In "Rogue Nation," Tom Cruise Proves That He Is Truly the Last Action Hero

Mission: Impossible - Rogue Nation

Of course, I went with this picture. Do you see his face? That's really Tom Cruise doing that!

When Last Action Hero, the underrated Arnold Schwarzenegger action-comedy that you should definitely watch now that its meta approach to action movies can be appreciated, came out back in the 90s, it served as a prediction of the future: no more action stars to singlehandedly get you to go to the movies. Part of the joke at the time was that it seemed silly that people would eventually stop blindly going to the new Schwarzenegger, Stallone, Willis, etc. movie. But it did happen, and not just because those stars got old. There are no new automatically bankable stars anymore. Even people that appear to be bankable, like Chris Pratt, are only truly successful because of the franchise they are in. Jurassic World would have been popular with a no-name in the Pratt role. His presence added to the film, no doubt, but no one can claim that the film was a Chris Pratt vehicle. But there is one man still fighting the action star fight: Tom Cruise.

Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation is obviously a franchise film (the fifth in the series), but unlike a Marvel movie or Jurassic Park sequel, it is driven by the presence of Tom Cruise. This is because Cruise has become obsessed with practical stunt work. The last three Mission movies would have been mediocre without Cruise in the Ethan Hunt role. The series would undoubtedly end without him. His presence, and need to do his own stunts, make the films an entertaining spectacle. More importantly, he makes them better action movies.

Today’s action environment suffers from too much computer generated material and/or nausea inducing shaky cam/quick cutting techniques. Because Cruise is the one doing the stunt, the camera needs to stay focused on him so the audience can tell he really did all the crazy stuff, such as the heavily promoted scene featuring him hanging from the side of a plane during takeoff and flight. So we can tell it’s Cruise, but we can also tell what’s going on in general. This is what makes all of Cruise’s action films so watchable.

Obviously, as far as action goes, Rogue Nation is great. There are multiple impressive sequences that adequately up the ante from the previous films. The series has become much like the Fast and Furious franchise, but better. The Mission films are better because they amp up the action while still making it very real through practical stunt work while the Furious films have amped up the action while throwing logic and practicality completely out the window. (Both series are enjoyable, I just prefer the “grounded” [I use that word very lightly] action of Mission: Impossible.)

All the action is great, but one thing that has suffered with each subsequent film is the story. Not that anyone comes to a Mission film expecting a groundbreaking plot, but it does get old seeing Ethan Hunt disavowed, on the run, rogue, etc. every single movie. At this point, shouldn’t everyone just trust him? Screenwriter/director Christopher McQuarrie (Jack Reacher) does what he can, but these movies can only cover so many different ways to save the world. To the film’s credit, one character at least acknowledges that the situation will never change by pointing out to Ethan that there will always be somebody out there creating chaos. The question is how long will Ethan (and Cruise) keep it up? The answer seems to be at least one more time since the sixth film in the franchise has been given the green light.

With the plot in the background, there needs to be good supporting actors, especially since some people don’t care for Cruise (because of his real life persona). Rogue Nation has this covered with Simon Pegg basically becoming Cruise’s comic relief sidekick. Pegg definitely keeps things light and fun throughout. Rebecca Ferguson is a bit of a standout as a female double agent who can hold her own against Cruise. But really, this is Cruise’s movie, and if you’re not on board with that, you’re not going to enjoy it.

Rogue Nation is exactly what we’ve come to expect from a Mission: Impossible movie, and that’s a good thing because you should be expecting a lot at this point. McQuarrie does what he can with the story, but he does shine as an action director here, picking opportune times to use unique camera placement within the action. And, most importantly, he knows to leave the camera on Cruise so everyone can see the crazy stunts that he is actually doing. Honestly, though, McQuarrie is expendable here. Mission: Impossible used to be a franchise for each director to put his personal stamp on it. DePalma brought his split-screens and atmosphere to the first film (still my favorite). Woo brought his trademark gunplay and inexplicable pigeons to the second (still my least favorite). And Abrams reinvigorated the franchise with his Spielberg-esque fun and action for the third. With the fourth, things changed. Cruise took over (not directing, but in general), and the series is only getting better and better because of it. Here’s to Tom Cruise, our last action hero.

