‘Mission: Impossible — The Final Reckoning' Review: Tom Cruise Flies High in a Thrillingly Doom-Laden Series Grand Finale
In the don't-try-this-at-home climax of 'Mission: Impossible — The Final Reckoning,' the thrillingly doom-laden last chapter of the 'M:I' series, Tom Cruise does something you expect — he's featured in the kind of elaborate stunt sequence that's become this 30-year-old series' trademark — but he also does something you may not expect. He tops himself in the most outrageous way. He literally flies beyond all the stunts he's done before, leaving us in an exhilarated state of awe.
Cruise, as the unstoppable IMF agent Ethan Hunt, is trying to catch up with Gabriel (Esai Morales), the film's serviceably sinister villain, who wants to gain control of the Entity, the film's apocalyptic projection of artificial intelligence and everything it's capable of — like initiating global nuclear war, just because it can. Hanging around Gabriel's neck is the digital 'poison pill' created by Ving Rhames' tech wizard Luther. If Ethan can get his hands on that device and slip it into the podkova (a gadget the size of a cell phone that contains the Entity's source code), he can trigger the end of the Entity's power. The two men are in primitive propeller planes. Gabriel is flying a yellow-and-black one, and Ethan…well, he has climbed aboard a red one with a bad-guy pilot, and as the planes zoom through a sunlit canyon and then out into the open air, he attempts to gain control of it.
More from Variety
'Loveless' and 'Leviathan' Filmmaker Andrey Zvyagintsev Sets Next Movie 'Minotaur' With MK2, CG Cinema (EXCLUSIVE)
Quentin Tarantino Gives Advice to Young Filmmakers at Cannes: 'You Only Have So Much Time' on Set. 'How You Use' It 'Will Define You'
Sylvie Pialat, Producer of Cannes' Opening Film 'Leave One Day,' Sets Projects With Directors Emmanuelle Bercot, Atiq Rahimi and Gustav Kervern (EXCLUSIVE)
This means walking on the wing and dangling from a thin bar and wriggling his way from the passenger seat into the cockpit, all while the plane is rocketing forward. When I've seen barnstorming daredevil plane sequences, like in 'The Great Waldo Pepper,' the stunt people up there tend to be quite staid. But Tom Cruise, filmed in drop-dead close-up, scrambles around that plane as if it were a set of monkey bars, his face mashed into rubber by the G-force of the wind, the grassland stretching out a mile below him. After tossing out the pilot, he slithers onto Gabriel's yellow plane, and that's when the action becomes too dizzying for words. Cruise is crawling over the plane, and now it's tilting sideways, nearly upside down, so he's hanging off it, and I was literally gawking at the screen going, 'How in God's name did he do this?' Because what we're seeing looks…impossible.
And here's what fuses it all. Two years ago, when Cruise took that motorcycle sky dive off a cliff in 'Dead Reckoning Part One,' it was impressive, to be sure, but all I remember experiencing was the abstract physical daring of it. In 'The Final Reckoning,' Cruise is doing something on that plane that no stunt person could do as well — he's acting. He bends his limbs around the metal with every fiber of his fear and desire, showing us the ferocity of Ethan's will to defeat evil, which matches up with Cruise's own will not just to entertain us but to leave us in a state of rapt disbelief. In 'The Final Reckoning,' Tom Cruise is out to save movies as much as Ethan Hunt is out to save the world. He's doing what he does on that plane so that we don't have to.
Up until then, 'The Final Reckoning' is more of a churning slow burn. Yet the film is good enough to remind you how much fun it is when something is truly at stake in a high-flying, twisty-plotted, solemnly preposterous popcorn movie. There are moments when 'The Final Reckoning' is preposterous — I'd say knowingly so, though at the screening I attended there was derisive hipster laughter. No one would claim that this is the breeziest of the 'M:I' films. The sequences that I remember most fondly from the series have a nimble sense of play — Cruise hanging from a wire in that breathless heist in the first 'Mission: Impossible,' his vertiginous suction-cup scaling of the Burj Khalifa in 'Ghost Protocol,' all the trap-door tuxedo-party deceptions. 'The Final Reckoning' is two hours and 49 minutes long, and it grinds along with a furrowed-brow anxiety about the precariousness of civilization in the age of omnipotent technology.
