Mission: Impossible - Phantom Protokoll

The concern that Bird, who undoubtedly has a liking for technology, would bury the franchise that Abrams jump-started under a pile of modern gadgets was unfounded. High-tech gadgets are the last thing that the participants in this experiential journey to the roots of the franchise can rely on, though they encourage the film’s most inspiring contemplation on the relationship between the copy and the original, between virtual action and its real consequences (the manifold duplication of reality – one sequence even involves the creation of a situation that is just coming together – smacks of a Baudrillard-esque simulacrum; the scene of controlling Brandt with a hovercraft works with an extreme form of computer simulation, when the life of a person depends on technology).  ___ Inoperable technology and lack of time force the agents to come up with alternative solutions on the fly, which slightly undermines the otherwise unshakable certainty that everything will turn out well and no one important will come to harm. During Hunt’s perilous feat of skyscraper-climbing – a more adrenaline-fueled version of Harold Lloyd’s brilliant Safety Last! – my hair seriously stood on end a few times despite the cartoonish exaggeration when the protagonists laugh at the fact that if something goes wrong, in the worst case they will die. Animated films and classic slapstick can be “sensed” in most of the action scenes with animate objects (the gloves), brilliant gradations (jumping on the train) and geometric use of space (the climax with parallel use of multiple directions of movement). Even without the stereoscopic effect, the steep ascent followed by a descent induces nausea similar to that experienced on a roller-coaster ride. ___ Before Pixar started making action movies, the perfect balance of suspense and humour was the domain of Bond films, but after the reboot with Daniel Craig, the Bond franchise became more serious and cleared the field of expensive, bombastic entertainment for others. Mission: Impossible doesn’t have a comparably charismatic protagonist in Cruise, but the screenwriters do an excellent job with exaggeration within the bounds of tolerability and artful creation of BIG action-packed situations. Bird helps to patch the bigger holes in the logic (could they really not have waited for the Dubai deal to take place and then follow the people involved?) by directing the action scenes and the screenplay with self-referential moments (“light the fuse”, the recording doesn’t self-destruct, “Mission accomplished”). ___ Because of their status as undesirables, the protagonists lack a firm background. As a band of outcasts (as opposed to the individual renegades that are currently in fashion), they have to be constantly on the move and deal with their private matters while they’re on the run. It would benefit the film if they didn’t address those matters and thus disrupt the professional prioritisation of global interests over the characters’ own personal interests. Also, because of the flashbacks, which slow the film’s pace, the  narrative is not the most cohesive. It doesn't keep us in constant suspense as to what’s coming in the next minute and it comes close to being another manifestation of the syndrome that afflicts so many contemporary animated films, in which the piling up of attractions replaces a more well-thought-out narrative structure. It also lacks a more loathsome villain (Nyqvist isn’t bad, but he isn’t given appropriate space) and a more impactful climax (just an airbag commercial followed by a theatrical “fizzling out”), but it’s still the fastest-paced action film made in Hollywood this year. 80% (12.12.2011) (weniger) (mehr)