Review of Mission: Impossible II (2000) by Michael M — 29 Jan 2011

I remember not liking this when I first saw it many years ago. It took me a very long time to understand this film's structure, and why it doesnt work. The story goes that Woo designed the action sequences first and then told the writers to build a narrative around those sequences. This is where the problem lies : the action and drama are not seamless. You can almost divide this film into separate portions consisting of action sequences and "drama sequences".

The way I see it, you can either have the Bruckheimer variety of action porn where there is almost no story to speak of, OR you can have plot-heavy narratives where the action amplifies the drama (Godfather, The Rock, Speed, Inception). This film is somewhere in between those two approaches, and so it fails.

Keep your eyes and ears wide open when you watch this film. The stunts, editing and sound design are as sophisticated as anyone could ask for. That the story is throw-away is irrelevant. This still works as a purely cinematic experience. Against all odds, Woo and Cruise push the boundaries till the action reaches an operatic level. If you are a lucid viewer then this will work for you.

I'm hoping against hope that we get to see the 3.5-hour cut by John Woo and Stuart Baird. This film has some spectacular action, but the existing version is marred by way too many conceptual/narrative discontinuities and lopsided pacing. Ebert's review is a must-read.