Yet that gravitas works for the movie. A.I. was merely a creeping threat in 'Dead Reckoning.' Here it's a specter whose time has arrived, and that's part of what makes this a more potent adventure. A line that keeps getting repeated by members of the IMF team (and becomes a running joke) is 'We'll figure it out.' And that means: When the world hangs by a thread, necessity will always be the mother of split-second espionage invention. 'The Final Reckoning' is an ode to winging it.
By now we've seen more than enough movies turn on the prospect of the planet being destroyed, and that doesn't automatically mean there's anything at stake in them. (Just think of such empty vessels of end-of-the-world action as 'Armageddon' or 'X-Men: Apocalypse.') But in 'The Final Reckoning,' Cruise and his 'M:I' partner and director, Christopher McQuarrie, ratchet up the doomsday fervor with enough conviction — and obsession — to carry you along on hairpin turns of suspense. The film glances back, in several quick-cut montages, to all seven of the series' previous films, taking Ethan's defining trait — his propensity to go rogue, which of course is what he does when he can't accomplish his mission any other way — and folding that into the film's symphonic sense of peril. The Entity, which is presented as the logical culmination of A.I. (i.e., a force that isn't necessarily going to be on our side), is out to control everything, to tap into the world's nuclear-weapons systems and destroy the human race. Total power is the outgrowth of its intelligence. But Ethan is almost a cousin of A.I. — over and over, he has been someone willing to gamble with the fate of the world.
'The Final Reckoning' has a few patchy moments, but I think it's the most enveloping entry in the series since 'Ghost Protocol,' because it finds a new way to make the impossible elating. Instead of fooling us with rubber masks and digital illusion, the film is all about pushing outlandish situations to the wall, where Ethan has to act at a split second's notice. Early on he's captured, along with Hayley Atwell's debonair Grace, and as they sit in a dungeon in handcuffs, he teases out a fake molar that will toxify him if he bites into it; that proves to be the way out. After a while, Ethan comes in from the cold, appearing at a meeting led by the U.S. president, Erika Sloane (Angela Bassett), as the IMF-head-turned-CIA suit Eugene Kittridge (Henry Czerny) and other dour brass look on disapprovingly. Ethan asks to be given control of an aircraft carrier (named after George H.W. Bush — a bit of we-didn't-know-how-good-we-had-it nostalgia geared to the age of Trump), and the president gives him the approval…on the sly.
It's here that the film turns into a very different sort of mission, a dense action caper set in the frozen sea. William Donloe (Rolf Saxon), a defrocked CIA analyst who was exiled after Ethan's heist in the first film, returns. He's the one who knows the exact location of the Russian submarine that was tricked by the Entity into blowing itself up at the start of 'Dead Reckoning' — and that's where they'll find the Entity's source code.
The sequence where Ethan dives deep into the Bering Sea to burrow into the carcass of that submarine has the kind of quiet floating logistical majesty I loved as a kid in the underwater sequences of 'Thunderball.' The submarine, jogged by Ethan's weight, keeps creaking and falling and turning, spilling water around inside, which gives the sequence, slow as it is, a spectral enchantment. But the film also has plenty of down-to-the-wire tension, as when Benji (Simon Pegg) directs a bomb defusion through the fog of his collapsing lung. And it's the hellbent jacked sincerity of Cruise's movie-star performance that makes it all mean something. Ethan's loyalty has become a major theme (he won't leave one of his team members behind), but despite the game contributions of Atwell and Rhames, whose Luther delivers the series' moving sendoff, Ethan has rarely been out on his own the way he is here.
