soaring in biplanes over South Africa and diving into the depths of the Bering Sea—the film struggles under the weight of a bloated storyline that leaves audiences wanting more.

We explore how the film attempts to blend the intimate espionage of its predecessors with a sprawling technological threat posed by an AI known as the Entity. However, the pacing falters, especially during lengthy underwater sequences that feel drawn out and tedious. While the chemistry among the regulars—Cruise, Simon Pegg, and Ving Rhames—remains intact, and Hallie Atwell's character Chris shows promise, the script's heavy-handed approach to character development detracts from the series' hallmark of subtle storytelling.

The episode also examines the new villain, ASAI Morales as Martinelli, and how he compares to the franchise's more memorable antagonists. While capable, Morales fails to evoke the same level of engagement as previous foes, leaving the conflict feeling mechanical rather than personal. We discuss how the film's shift from sophisticated heists to world-ending stakes has diluted the original spirit that fans cherished.

With a score of 6 out of 10 , *The Final Reckoning* offers a spectacle worth witnessing in theaters, especially for those who appreciate practical stunts. However, we caution viewers to temper their expectations regarding the story and pacing. Join us for an insightful discussion that reflects on the evolution of this beloved franchise and the bittersweet end of an era in action filmmaking!
https://www.bitesz.com/podcast/movies-first

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/movies-first

WEBVTT

1
00:00:00.160 --> 00:00:03.960
Mission Impossible has pulled in over four billion dollars across

2
00:00:04.040 --> 00:00:08.160
eight films. But here's the surprising part. The latest installment

3
00:00:08.279 --> 00:00:12.080
might prove that even Tom Cruise's death defying stunts can't

4
00:00:12.119 --> 00:00:14.480
save a bloated storyline.

5
00:00:14.519 --> 00:00:17.000
That's quite a statement about a franchise that's been thrilling

6
00:00:17.039 --> 00:00:18.920
audiences for nearly thirty years.

7
00:00:19.519 --> 00:00:20.600
What makes this one different?

8
00:00:22.000 --> 00:00:25.399
Well, imagine having all the ingredients for an amazing meal,

9
00:00:26.160 --> 00:00:30.960
but somehow the flavors just don't come together. Dead Reckoning

10
00:00:31.679 --> 00:00:35.240
Part two has Cruise flying biplanes over South Africa and

11
00:00:35.320 --> 00:00:38.000
diving to the depths of the Baring Sea, but the

12
00:00:38.039 --> 00:00:39.200
pacing feels off.

13
00:00:40.000 --> 00:00:42.560
The underwater sequence, for instance, goes.

14
00:00:42.320 --> 00:00:44.479
On so long you might think you're actually stuck in

15
00:00:44.520 --> 00:00:46.000
that submarine with him.

16
00:00:46.439 --> 00:00:49.200
So the spectacle is there, but the substance is lacking.

17
00:00:50.200 --> 00:00:53.159
How does the story actually set up these elaborate sequences?

18
00:00:54.640 --> 00:00:54.840
You know?

19
00:00:54.880 --> 00:00:57.679
That's where things get interesting and honestly a bit messy.

20
00:00:58.479 --> 00:01:02.200
The plot centers around this AI, called the entity that's

21
00:01:02.240 --> 00:01:05.840
taken control of nuclear facilities in almost every country except four.

22
00:01:06.400 --> 00:01:09.879
It's like they're trying to combine the intimate espionage of

23
00:01:09.920 --> 00:01:13.920
the earlier films with this massive technological threat and it

24
00:01:13.920 --> 00:01:14.760
doesn't quite work.

25
00:01:15.680 --> 00:01:15.920
Hmm.

26
00:01:16.920 --> 00:01:19.200
That's quite a shift from the more grounded heists and

27
00:01:19.200 --> 00:01:21.959
spy work of the original film. How does the team

28
00:01:22.040 --> 00:01:22.920
dynamic hold up?

29
00:01:23.879 --> 00:01:27.120
The chemistry between the regulars Cruz, Simon, Peg and Ving

30
00:01:27.239 --> 00:01:30.280
Raims is still there, and Haley Atwell's grace has really

31
00:01:30.280 --> 00:01:33.799
found her footing. There's this clever early scene where she

32
00:01:33.879 --> 00:01:36.799
and Hunt get trapped by the villain Martinelli, and their

33
00:01:36.879 --> 00:01:41.000
scape shows that old mission impossible ingenuity. But then the

34
00:01:41.000 --> 00:01:43.280
script keeps hammering home what a good guy Hunt is,

35
00:01:43.879 --> 00:01:46.359
almost like they're writing his eulogy.

36
00:01:46.560 --> 00:01:49.920
That's fascinating because the series has usually let actions speak

37
00:01:49.959 --> 00:01:52.959
louder than words. Do you think they're trying too hard

38
00:01:53.000 --> 00:01:54.719
to make this feel like a definitive ending?

