User Score
7.0

Generally favorable reviews- based on 249 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 29 out of 249

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Jan 22, 2012
    4
    Mission: Impossible III is always competent, and is considerably better than M:I-2 but lacks the excitement and consistency of the first film. The action is generally well handled, but ranges from jaw-dropping set-pieces (the scene where the IMF team frantically try to bring down a lethal military drone on a rapidly disintegrating bridge), to the ridiculous (Ethan Hunt BASE jumping from halfway down a Shanghai skyscraper) to the uncreative and dull (the opening hostage rescue in a guarded warehouse). Concerning the actors, Tom Cruise still does what he needs to do, Ving Rhames is as entertaining as ever, and Philip Seymour Hoffman's makes a terrifically scary villain, but the vast majority of the rest of the cast tend to drift listlessly through the film. Michelle Monaghan, despite being a key addition to the cast in theory (she does play Ethan Hunt's fiancee after all) feels more like a spare wheel, an unwelcome bit of emotional baggage that slows the pace of the story, Billy Crudup and Laurence Fishburne's characters are woefully underdeveloped, Maggie Q plays the same character she plays in every film, and Keri Russell and Eddie Marsan don't get enough screen time to make any impact whatsoever. The film always looks good, and J. J. Abrams gets ample opportunity to flex his directorial muscles on the big screen for the first time, but the main disappointment of M:I--3 is the story. It's flimsy, unable to adequately support the plethora of action sequences let alone allow for any sort of character development. Thankfully, the silly hyper-real facemasks don't play as key a role to the plot this time round, and it's kind of cool that we get to see how they're made, plus the filmmakers finally acknowledge the need for contact lenses and voice--changing software for an IMF agent to convincingly imitate their target (though it still doesn't explain how Cruise can believably pose as any other man considering his diminutive stature). Mission: Impossible III looks good and has a few stand-out sequences and a great performance from Philip Seymour Hoffman to offer us, but the lazy story and the addition of an ill-defined romantic subplot detracts from the viewing experience as a whole, and some of the actors simply don't look like they're really trying. J.J. Abram's film directorial debut is solidly O.K., but nothing more. Expand
  2. Jan 23, 2012
    2
    Mission Impossible 3 might just be worse than its sloppy predecessor if only because it is unimaginative and so incredibly simplistic. It does have some great action sequences (A daring prison transport break on an unstable bridge) but it lets them down with some equally dull and uneventful action sequences (the opening warehouse raid). However the main segment of the film that is the most disappointing is the heist in the Vatican which under the direction of one of the previous MI directors Brian De Palma and John Woo could have been electric and adventurous is unfortunately slow, basic and downright boring, thanks to JJ Abrams playing it safe with the entire film playing like a really bad yet expensive episode of Alias (created by Abrams). Every now and then there is some semblance of flair but its quickly discarded in favour of more mundane camera work. Even the music in the film leaves much to be desired despite the fact its by an Oscar winning composer (Michael Giacchino). In fact it's a film that suffers in every possible way because of Abrams, with the look of the film and the actors being fine. It's the direction, writing and general feel of the film that seriously lack. The writing by Alex Kurtzman, Roberto Orci and JJ Abrams is hammy with key scenes being clunky, bordering on embarrassing. The film is just wrong. Finally someone should tell Mr Abrams that even if you have the money to film a stylish slow motion gun toss it doesn't mean you should, its just unnecessary and unbelievably stupid. Expand
  3. Feb 9, 2013
    3
    A movie of utter garbage. Every scene was either taken from a better movie or too stupid to have ever have been in any other movie. Just a bunch of rerun nonsense.
Metascore
66

Generally favorable reviews - based on 38 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 28 out of 38
  2. Negative: 0 out of 38
  1. Reviewed by: Ian Nathan
    60
    An inspired middle-hour pumped by some solid action gives you an idea how good the franchise could be, but we now live in a post-Bourne, recalibrated-Bond universe, where Ethan Hunt looks a bit lost.
  2. In his feature debut, "Lost" creator J.J. Abrams, who got the job on the basis of "Alias," takes the driver's seat with both feet on the accelerator.
  3. Reviewed by: Todd McCarthy
    70
    For all its far-fetched formulations, this new entry maintains more of a dramatic throughline and has the bonus of a villain played with unsparing meanness by Philip Seymour Hoffman.