Rogue Nation receives a:

Random Thoughts (SPOILERS)

I like Simon McBurney (the head of MI6), but he needs to allow himself to go bald or wear a wig. His hairline was distracting in his first scene in the film. It was mostly due to the lighting, but it looked ridiculous. Someone should have at least realized this and changed the angle or the lighting or something. 

Alec Baldwin's character was mostly worthless in the film, but at least he didn't end up being the villain.

Renner was a bit of a nonentity for most of the film, due to his other job as Hawkeye, no doubt. Most of the film requires him to hang out in an office and look mildly annoyed.

The obligatory heist of the film was decent, and I really enjoyed that they brought up wearing a mask only to dismiss it. I only wish they hadn't ended up using a mask later in the film. I'm just sick of the masks...

As far as villains go, Sean Harris was all right, if not a bit too raspy/Bond-villainish. He looked a bit too much like Simon Pegg, though. If a mask was to be used, I thought for sure they would go that route, but they didn't.

The titles of these movies really makes you appreciate punctuation. It's not every day that a movie requires a colon and a dash. 

"Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol"

Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol - Directed by Brad Bird, written by Josh Appelbaum & Andre Nemec, starring Tom Cruise, Paula Patton, Simon Pegg, and Jeremy Renner - Rated PG-13

This film doesn't have a villain nearly as cool as the Evil Kurgan, but the action more than makes up for it.

The Mission: Impossible franchise has transformed from complicated (some would say overly so) spy thriller to the go-to series for outrageous action.  Some may prefer the former (the first film is still my favorite, though I’m okay with where the series has gone), but it’s hard not to have a lot of fun with Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol.

Ghost Protocol picks up right where the third film left off.  Not story wise, necessarily, but in regards to the action.  Mission: Impossible 3 invigorated the series with its amazing action set pieces, fun tone, and memorable villain.  Ghost Protocol certainly takes the fun tone and action set pieces and amplifies them, though it falls a bit short in the villain department.

The plot of Ghost Protocol is ripe for ridiculous action as the members of Agent Ethan Hunt’s IMF team must stop a nuclear explosion while they themselves are on the run after being blamed for blowing up part of the Kremlin.  To stop the nuclear blast they have to travel all over the world and engage in over-the-top theatrics, like climbing on the outside of the world’s tallest building just to reach a computer. 

If the plot sounds a bit vague, it’s because it is.  I am still not entirely sure what the villain’s true goal was.  That isn’t a fault against the movie, though.  It is probably explained in full spy-lingo detail, it’s just that the action overshadowed the stakes of each situation to the point that it became easy to forget just why the characters were doing what they were doing.  I suppose that is actually what you would call a plot hole, if the reasons are so vague you’re not even sure what they are, but it’s easy to forgive a film that features Tom Cruise running down the face of the Burj Khalifa (the aforementioned world’s tallest building). 

The action is simply astounding.  And when seen in IMAX, it can be nearly overwhelming.  It’s not all big set pieces, though.  The way the action is filmed is easy to follow so you never get that frenetic “who’s punching/chasing who?” feeling that modern action films so often succumb to.  Brad Bird (Ratatouille, The Incredibles), directing his first live action feature, shows that he knows his way around an action scene.  Of course, a film starring Tom Cruise has to show action in a specific way: you have to be able to see Cruise’s face as much as possible.  This isn’t an ego thing, but more about proving to the audience that it is, in fact, actually the actor performing many of the crazy stunts of the film.  Being able to see Tom Cruise’s face isn’t what makes the action better; but if you have to hold the shot long enough and you have to zoom in close enough to tell who the actor is, then you’re also going to get to see the action in a straightforward manner. 

