Mission: Impossible
It’s hard to imagine that Tom Cruise, as star and producer, has managed to keep the “Mission: Impossible” franchise running for nearly 20 years, because it’s had some close calls, much like it’s main character, Ethan Hunt. There was the complicated audience reaction this first film received, where people were entertained, but found it needlessly complicated, and the big box-office, but bigger critical and audience dismissal, of “M:i-2.” However, when Cruise brought on J.J. Abrams (hot off of “Alias” and the just-started “Lost”) to direct “Mission: Impossible 3,” the past was put very much in the past, and the series hasn’t looked back. I think part of the reason the last two films have been so well received (I haven’t seen “Rogue Nation” yet) is that Abrams stayed on as a producer with Cruise, giving the franchise some continuity beyond just Cruise. The meeting of minds has been refreshing for the series, but for now, let’s discuss the first film.
When “Mission: Impossible” was released in 1996, Cruise was at the peak of his popularity as a star, with an almost unprecedented run of box-office success that continued for a while, despite some middling success with more acclaimed films such as “Eyes Wide Shut” and “Magnolia.” “Mission: Impossible” was the first film he produced with his partner, Paula Wagner, and it set a tone for the type of films they wanted to make– intelligent, exciting, and not quite to the formula of the genre. Based on the popular ’60s spy TV series, which was a by-product of the start of the Bond franchise, “Mission: Impossible” the movie franchise started at the same time the modern Bond era began with Pierce Brosnan, and has been running almost hand-in-hand with each new film since 2006. It’s been fascinating to watch how each franchise has evolved over the years, and devolved into self-parody at roughly the same time (between 2000 and 2002, with “M:i-2” and “Die Another Day,” respectfully). At the beginning, though, it felt like a breath of fresh air compared to the major special effects blockbusters of the summer. Paired down was always better, and Brian De Palma’s approach is very paired down, although the climax does have some CGI goodness.
The biggest issue with the first “Mission: Impossible” film was it’s convoluted plot. I know that was the big issue both my mother and I had when we first saw it in May 1996. The screenplay by David Koepp and Robert Towne (based on a story by Koepp and Steven Zallian) is loaded with plot twists and flashbacks that make Kurosawa’s “Rashomon” feel like a straightforward piece of storytelling by comparison. We first see Ethan Hunt (Cruise) on mission with the IMF team he is a part of with team leader, Jim Phelps (Jon Voight). They are trying to get information out of an informant and using an elaborate rouse to do it, including the famous face masks that get ripped off in dramatic fashion. After the opening credits, with Lalo Schifrin’s famous theme wonderfully adapted by Danny Elfman (whose score is one of his best), we see Phelps get his team’s next mission: a CIA NOC list, of all the undercover agents around Europe, is being stolen for an arms dealer known as “Max.” Their mission, should they choose to accept it, is to tail the person trying to steal it, and apprehend both the person delivering it, and their buyer. Something goes wrong, though, and the entire team (save for Ethan) is killed. When he’s informally debriefed by Kittridge (Henry Czerny), though, he learns that he is seen as a mole by the CIA. He can’t trust the agency anymore, so now, he has to find the truth, and doing so does, indeed, seem like an impossible mission.
De Palma was an inspired choice to direct the first film in this series. His slavish appreciation for Hitchcock is on full display here, with extreme camera angles; tight, suspenseful editing; and the Herrmann-esque score by Elfman all punctuating the use of a common Hitchcock theme in this story, of the innocent man, wrongly accused. This is very much a thriller in the vein of “North By Northwest” and “Saboteur,” but it also stands on it’s own, not just in respect to Hitch, but also the series it’s based on. Watching this film again, I was pleasantly surprised by the 110 minute run time; in a time when superhero movies clocked around 2 1/2 hours on average (and blockbusters were already headed that way in ’96), a film that is under two hours, and holds our interest every step of the way, is not nothing. That’s a big part of the film’s lasting appeal– it tells a complex, compelling story that punctuates itself with action, and doesn’t linger too long on needless chaos. It maintains a focus on character, and gives us some great ones. The primary focus is on Ethan, of course, but Jim and Claire Phelps (Emmanuelle Béart) have some great moments, and tech genius Luther Stickell (Ving Rhames) is a terrific addition to the team when they have to break into the CIA and steal the NOC list for the buyer as leverage to get the mole to come into the open. The CIA break-in, with Cruise suspended by wires in mid-air, remains one of the smartest, most exciting sequences in modern movies, with some inspired humor to go along with the high-wire tension. The ability to stage and cut a sequence like this is why you hire someone like De Palma to direct this film, and it was a savvy choice on Cruise’s part, which he would continue with the rest of the films by going after unique talents to bring each “Mission” to life. It hasn’t always worked out quite as he hoped, but it’s allowed Cruise to bring in fresh blood, and interested voices, to help make each mission feel less impossible to pull off. The results have been a great addition to blockbuster cinema for two decades, and Cruise doesn’t appear to want to slow down anytime soon. I can live with that.
