Metascore
60

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

User Score
6.0

Mixed or average reviews- based on 120 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.
Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 20 out of 33
  2. Negative: 3 out of 33
  1. It's eye candy that detonates.
  2. The power of film to irrationally transform and exalt is almost a religion to Woo, and another reason why he was the natural go-to guy for this lucrative movie franchise.
  3. 75
    Check your brains at the popcorn stand and hang on for a spectacular ride.
  4. There's solid chemistry between Cruise and the stunning Newton, a superb actress previously restricted to such ethnic roles as Sally Hemings in "Jefferson in Paris" and the title role in "Beloved."
  5. 60
    It's actually sharper, less reverential and generally better than "Misson: Impossible."
  6. The stagy emotionalism Mr. Woo specializes in is not ideally suited to his gifts, and Mr. Cruise, his jaw churning to indicate ambivalence and pain, mostly registers confusion and fatigue, soon amply shared by the audience.
  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 24
  2. Negative: 3 out of 24
  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 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 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 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. 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, 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. Dec 16, 2013
    4
    Great action sequences complimented by a boring plot. Action movies should keep you on the edge of your seat waiting for what happens, but with the predictability and lack of intrigue packed into this one, it's a slow two hours. 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 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 24 User Reviews

Trailers