While Tom Cruise is the face of the franchise, he is certainly not alone in Ghost Protocol.  Jeremy Renner steps in as a new, mysterious team member, and Paula Patton and Simon Pegg round out the cast.  Renner does okay, but his character isn’t all that interesting.  There might be some potential in a sequel, but he pales a bit in comparison to the rest of the cast.  Patton is pretty much just there to be the woman in the film.  And Pegg, of course, supplies comedic relief.  It’s that comedic relief that changes the tone a bit. 

Ghost Protocol comes off as an action comedy more often than not, which is not in keeping with previous films of the series.  (The third film starts off very dark, with a menacing Phillip Seymour Hoffman threatening Tom Cruise, while the most memorable beginning moment of this film is a slightly goofy prison break.)  A few laughs are okay in an action film, but some people may be thrown off by just how often the film goes for the comedy.  It does make the film feel a bit more cartoonish than it should be at times, but a lighter Mission: Impossible is simply more entertaining. 

A bit more comedy isn’t that big of a deal, but what is truly unfortunate is the downgrading of the villain.  Michael Nyqvist (the original The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo) is okay but this is one of the most uninteresting villains in recent memory, not just in this series but in movies in general.  He’s just the guy who wants to do bad things and that is it.  The character is a complete letdown, especially since the previous film had such a memorable villain. 

A weak villain isn’t the end of the world, though.  Ghost Protocol is about big action, a few laughs, and that is it.  While there are weak elements, the strong aspects outweigh them so much that you’re not likely to notice problems unless you try to look for them.  Can I remember the villain’s name or even what he looks like?  Nope.  Can I still vividly picture Tom Cruise climbing the tallest building in the world?  I think I could storyboard it if need be.  In an action movie, that’s the way it should be.

 Random Thoughts (SPOILERS)

The gadgets are interesting, ridiculous, and funny at times, even if they do make the movie feel more like another popular spy franchise.  I really dug the that whole fake hallway screen.

Renner makes for a decent addition, though I would prefer Ving Rhames to be part of the team.  I understand that Pegg has pretty much taken over as resident computer guy so Rhames wouldn't have his own thing anymore, but why tease us with a cameo from Rhames at the end?  Just find a way to work him into the movie since his presence made the first three better. 

Can we finally put the disavowed plotline to rest?  How many times is Hunt going to be portrayed as enemy to the States?  Wouldn't they trust this guy at this point?  He's been set up fifty times it seems.  Shouldn't somebody at IMF put out a memo: Hunt is a good guy and always will be.  Also, it's not like their means are limited even when disavowed since the team had an insane amount of resources even though they technically had no support.  How about having Hunt and his team actually remain official agents in the next film?

"Paul"

Paul - Directed by Greg Mottola, written by Simon Pegg and Nick Frost, starring Pegg, Frost, Jason Bateman, Kristen Wiig, Bill Hader, Joe Lo Truglio, Blythe Danner, John Carroll Lynch, and Seth Rogen - Rated R

The Evil Kurgan is not a geek, but he understands what geeks (especially the critic on this site) like and Paul gets his endorsement.

There is no shortage of alien films coming out of Hollywood these days. Cinemagoers have always been interested in the possibility of alien life forms showing up on our planet. Usually they want to kill all of us, sometimes for no reason at all. Less often, they turn out to be lovable creatures that are so cuddly and safe that they end being friends with your children. So why do we need any more alien movies at all since it’s been done to death? Well, there hasn’t really been an attempt to openly create an R-rated buddy-alien movie aimed directly at geeks. That might be a niche market, but the end result, Paul, is very enjoyable one, potentially for more than just the dorks among us.

Paul is basically a buddy road trip movie. Graeme (Simon Pegg) and Clive (Nick Frost) are two Brits who have traveled to America to go to Comic-Con and a tour of all the extraterrestrial hot spots in the southwest. Things go awry when they come across an actual extraterrestrial: Paul (voiced by Seth Rogen). After that, their trip isn’t a vacation; it’s a mission. And along the way they encounter all manner of different characters like religious fanatics, inept government agents, and rednecks.

