Mission: Impossible (1996)

I’ve come to find it refreshing to have no connection to certain films’ source material. My only connection to Mission: Impossible is that I know the theme music from the TV show. With no limitations or biases getting in the way of processing this film for what it is, I can say with a clear conscience that this film is convoluted but very entertaining.

Tom Cruise stars as Ethan Hunt, a member of the top secret Impossible Missions Force (IMF), whose team is wiped out during a botched mission to intercept a data file that contains the aliases of many undercover operatives around the world. The job, it turns out, was a setup to draw out a suspected mole. As the lone survivor of his team, the government brands him a traitor and Hunt is thrust into his most difficult mission yet- clearing his name.

If you boil it down to its framework, Mission: Impossible is a spy thriller built around three scenes- the opening job gone wrong, the Langley job (where Cruise dangles in mid-air by a harness), and the climactic train sequence. That’s really all you’re going to remember and for good reason. The job is the only thing that matters; it’s the payoff. All the planning and exposition that comes before each job only exists to help the job itself make sense. The filmmakers may have gone overboard on a few things but it’s all still great fun to watch.

Just like its main character, Mission: Impossible succeeds through a combination of coincidence, luck, and skill. You can debate which ingredient is in greater supply all you want, but all three are in there. Your opinion on this matter depends on your level on cynicism and your ability to not overanalyze a summer popcorn flick.

I liked Vanessa Redgrave’s character. It was a nice twist for a sought-after international criminal to be female. James Bond has the market on egomaniacal men, so kudos to the filmmakers for not being lazy there. Unfortunately, this break from stereotype doesn’t make up for a weak motive by the shadows-lurking villain who’s been trying to frame Ethan Hunt all along.

All things considered, Mission: Impossible is the kind of movie you say ‘sure, why not’ to. It’s nothing to get too excited about but it’s always fun to watch those three tent-pole scenes play out. It will never be considered a classic but it fills the hearts of people my age with nostalgia for the early to mid-90s, when there was still a middle ground between awesome and suck for summer blockbusters.

RATING: 3.25 out of 5

National Treasure (2004)

Brainless popcorn fodder is what this mess of bad science and inference amounts to. Essentially, it’s an attempt to create an American version of The Da Vinci Code. It even succumbs to America’s greatest vice- greed. Instead of a controversial, well-sought after relic like the grail in Da Vinci, the heroes and villains of National Treasure are after, well, treasure. It’s a meaningless search for something that has no radical impact on anything profound (okay, so some bad guys would get rich- whoop-dee-doo).

It pretends to be smarter than Tomb Raider, and at least manages to be a quest involving real historical stuff. But it is strung together like a Michael Moore ‘documentary’- there’s so much inference and dotted line dangling between each phase of the plot that you have to either believe that (as the filmmakers hope) these characters truly are geniuses for figuring all this out in only a few days time (in the movie), OR (as your brain should tell you) this is one ginormous festering mess of a film.

Case in point: The opening scene leads us to believe that a century-plus old wooden ship can survive (hull perfectly intact no less) the constant melting and refreezing of the arctic ice cap, would only be a few feet under the ice surface, and that gunpowder (at least 100 years old to boot) explodes in a giant fireball. No. Just…no. And besides, didn’t anyone in the casting department remember from GoldenEye that Sean Bean isn’t believable as a mastermind villain?

RATING: 1.25 out of 5

Lara Croft: Tomb Raider (2001)

I’m trying to come up with a mathematical equation that will make this film make sense. I think I’ve got it:

Tomb Raider = Indiana Jones – intelligence – realism + breasts + short shorts

That pretty much sums it up. The absurdity of the plot (which seems to be just a vehicle for showing how good Angelina Jolie looks in tight outfits) shows its video game roots. Only a gamer could consider any of this mess plausible.

A planetary alignment of the whole solar system gives a cult the chance to control time by accessing some ancient, yet uber-sophisticated device hidden somewhere. In the process, the cult manages to anger Angelina, bringing her (and her breasts) into the fray to honor the memory of her father. About as deep as a kiddie pool, right? Basically, it gives helpless gamer nerds a flesh and blood image of their video game heroine and sucks a little bit of intelligence out of the rest of us.

RATING: 0.5 out of 5