So it’s J.J. Abrams’ turn to helm M:I, and just as the first two had very different styles, so does number three. I gotta say that i’m getting a little sick of the “opening scene is some climactic moment in the movie you’ll see again later” thing. Sure it’s cool when your understanding of it changes after watching things unfold. But when that’s not the case, and it even gives away things early… no good. I’ll leave that at that, and hopefully not give anything away. But while i’m ranting, is there a rule that Tom Cruise must perform at least one dangling wire stunt and wear a face disguise in each movie?

Anyway, i’m not all that familiar with the look of Abrams’ work. But i definitely recognized his composer’s sound from Lost—he used a bunch of familiar piano cues.

Would like to have seen a little more to do with the IMF team—they seemed like cheap characters just thrown in because. They had no apparent specialties, besides Luther (the only other character in all three films) and the token lab geek. The story was more personal, but then maybe too centered around Ethan. This film definitely had more light-hearted elements than the others, which i’m not sure how i feel about—maybe balanced out some of the intense action (which there was plenty of), but i don’t think i like my spy thrillers that sweet.

Though far from perfect, the first Mission: Impossible film remains my yardstick for the series. Definitely liked III—probably not quite what i was expecting or looking for, but still very cool, very entertaining.