Mission: Impossible

Un enchevêtrement chaotique et narrativement opaque d'intrigues et d'action électrique, surhumaine et techniquement brillante. Beaucoup de scènes originales, souvent citées dans les films ultérieurs. Une orgie d'espionnage stylée. Un plaisir pour les yeux et les oreilles, un tourbillon inutilement surcombiné pour la tête. (14/08/2003)

I’m between three and four stars, but thanks to several scenes where the tension is almost like out of a text-book (the gymnastics in the CIA vault, the gymnastics on the train), I will go for a more generous rating. That said, the script is quite messy; by the end, at least, it’s clear who was good and who was bad, but during the story, who’s playing what wasn’t very clear. The opening part in Prague was nice. (29/08/2011)

At a time when the creative reins of the entire series are firmly held by Christopher McQuarrie, it is hard to believe that a quarter of a century ago there was a film in which the main hero was not a complete legend with a cold gaze and a stunt up his sleeve, as we have him in our minds now, but an unbearable clown who surprisingly often plays by chance. I considered Brian De Palma's contribution to the IMF archive a dull spy installment for many years, but today it surprisingly feels fresh to me thanks to Prague, the legendary (and timeless) break-in into Langley, or the pleasantly overblown train finale. However, its main problem remains the striking inconsistency. One moment Ethan is devastated by the loss of all certainty, only to casually flirt with the enemy or perform cheap magic tricks a few minutes later, solely to annoy a colleague he didn't much like. So even though Tom Cruise is surprisingly bad, and at times two or three films play out before my eyes, I am willingly raising the rating above average. The pace, unlike the subsequent installments, never stops for a moment, and out of all the entertaining spy flicks that have irrevocably disappeared from cinemas, I have to add some affection for Czech-based escapades. (17/03/2020)

This feels like an American response to the Bond films. The story is profiled as a typical spy plot full of intrigue and false identities. The action initially stays quite grounded, only to turn into something amusingly unrealistic and crazy at the end. As Ethan Hunt, Tom Cruise really only acts with his face; otherwise, his agent, created as an indifferent hanger for nice rags in the shape of a good guy, is directly archetypal. With his style, Brian DePalma oscillates between a thrilling spy film and an adrenaline action film. However, it cannot be said that M:I has a strong style, a strong charge, or a moment of surprise. It seems to me that even the main twist fizzles out due to bad timing. Compared to the Bond films, it's really quite soulless, but still fun. (13/01/2007)

Looking back on it, De Palma filmed certainly the darkest and most convoluted Mission: Impossible. The entire infiltration of Langley was ingeniously filmed. You can’t tell me that the scene with the balancing Cruise didn’t make an impression on you. The stifling silence and tension can be cut with a knife. The final revelation of the conspiracy when Hunt slowly pieces together fragments of “what we didn’t see in Prague" is nicely filmed too. Complete satisfaction is spoiled by the slight difficulty I found in orientating myself in the story. The first M:I wasn’t as mediocre as they say. (13/01/2007)