Is this truly the series' final reckoning? We're now in an era where John Wick can snap back to life, and where even the death of James Bond, in 'No Time to Die' (a movie that feels like a cousin to this one — though I think 'Final Reckoning' is better), came off like a parlor trick. I expect 'The Final Reckoning' will prove to be one of the must-see movies of the summer, and at the end of it Ethan Hunt is very much alive. Yet an element of the film's power is that it's genuinely saying goodbye to these characters, to that reconfigured 1960s chicanery, to Ethan's more-Bond-than-Bond mojo. Besides, what's Tom Cruise going to do for an encore? In 'The Final Reckoning,' he's more than just the top gun of danger junkies. He has turned the spectacle of doing his own stunts into a popcorn art form.
Best of Variety
The Best Albums of the Decade
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Chicago Tribune
2 hours ago
- Chicago Tribune
Going high or low? Film festivals ‘Summer Camp' and ‘Bleak Week' open on Sunday
Right now at the movies, Tom Cruise, a Hawaiian island dweller and a genetic lab experiment from space are simultaneously agitating and reassuring millions with tales of apocalypse-thwarting derring-do ('Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning') and a loving family in challenging circumstances ('Lilo & Stitch'). It's good news for theater owners, and the perpetually challenged moviegoing tradition. This is good news, too: We have a couple of eccentric film festivals opening this week in Chicago, designed to broaden our options and reexamine some movies past, launching the new month in this nervous breakdown of a year with some striking emotional/visual extremes, careening from darkness to giddy intensity in multiple genres. 'Summer Camp' is what the Siskel Film Center calls its 10-film mini-festival of 'extra-ness,' that adjective courtesy of director of programming Rebecca Fons. The series opens at 1:30 p.m., June 1 with 'Written on the Wind,' director Douglas Sirk's feverish Texas hotbed of repression and psychosexual yearning. A huge hit in 1956, coming off Sirk's previous examples of brilliantly skeptical romantic artifice, this is a melodrama that turns 'mambo' into a verb. Oscar winner Dorothy Malone, as the rabidly carnal oil heiress, not just figuratively but literally mambos her disapproving father into a fatal heart attack. It's a great scene in a dozen ripe, contradictory ways. And that, for many, exemplifies the power of camp in the right filmmakers' hands. From there, the festival struts from a Bette Davis/Joan Crawford smackdown ('Whatever Happened to Baby Jane?' from 1962, directed by Robert Aldrich) to John Waters ('Female Trouble,' 1974, with Divine, of course) to a clever variety of titles ranging from 1933's 'King Kong' and '42nd Street' to the uniquely unhinged 'Boom!' from 1968 and director Joseph Losey. 'Boom!' may star Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton, but the real star, in my view, is the Tiziani label of Rome, whose wardrobe for Taylor is the stuff of waking nightmares. The range of work on screen in 'Summer Camp,' Fons hopes, supports the notion that camp has no fixed definition, only an appetite for life. She says she revisited Susan Sontag's 1964 essay 'Notes on Camp,' which she first devoured in college, for curation tips and as a historical sounding board for her own ideas about cinematic extra-ness. 'I'm always thinking about how movie audiences interact with what's in front of them,' she says. 