Metascore
60

Mixed or average reviews - based on 33 Critics What's this?

User Score
7.0

Generally favorable reviews- based on 176 Ratings

Your Score
0 out of 10
Rate this:
  • 10
  • 9
  • 8
  • 7
  • 6
  • 5
  • 4
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1
  • 0
  • 0
  • Starring:
  • Summary: Ethan Hunt (Cruise) leads his IMF team to capture and destroy a German-manufactured virus before it falls in the wrong, potentially deadly hands.
Watch On
Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 20 out of 33
  2. Negative: 3 out of 33
  1. 83
    Moves with terrific energy, alternating riveting action sequences with intimate material in a manner that's pure Woo.
  2. 80
    Keeps the pulse pounding without sacrificing laughs or logic.
  3. 75
    There's also a nice cheekiness to the material written by Robert Towne ("Chinatown"), and the usual cool high-tech toys are deployed.
  4. Never as much fun as (Woo's) old Chow Yun Fat-starring Chinese pics.
  5. 60
    It's actually sharper, less reverential and generally better than "Misson: Impossible."
  6. Reviewed by: Robert Horton
    60
    The problem is that the motion picture around these individual stunts is patently a committee-made artifact.
  7. Mostly, you get a pain in the head from the assault on your senses and déjà vu as thick as heartburn after an anchovy pizza.

See all 33 Critic Reviews

Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 12 out of 25
  2. Negative: 3 out of 25
  1. Jan 11, 2012
    10
    This is the best Mission Impossible, John Woo made a good job with this film. The action is as I lwant the action to be. Enjoyable, funny andThis is the best Mission Impossible, John Woo made a good job with this film. The action is as I lwant the action to be. Enjoyable, funny and extreme. M:I-2 rules! Expand
  2. Jan 22, 2012
    9
    The plot is taken more seriously than the first with tension and thrills on a adventure of suspense and amazingly violent action. I know a lotThe plot is taken more seriously than the first with tension and thrills on a adventure of suspense and amazingly violent action. I know a lot of you think the first is better, but it's more serious than the first. Expand
  3. Dec 31, 2011
    7
    The Weakest in a great series but entertaining after you realize your watching John Woo make a James Bond inspired cartoon. It is nowhere nearThe Weakest in a great series but entertaining after you realize your watching John Woo make a James Bond inspired cartoon. It is nowhere near as sophisticated at the 1st or as involving as the 3rd or as funny as the fourth but it is still a very well made B movie. John Woo is a pretentious but unique action film maker, he indulges in slow motion but it's interesting how he edits action scenes, the problems with the film is that the script is under mediocre with a bad performance from the villan. By the way Ghost Protocol (the 4th) has some of the best action scenes ever made (that story has a few problems also though) Expand
  4. Feb 2, 2012
    5
    Mission Impossible 2 has flaws, many many flaws but its main problem is John Woo brings his signature stylised action but overdoes it. FromMission Impossible 2 has flaws, many many flaws but its main problem is John Woo brings his signature stylised action but overdoes it. From the unnecessary twirling during gunfights to his signature doves itâ Expand
  5. Feb 9, 2014
    5
    "II" is not a particularly good sequel, but don't worry:"Tis' but a flesh wound" on the M:I series. The third and fourth are much better,"II" is not a particularly good sequel, but don't worry:"Tis' but a flesh wound" on the M:I series. The third and fourth are much better, especially the fourth. So enjoy this one for what it is, and know that there is light at the end of the tunnel. Expand
  6. May 25, 2015
    4
    Mission Impossible II is a big dumb action movie done in the big dumb way that is only possible with Jon Wu. The direction in itself leadingMission Impossible II is a big dumb action movie done in the big dumb way that is only possible with Jon Wu. The direction in itself leading to tons of crazy gunfire, chases, explosions, slow motion, and doves in itself prevents this film from being particularly good but its frustrating when it is taken into consideration how smart the first film was. The original film restrained the action scenes, minimalized the use of CGI, and a t no point was a gun fired. In this film there are gun fights galore, the film rehashes the iconic scene from the first film except with more CGI, and overall the film lacks any sort of restraint or intelligence in regards to the action scenes that the first film had. The one interesting action scene involves Ethan Hunt being stealthy and for a moment the film was remotely engaging but then it goes back to the big dumb action Jon Wu is known for. Excessive time is spent delving into an excessive romance that lends itself to a plot straight out of Hitchcock’s Notrious that is uninteresting although the love interest is kind of hot. Unless you like dumb Wu action this is a skip as it sh*ts all over what made the first film so good. At the very least though this film provided a cool take on the M.I. theme. Expand
  7. Jan 3, 2012
    2
    I can see Tom Cruise and the other producers' logic when they hired John Woo to direct Mission: Impossible II - getting a big-name actionI can see Tom Cruise and the other producers' logic when they hired John Woo to direct Mission: Impossible II - getting a big-name action director to helm the second installment of a big-name thriller franchise makes complete sense. Unfortunately, what John Woo turned M:I-2 into was an English-language Hong Kong action movie, and not a good one. At times his direction of the action scenes borders on self-parody, and I'm not certain Woo has noticed. We get it John, you like your wire-work, your slow-motion jumping-through-the-air-whilst-shooting, but I think I speak for the vast majority when I say we'd much rather see Chow Yun-fat doing it in Hard Boiled or a Better Tommorrow and looking cool than Mr. Cruise doing it in this knockoff and looking pretty damn silly. On the subject of the pocket-sized actor, in the first film, Cruise's Ethan Hunt was a character you could get behind - despite his **** he was likeable, his motivations understandable, but this time round he's just a smug, self-indulgent douchebag (putting it mildly), and his hair is stupid. I could write a whole page on the hair in this film - with all the slow-motion shots of hair billowing in the wind, it's like a Loreal ad! Concerning the rest of the cast, Thandie Newton is irritating as the love interest, Dougray Scott and Richard Roxburgh make bland villains in comparison to the baddies in the first film, and Brendan Gleeson and Anthony Hopkins should be ashamed by appearing in the film at all, brief though their time on screen is (i swear Hopkins only said yes to have something to do between scenes in Hannibal). Thank goodness for Ving Rhames, who reprises the role of Luther Stickell the effortlessly cool hacker - he's still an incredibly fun character, but just isn't on the screen for long enough. Even after all these gripes, my main problem with M:I-2 is the decision to make a novelty of the first film a major plot device in this film. Yes, I'm talking about the ultra-realistic face masks people use when they need to look a doppelganger of someone else. It's a lazy and unconvincing concept for a plot element, and you always see it coming. Plus it's never explained why people's eyes aren't a different colour. Mission: Impossible II has completely lost the fun factor of the first film. Yes, the action scenes are just as big, if not bigger, and exceptionally competent, but Woo's direction is lazy and with too much tendency to reference the infinitely better films he directed in the 80s and 90s. The performances are lacklustre, the script laughable, and tone extremely uneven. It's not quite the worst action film I've ever seen, but I can find little that's right with the film, and a whole lot that's wrong with it. Expand

See all 25 User Reviews

Trailers