Regardless, it's still 2018, which means that people still care about Mission: Impossible--Fallout. What's more is that audiences and critics unanimously revere it to the point where you probably haven't read or heard anything negative about it from anyone. And I'm not here to provide that first negative review; I'm not even here to say that it isn't excellent; I'm just left wondering, "Is it really 98%-on-Rotten-Tomatoes excellent?" To that, I respond with a definite, irrevocable, inconsequential...ehhhhhh.
Be honest--when you heard about a sixth Mission: Impossible, you thought, "Really? Another one? Geez." Sure, most of us were excited--for the most part--but you also have to wonder how long they're going to be able to milk these things before we all start drinking spoiled milk. Although, impressively, the Mission: Impossible franchise is an extremely rare one in the sense that it actually makes better movies with more installments. Rogue Nation, however, is an exception, as I found it to be wildly underwhelming after its second act. Despite this, however, the weakest two movies are inarguably the first two, which is an abnormality to say the least.
Part of the reason Fallout is such well-made fun is because it takes everything we love about the inevitable absurdity of action movies and portrays it in the most un-absurd ways. I mean, sure, everyone ends up wearing a Scooby-Doo mask and can survive literally anything, but at least they're not parachuting multiple racecars onto the same stretch of road with zero complications. Additionally, there were moments where I genuinely feared for our heroes, which is something that is tragically rare in movies. Being able to tap into the vulnerability of the protagonists paid dividends for Fallout, regardless of whether it came into fruition.
Action movies are rarely critically acclaimed. Due to this, franchises are trading intelligent movie-making for big-name actors and CGI budgets that could pay the national debt. This is shameful; not only in principle, but in practicality. The majority of America thoroughly enjoys action movies (source: the Box Office), and well-made ones easily stand the test of time. Just look at Die Hard, The Matrix, Predator, Rambo, Raiders of the Lost Ark, The Terminator, Terminator 2: Judgement Day, Gladiator...you get the point.
Another plague of modern action movies is the execrable filming. The Bourne movies modernized shaky-cam, which is almost as pathetic as actors' attempts to mumble lines because it worked for Marlon Brando in The Godfather. Hollywood, you need to get it through your thick head that anomalies are not meant to be mainstreamed. Thankfully, though, Fallout does not fall victim to this particular cheat-code. What's more is that the editing is tremendous, and the honorable stunts performed by Tom Cruise are left unfettered. Wow, it actually looks like you don't need to cut a scene to death to keep a fast-paced rhythm. Who would've thought.
Speaking of Tom Cruise, he has proved himself once again as the best current star of action movies. Not only does he perform his own stunts, but he delivers dialogue in a way that doesn't utterly suck out the tone out of a dramatic scene. In other words, he's the Bizarro Dwayne Johnson. Additional actors such as Simon Pegg, Ving Rhames, and Rebecca Ferguson were also excellent. It's not that they gave particularly tremendous performances, but they simply did exactly what they were meant to do.
Henry Cavill, on the other hand, did not fall into such a category. If you want a prime example of someone who is a movie-star strictly for their body, then look no further. On the bright side, we finally got to see his moustache that was poorly disguised by shoddy CGI in Justice League. So, you know, that's something. Perhaps it's a metaphor. His acting range is that of a moustache. Seriously. I want to know why Hollywood continues to pay through the nose for Cavill to star in the biggest-name action movies. If we're able to recognize that a good female body isn't what makes a good actress, why are we still giving these carboard beefcakes big-budget roles? It's stupid, and it needs to end.
On a similar note, I was excited when I found out that Angela Bassett is in this movie, but her character is quite useless. Bummer.
Another way Fallout both succeeds and fails is how smart it is. The dialogue and narrative turns are entertaining and fun, but certain aspects that were meant to be surprising were quite obvious. It's difficult for a narrative to be both clever and predictable, but lo and behold. Thankfully, though, Fallout's stupidity is easily overshadowed by its intelligence, so I wasn't too bothered by it.
Lastly, the arcs of the villain and the antagonist were unnecessarily tangled and complicated. I've said this before, but for those of you who think a villain and an antagonist are interchangeable, I'm afraid you're mistaken. Fallout's villain is the same guy from Rogue Nation, while its antagonist is a surprise (allegedly). Regardless, the primary villain took a back seat to the antagonist; which isn't inherently a problem, but when the villain is far more interesting and important than the antagonist--as is the case with Fallout--then we have a problem. This bothered me, but it didn't take away from the narrative to a damning degree, so it's more of a hiccup than anything.
I know this all sounds wishy-washy, but nobody else seems to be talking about any issues Fallout has, so it looks like I have to be the one to do it. Again, I'm not here to say it wasn't excellent, because it's probably a top-three action movie of the 2010s. I just think people are over-inflating it to the point where it's being revered as a top-five action movie ever, which just isn't the case. I think that action movies have been just so poor lately that anything that's quite good is nearly worshipped.
So--to answer my own question--no, it's not 98%-on-Rotten-Tomatoes excellent (although Rotten Tomatoes is consistently overly generous), but I'm willing to transpose those numbers, giving it a well-deserved 89% and a clear spot in the family of the
Theater Worthy.
Comments
Post a Comment