'Mission: Impossible — The Final Reckoning' review: Self-indulgence overshadows spectacle in Tom Cruise film
But while Mission: Impossible — The Final Reckoning was crafted for the thrills, a messy story flattens its impact. Sure, these films are about spectacle, but visual delight can be overshadowed by self-indulgence.
Mission: Impossible — The Final Reckoning release date: May 23Cast: Tom Cruise, Hayley Atwell, Ving Rhames, Simon Pegg, Esai Morales, Pom Klementieff, Henry Czerny, Holt McCallany, Janet McTeer, Nick Offerman, Hannah Waddingham, Tramell Tillman, Angela Bassett, Shea Whigham, Greg Tarzan Davis, Charles Parnell, Mark Gatiss, with Rolf Saxon, Lucy TulugarjukDirector: Christopher McQuarrieRuntime: 169 minutes
Mission: Impossible — The Final Reckoning begins two months after the previous film, Mission: Impossible — Dead Reckoning, with Ethan striving to take down the Entity, AI threatening the world with nuclear annihilation. With the key in hand to take down this threat, he only has 72 hours to do so.
Working with a team that includes Grace (Hayley Atwell), Luther (Ving Rhames) and Benji (Simon Pegg), only Ethan can save the world.
Mission: Impossible — The Final Reckoning certainly harkens back to the big blockbuster movies of the past, where you're going to get the immense pleasure of a thrilling adventure with impressive visuals on the big screen. And that still holds true for this movie.
As we approach the end of the film, that's where the high-octane, stress-inducing nature of the story really shines through. And of course, much of that has to do with the impressive biplane stunt, where Cruise is hanging off the wing of a plane, facing winds of more than 225 km/h. But that thrill is too late in the runtime to save the rest of the film.
There are many elements in Mission: Impossible — The Final Reckoning that make it feel too much like a vanity project for Cruise. Yes, Cruise is a superstar, but there's just so much you can take being constantly reminded that only Ethan can save the world.
We get it, the repetition is unnecessary and distracting.
Overall, Mission: Impossible — The Final Reckoning just feels clunky and overstuffed, particularly when it includes several flashbacks that completely take you out of the flow of any narrative. Worst of all, not of it is necessary for anyone who's seen the previous films, but they're also likely to not provide enough context for any newbies in the audience. They're useless montages that are masquerading as some sort of fan service to remember the past.
While some have argued that you go to a Mission: Impossible movie for spectacle not the plot, that's never been my way of evaluating movies. The messy story here takes the fun out of the spectacle.
It also feels like this movie has lost all self-awareness. The situations setup in this franchise are oftentimes just silly, and Mission: Impossible — The Final Reckoning largely misses any humour.
But you can't deny the impact of that plane sequence, which really is the element that saves this otherwise directionless, chaotic film.
Hashtags

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


Geek Wire
4 hours ago
- Geek Wire
Have we hit ‘Peak AI'? Microsoft, Amazon, and a pivotal week for Seattle tech
This week on the GeekWire Podcast: Microsoft soars past Wall Street expectations, briefly hitting a $4 trillion valuation, while Amazon faces sharper scrutiny over its AI strategy. We break down the contrasting earnings results, analyst reactions, and what it all means for the future of AI — and Seattle's place in it. Plus: insights from Microsoft's Mustafa Suleyman on the future of Copilot, a throwback lesson from the Zune era, and a guestbook entry that shows just how mainstream ChatGPT has become. Related stories and links Recommended listens (final segment) Subscribe to GeekWire in Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you listen.