39
00:01:55.879 --> 00:01:56.599
Exactly right.

40
00:01:57.000 --> 00:02:00.239
They even throw in these rapid fire flashback sequences of

41
00:02:00.319 --> 00:02:04.079
everything Hunt's been through, like a Greatest Hits compilation nobody

42
00:02:04.159 --> 00:02:04.640
asked for.

43
00:02:05.079 --> 00:02:07.879
And get this, they pull that classic.

44
00:02:07.519 --> 00:02:11.319
Move of having a fan favorite character seemingly die but

45
00:02:11.400 --> 00:02:14.039
with just enough ambiguity to bring them back if the

46
00:02:14.120 --> 00:02:16.000
box office numbers look good.

47
00:02:16.520 --> 00:02:19.520
Let's talk about Assi Morales as Martinelli. How does he

48
00:02:19.599 --> 00:02:22.319
stack up against previous Mission Impossible villains.

49
00:02:23.560 --> 00:02:27.080
Well, here's the thing. While Morales is certainly capable, he

50
00:02:27.159 --> 00:02:31.120
never reaches the memorable heights of Philip Seymour Hoffman's Owen

51
00:02:31.199 --> 00:02:36.680
Davian or Sean Harris's Solomon Lane. The conflict feels mechanical

52
00:02:36.759 --> 00:02:42.039
rather than personal. Even during that spectacular biplane sequence, it's

53
00:02:42.080 --> 00:02:44.800
like they were so focused on the stunts that they

54
00:02:44.840 --> 00:02:47.360
forgot to give us a reason to care about the outcome.

55
00:02:48.280 --> 00:02:51.039
That must be disappointing for longtime fans who've come to

56
00:02:51.120 --> 00:02:53.439
expect complex antagonists from the series.

57
00:02:54.520 --> 00:02:59.759
You know what's really interesting. The original Mission Impossible was

58
00:02:59.800 --> 00:03:03.479
a essentially a sophisticated heist movie with some high tech elements.

59
00:03:04.000 --> 00:03:08.439
Now we're dealing with world ending AI threats and nuclear annihilation.

60
00:03:09.199 --> 00:03:12.639
The stunts have gotten bigger, and they are impressive, but

61
00:03:12.759 --> 00:03:15.039
something of that original spirit has been lost.

62
00:03:16.319 --> 00:03:21.199
So what's the final verdict? Worth seeing in theaters? Here's

63
00:03:21.199 --> 00:03:21.639
my take.

64
00:03:22.240 --> 00:03:24.840
If you're a fan of practical stunts and action sequences,

65
00:03:25.159 --> 00:03:26.520
it's worth the ticket price.

66
00:03:27.240 --> 00:03:28.960
Watching a sixty one year old Tom.

67
00:03:28.800 --> 00:03:33.639
Cruise actually pilot those biplanes is genuinely impressive. But go

68
00:03:33.759 --> 00:03:36.960
in knowing that while the spectacle is there. The story

69
00:03:36.960 --> 00:03:40.479
and pacing needed more work in the editing room. It's

70
00:03:40.520 --> 00:03:43.360
like they forgot that sometimes the most thrilling moments come

71
00:03:43.360 --> 00:03:45.599
from the smaller, more personal stakes.

72
00:03:46.080 --> 00:03:48.280
That's quite a journey for a franchise that started with

73
00:03:48.319 --> 00:03:51.000
a simple CIA break in back in nineteen ninety six.

74
00:03:51.840 --> 00:03:53.840
And that's really the bittersweet part of all this.

75
00:03:54.759 --> 00:03:58.159
Even if this isn't truly the final mission, and let's

76
00:03:58.199 --> 00:04:01.240
be honest, Hollywood rarely meets it when they say final,

77
00:04:01.919 --> 00:04:05.280
it represents the end of an era in action filmmaking

78
00:04:06.240 --> 00:04:09.520
in a world where CGI dominates. Crews and his team

79
00:04:09.560 --> 00:04:13.759
have consistently pushed the boundaries of what's possible with practical effects.

80
00:04:14.599 --> 00:04:18.759
That commitment deserves respect, even if this particular mission didn't

81
00:04:18.800 --> 00:04:21.959
quite accomplish its objective. I hate to say it, but

82
00:04:22.000 --> 00:04:24.160
we're only giving this a six out of ten score.

83
00:04:24.600 --> 00:04:30.959
You've been listening to movies first available at Apple Podcasts, Spotify, iHeartRadio,

84
00:04:31.279 --> 00:04:34.319
or your favorite podcast player. You can also stream on

85
00:04:34.399 --> 00:04:37.680
demand at bytes dot com. This has been another quality

86
00:04:37.720 --> 00:04:41.120
podcast production from bites dot com.