This film is first and foremost a movie for people of the same ilk as Graeme and Clive. Not British, but the type of people who would go to Comic-Con. Paul is filled with references to geeky pop culture: Klingon is spoken, there are Star Wars references galore, a certain heroine from a classic sci-fi flick shows up, etc. In short, this is an alien movie that acknowledges all other alien movies. If you’re into those kinds of movies, you’re more likely to enjoy this one than most people. But there is still plenty of comedy for all.

Paul features enough standard comedy fare to keep the less geeky audience members laughing as well. There are the standard physical comedy bits, but the film mainly relies on its R-rating to bring the laughs. Foul language can sometimes be seen as a crutch for comedy, but this film features the hilarious gimmick of a reformed goody two-shoes trying to improvise cuss words. That bit might get stale for some, but it worked throughout for this reviewer.

Even if some of the bits don’t knock it out of the park for some, the cast should be able to elevate the material. Pegg and Frost have been working together for years (and are actual best friends in real life) so they completely work as a comedic duo (and it helps that they served as screenwriters on this one). Rogen brings an interesting voice to the alien that is consistently amusing. Kristen Wiig was hilarious as the aforementioned improvisational foul mouth. Jason Bateman is solid as the determined agent, but his role is really elevated by dealing with his halfwit underlings, played by Joe Lo Truglio and Bill Hader. There are more, but you get the idea: the cast is strong with this one.

Perhaps the most important element of the film, though, is Paul himself. The alien is computer generated but he felt like an onscreen presence throughout. It would have been devastating to the film if Paul came across as overtly fake. Also, his design might leave a bit to be desired, but the screenplay has a great element that takes care of that. It turns out that the government has slowly been leaking Paul’s identity through pop culture to make it easier on the public if the alien is ever revealed, which explains why Paul looks like such a clichéd alien. That also opens the script up to make many more pop culture references as Paul claims ownership to countless classic sci-fi moments.

Paul is far from perfect, though. The rednecks and religious fanatics mentioned above are kind of weak villains. Their complete idiocy gives this film an overly atheist and liberal feel. This isn’t a film to get bent out of shape over, though, so you should be able to ignore it. But some people have strong feelings about some of the religious topics brought up and could potentially be offended. None of that stuff really bothered me. The issue I had with the film was that it started off quite weak and a little too goofy. And even though the film has dozens of pop culture references, it seemed like the filmmakers were toning it down a bit for fear of (no pun intended) alienating their audience. But that is a minor nit to pick, to be sure.

Paul is a comedy aimed at the geeks among us, but there is enough here to keep most people entertained. Aliens don’t always have to show up to kill us. Sometimes they just want to make us laugh. Fortunately, Paul does just that.

Random Thoughts (SPOILERS)

Just wanted to point out a few references I enjoyed:

The cantina music is the road house was great.

It was a nice reference when Bateman shot his radio and said, "Boring conversation anyway."

It was hilarious when Pegg and Frost recreated an alien fight from the original "Star Trek" TV show.

Frost's ewok fetish...

I dug the E.T. jokes, and it was very cool that Spielberg lent his voice the film.

Sigourney Weaver was borderline cheesy, but it was still cool to see her in this.

Some Indiana Jones references were amusing, like Bateman calling Paul “Short Round” and Paul hanging out in the warehouse from Raiders.

Of course, there had to be Close Encounters of the Third Kind references and they worked as part of the plot device that Paul has actually had a hand in creating all of these classic sci-fi films we love.

Finally, there's no reference to this, but Paul is kind of like Roger from "American Dad," except not nearly as cynical, sadistic, or sociopathic. I don't see this as a ripoff of that character or anything, but I do find some similarities, especially when they have to disguise Paul as a cowboy.