'For me, camp means a celebration of self, of the extravagance of self. It can be expressed through fashion or just the outward expression of pure emotion, with no shame.' Though it predates the Victorian era by centuries, 'camp' as we now know it, though its definition remains an argument every time, has its roots in the queer Victorian usage of the word. (There's a really good feature on this posted on the United Kingdom National Archive website.) In her essay, Sontag consciously downplayed camp's political and queer aspects, and its sly revolt against the establishment. Its gradual mainstreaming meant something; it was serious business, in the spirit of outré flamboyance. She defined camp as 'playful, anti-serious,' expressing a fundamentally comic or ironic worldview and 'artifice as an ideal.' Also starting June 1, 'Bleak Week' at the Music Box Theatre takes things down a notch, while somehow taking it up, too. The festival moniker comes from the American Cinematheque in Hollywood, which has presented 'Bleak Week' in a big, bittersweet way for four years running. This year, several other art-house and repertory film organizations around the country are getting in on the downbeat, among them the Paris Theater in New York City and the Music Box in Chicago. The 12-film series took a couple of titles from the American Cinematheque's past calendars, while programming the rest with the Cinematheque's blessing. The result is a vivid, surprisingly varied range of bummers, both domestic and foreign, many of them exquisite in their stoic but not heartless dramatizations of a world out to get you, somehow, with forces of doom snaking through the narratives. Some are Hollywood studio classics of the 1970s, such as director Roman Polanski's 'Chinatown' (1974) or, lesser-known but extraordinarily affecting, Jerry Schatzberg's plaintive road movie 'Scarecrow' (1973), pairing Gene Hackman with Al Pacino in a simple story of drifters with an idea to open a car wash. Simple idea, complex and remarkable performance detail: The film was shot in sequence, allowing Hackman and Pacino, actors and recently anointed stars, the time and rhythm to accommodate, however warily, each other's working methods. It wasn't a hit, but 'Scarecrow' knew the score. The late Hackman frequently cited it as his most gratifying film experience. Despair can be really funny, too, and the Coen brothers' 'A Serious Man' (2009) piles misfortune atop misfortune for a University of Minnesota mathematics professor (Michael Stuhlbarg), cuckolding him (Fred Melamed's Sy Abelman is the most soothing bastard in modern American cinema) and eventually forcing him into a stern ethical dilemma around grading time, among other catastrophes. It's the Coens' best film, and yes, I'm not forgetting 'No Country for Old Men,' the one everybody admires more because serial killer movies are easier than mordant comedies of unease. 'Bleak Week' spans the globe, with the infamously grotty late-night dare 'In a Glass Cage' (1986) from Spain's Agusti Villaronga and, from Japan, Akihiro Suzuki's newly restored 1999 sexual odyssey 'Looking for an Angel.' Greece's Yorgos Lanthimos and his black-comic penchant for totalitarian nightmares are represented by 'Dogtooth' (2009). The rest of the offerings fill out the slate's idea of what bleak means to this director, and that one, and why despair comes in more than one shade of grey. The Music Box has big expansion plans, recently announced, thanks to a $1.2 million community development grant from the City of Chicago. The Southport Avenue landmark is adding a 100-seat theater to complement its existing 700-seat auditorium and the 60-seater built a few years ago, located across from the concession counter. The third theater will replace two storefront units immediately south of the Music Box main entrance. Managing director Ryan Oestreich says it'll be a $2.6 million project overall, as the theater renovates its restrooms to double the capacity. Target completion date is summer 2026. 'We're future-proofing ourselves,' he says, 'because our audience is growing. The new screen will allow us to better juggle the two sides of our programming, the repertory side and the new releases.' 'Bleak Week,' he says, is 'an experiment. But if you play the same hand over and over again, does that help the cinema experience in Chicago? It does not.'


