Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol

In the last third, Ghost Protocol loses not only its breath, but everything else that made what came before so great – the comedic and intelligent sense of detachment, the likable cohesion of the IMF team composed of Cruise, Patton, Renner and Pegg, the way the screenplay inventively plays with clichés, the imaginative hi-tech secret-agent gadgets, the eye-candy action and the suspense. Dubai should have been the last setting, not the central one. And the main bad guy, played by the charismatic Michael Nyqvist should have been given more room to work. Ghost Protocol is enjoyable in its details, but as a whole, it’s only the third best film of the franchise after the first one and M:I III. (2011-12-12)

Mission: Accomplished. I fought with Bird's perspective for some time, but his qualities are especially highlighted in the tightly repeated saga. The pace is occasionally almost frenetic, balanced by the surprising cadence of lines, an excellent passage in Dubai, and a playfully espionage mood, cleverly combined with Abrams' established trends. Fans of various neighboring series can also enjoy it, because in gloomy moments, Ethan resembles Jack Bauer, and in the final battle, he is like James Bond. And it is precisely this cross-section of genres and moods that ultimately elevates Ghost Protocol to the position of a strong player. (2011-12-16)

How peculiar that a director who had previously worked in the field of animation brought a necessary breath of fresh air to the action genre, which had become dependent on the post-Bourne chaos cinema style. Bird’s Pixar movies abound with astonishing action sequences built on the clarity of the scene, long shots and the interconnection of the action with the setting and its elements. Bird brings the same qualities to Ghost Protocol. Replacing animation with live action enhances the strengths of the medium, thus bringing back the attraction of physical action. At a time when blockbusters are rather cartoonish CGI mess with the deepfaked faces of live actors, Bird had Tom Cruise climb the façade of the world’s tallest building. Similarly, the brilliantly designed and always spatially uncluttered chase through a sandstorm is an expressive counterpoint to the cluttered mess of scenes composed of tremendously brief shaky-cam shots that have inundated big-budget action productions in recent years. In comparison with the dark, tense and sophisticated nature of the competition, particularly movies based on comic books, Ghost Protocol also offers a big, longed-for dose of exaggeration and light-heartedness. In addition to that, Bird manages to combine all of the aforementioned elements into brilliant sequences abounding with inventiveness, charming humour, physical action, playful interactions between the actors and a surreal upgrade of the technological gadgets. If what remained of the third Mission: Impossible in the audience’s memory was the playing with expectations and building of suspense with no action sequences, the fourth instalment does not rely on its twists and turns, as its action passages (not only the Burj Dubai and the robotic parking lot, but also the sequences in the prison and the corridor in the Kremlin) rank among the absolute best of the genre. (2015-08-26)

One could say that Ethan Hunt for the fourth time is a bet on a very sick horse. However, such a thing could be said at a time when the second part infected the cinemas, which was just as far from a good action movie as fries are from a classic French onion soup. Currently, "M:I" is once again a highly sought-after brand and we can apparently look forward to the fifth installment. The success of the last notch lies in several points. These points are Tom Cruise, the team, a well-crafted story, and locations. Tom Cruise, although a fresh fifty-year-old, is absolutely perfect in action scenes, and also funny. He doesn't wear as many masks anymore, which is another point for him. However, the others support him brilliantly. Events from the third part are present in this one as well, with Ethan's story unfolding, and his partners remaining by his side. Ving Rhames only appears briefly at the very end, but Simon Pegg managed to rise to the level of a lead actor of supporting characters, whom you will love. His antics in American brawls are simply excellent. The new member of the team is Jeremy "Hawkeye and the new Bourne" Renner and Paula Patton, who are definitely pleasant additions because together they create a great team. The story is a bit of a classic spy one, where it's about nothing less than the destruction of the world, and the main villain is none other than a Russian portrayed by Michael Nyqvist, who fit better in the "Millennium" series. And finally, the locations. "M:I" has returned to the Czech Republic, pleasing the presence of Pavel Kříž. There are many locations here, including a sandstorm. In this regard, the film remains very interesting and keeps the viewer on the edge, providing a spectacular spectacle to cheer for the good guys. Brad Bird ("The Incredibles" or "Ratatouille") directed a sequel that he definitely doesn't have to be ashamed of. More: http://www.filmovy-denik.cz/2012/08/parmeni-krysy-z-temnot-mi-4-blazniva.html (2013-02-26)

I had a little problem reviewing Ghost Protocol. The fact is that I didn't enjoy the film at all from the beginning and it was clearly heading toward parts of the film world that mean nothing to me. On the other hand, if I were to be objective, the film was better than some of the previous installments in the series, so I should go back to the older ones and reassess them. As others have said, it's a parade of beautiful people (women, men), and beautiful things (high-tech toys, perfectly fitting suits from expensive fashion houses). It could be meant as a compliment, but I don't feel that way about it. I would also add that it has very unobtrusive but effective product placement. What is visually attractive about Ghost Protocol, meaning the set design, effects, and non-stop action, doesn't impress me. The high-tech gadgets rather annoy me and overall, I would describe the direction the series took as a worse aspect of Bond's legacy. At least Bond has style and in the newest films, they even try to add some psychological depth and character development, whereas here the characters are as flat as a sheet of paper. What fails the most in my eyes (and it's paradoxical) is the humor, because, unlike the previous installments, the film doesn't take itself seriously and becomes an action comedy. However, the comedic aspect doesn't paradoxically affect me, I simply can't laugh at the exaggeration. Maybe it's because the action, story, and characters are taken to such absurdity that even parody has nowhere to go. Perhaps this is the first film where Simon Pegg, no matter how hard he tries, simply doesn't entertain me at all. Overall impression: 25%. (2013-10-27)