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
We must lead AI revolution or be damned, says Muslim leader
Muslims must take charge of artificial intelligence or 'be damned' as a marginalised community, the head of the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) has said in a leaked video. Dr Wajid Akhter, the general secretary of the MCB, said Muslims and their children risked missing the AI revolution in the same way as they had been left behind in the computer and social media revolutions. He added that while Muslims had historically been at the forefront of civilisation and were credited with some of the greatest scientific advances, they had ended up as the butt' of jokes in the modern world after failing to play a part in the latest technological revolutions. 'We already missed the industrial revolution. We missed the computer revolution. We missed the social media revolution. We will be damned and our children will damn us if we miss the AI revolution. We must take a lead,' said Dr Akther. Speaking at the MCB's AI and the Muslim Community conference on July 19, he added: 'AI needs Islam, it needs Muslims to step up.' Scientists 'made fun of' faith at computer launch Dr Akther recalled how at the launch of one of the world's earliest computers, the Mark II , US scientists brought out a prayer mat aligned towards Mecca. 'They were making fun of all religions because they felt that they had now achieved the age of reason and science and technology and we don't need that superstition any more,' he said. 'And so to show that they had achieved mastery over religion, they decided to make fun and they chose our faith. 'How did we go from a people who gave the world the most beautiful buildings, science, technology, medicine, arts to being a joke? 'I'll tell you one thing – the next time that the world is going through a revolution, the next time they go to flip that switch, they will also pull out a prayer mat and they will also line it towards the Qibla [the direction towards Mecca] and they will also pray, but this time, not to make fun of us, they will do so because they are us.' Government eases stance on MCB Dr Akther also told his audience: 'We lost each other. And ever since we lost each other, we've been falling. We've been falling ever since. We are people now who are forced, we are forced by Allah to watch the genocide of our brothers and sisters in Gaza. 'This is a punishment for us if we know it. We are people who are forced to beg the ones who are doing the killing to stop it. We are people who are two billion strong but cannot even get one bottle of water into Gaza.' Dr Akhter said Gaza had 'woken' Muslims up and showed they needed to unite. 'We will continue to fall until the day we realise that only when we are united will we be able to reverse this. Until the day we realise that we need to sacrifice for this unity,' he added. British governments have maintained a policy of 'non-engagement' with the MCB since 2009 based on claims, disputed by the council, that some of its officials have previously made extremist comments. However, Angela Rayner, the Deputy Prime Minister, is drawing up a new official definition of Islamophobia, and last week it emerged the consultation has been thrown open to all groups including the MCB. Earlier this year, Sir Stephen Timms, a minister in the Department for Work and Pensions, was one of four Labour MPs to attend an MCB event. The MCB has been approached for comment. Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
Meta chief AI scientist Yann LeCun says Elon Musk risks 'killing breakthrough innovation' at xAI. Here's why.
Meta's Yann LeCun disagrees with Elon Musk about the role of researchers at AI companies. Musk earlier said xAI is ditching the "researcher" job title in favor of "engineers." LeCun said ignoring the distinction between them could risk "killing breakthrough innovation." Meta's chief AI scientist, Yann LeCun, doesn't agree with Elon Musk's latest take on AI development. Like, at all. Musk sparked a conversation about the roles of researchers and engineers at tech companies on Tuesday in an X post. Musk said his AI startup, xAI, would ditch the "researcher" job title in favor of "engineer." "This false nomenclature of 'researcher' and 'engineer', which is a thinly-masked way of describing a two-tier engineering system, is being deleted from @xAI today," Musk said. "There are only engineers. Researcher is a relic term from academia." Two days later, LeCun shared a screenshot of Musk's X post on LinkedIn with a multi-paragraph response. "If you make no distinction between the two activities, if you don't evaluate researchers and engineers with different criteria, you run the risk of killing breakthrough innovation," LeCun said. "True breakthroughs require teams with a long horizon and minimal constraints from product development and management." Musk isn't the first person to question the distinction between AI researchers and engineers. Other leading AI companies have, too. In a 2023 X post, OpenAI President Greg Brockman said that the company didn't want to put its workers into such defined buckets. Instead, the ChatGPT-maker settled on the phrase "Member of Technical Staff." Anthropic, which makes Claude, also uses "Member of Technical Staff" as a job title. "While there's historically been a division between engineering and research in machine learning, we think that boundary has dissolved with the advent of large models," Anthropic says on its careers page. LeCun, however, says the research labs that shaped what the science and tech industries have become were all separate from engineering divisions. "The industry research labs of yore that have left an indelible mark on scientific and technological progress (Bell Labs Area 11, IBM Research, Xerox PARC, etc) were all research divisions that were clearly separate from engineering divisions," LeCun said. Read the original article on Business Insider