Entrepreneur
7 hours ago
- Entrepreneur
When AI Meets Climate: Powering Progress Without Burning the Planet
Artificial Intelligence (AI) stands as a beacon of innovation, offering transformative advances across almost every sector. But as AI becomes more powerful and more pervasive, it brings with it a growing dilemma: its hunger for energy. Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own. You're reading Entrepreneur United Kingdom, an international franchise of Entrepreneur Media. According to the IMF and other global observers, AI is becoming an increasingly large contributor to energy demand, driven by massive data centres, high-intensity model training, and real-time inference at scale. The question is no longer whether AI will impact the climate, it's how we ensure it helps rather than harms. Training a single large language model can consume as much energy as a small town uses in a week. As deployment scales across healthcare, finance, manufacturing and government, global data centre energy demand is expected to more than double by 2030. This growth is unsustainable without significant changes to infrastructure, regulation, and design philosophy. Ironically, some of the most promising use cases for AI are in making other systems more energy-efficient: Smart energy grids using AI for demand forecasting and renewable energy balancing using AI for demand forecasting and renewable energy balancing Building automation systems that optimise lighting, heating and cooling in real time that optimise lighting, heating and cooling in real time AI-enhanced chip design reducing the energy footprint of next-generation hardware reducing the energy footprint of next-generation hardware AI for battery management, as with Apple's new AI-powered system in iOS 19, which extends battery life by intelligently learning user behaviour We're also seeing innovations in neuromorphic computing and event-driven AI models (e.g. the Spiking Neural Network) which consume drastically less energy than traditional deep learning models, in some cases, approaching the efficiency of biological systems. In these scenarios, AI doesn't just "offset" its own footprint. It could eliminate meaningful power usage altogether, particularly when deployed on-device or in ultra-low-power environments like edge IoT. So, should AI have an energy label? Yes, and urgently. Consumers now expect energy ratings on fridges, washing machines and televisions. Shouldn't we expect the same transparency for AI? Imagine an AI system with an Energy Impact Rating, clearly indicating: Model training cost in kWh Inference energy per user session Hosting efficiency (green hosting or fossil-based? This would: Help customers and businesses choose responsibly Push vendors to optimise for energy as well as performance Allow regulators to set efficiency standards for AI For AI to continue driving economic growth without derailing net-zero targets, we need a shared response: Policymakers must create incentives for energy-efficient model design and deployment. Companies should disclose the energy use of their AI systems, not just the outcomes. Developers must bake energy constraints into their system design from day one. Investors should ask not only, "What can this model do?" but "What does it cost the planet to do it?" AI won't magically reach a zero-carbon footprint. But if we pair it with smart legislation, innovative engineering, and greater public transparency, it can become one of the greatest climate tools we have. The question is: will we demand it?
Yahoo
10 hours ago
- Yahoo
Jon Hamm Admits He Would Have Done Anything for Role in 'Top Gun: Maverick'
Jon Hamm had no problem not being the 'star' of the 2022 action film Top Gun: Maverick. On the heels of his massive success on the AMC drama series Mad Men, the actor told GQ magazine that he just wanted to work on projects that were meaningful to him. 'I knew it would be unlikely to have another experience like Mad Men,' Hamm told the outlet in a May 2025 interview. 'And I was okay with that. Some people don't even get the one. So I got one. I got all the awards I needed. [After it ended] I was like, 'I'm good.' I just want to work with people I find compelling.' Hamm also revealed that he did what he had to do to get cast in the 2022 Top Gun sequel. 'That was an interesting one, because there's no mistaking who's the star of that movie,' he said of the film's lead, Tom Cruise. 'I saw the original film when I was 14 years old. So, I would've f---ing made coffee on that set.' 'My agents were like, 'I don't know—it's not a very big part. Do you really want to do this?'' the actor added. 'And I go, 'Dude, it's Top Gun 2. Like, what?' That movie meant a lot to me personally. I told them, 'If you guys f--- this deal, you're all fired.'' In the sequel to the 1986 film Top Gun, Hamm played Vice Admiral Beau 'Cyclone' Simpson opposite Cruise's Captain Pete 'Maverick' Mitchell. The film, released in May 2022, was a massive box office hit, grossing $1.48 billion worldwide, per CNBC. Cruise has not ruled out a third run for the Top Gun franchise. In May 2025, he told the Today Show Australia he had several ideas in the works. 'We're thinking and talking about many different stories and what could we do and what's possible. It took me 35 years to figure out Top Gun: Maverick, so all of these things we're working on, we're discussing Days of Thunder and Top Gun: Maverick,' the actor said.