An absolute masterclass in producing an enjoyable action movie. Cinematography was great, the story was paced extremely well, and the casting of ALL roles was absolutely perfect. Cruise, Pegg and Rhames were awesome as always, Whigham and Davis were great additions, but the power quartet of Ferguson, Atwell, Klementieff and Kirby, really went above and beyond in making this movie perfect. Not to mention the chilling confidence of Morales as Gabriel, who practically oozed tangible danger. From the pre-opening credits scene to the final act, you will be on the edge of your seat - especially during any fight scene that involves Ferguson or Klementieff - and whilst there are moments that the tempo slows down to advance the story, it is always completely captivating. The single, solitary, disappointment comes as the credits roll, and you remember you're going to have to wait until next year to see how it ends.

**Mission: Impossible - Dead Reckoning (Part One) boasts some of cinema's most stunning stunt work, but it came at the cost of character development and a solid story.** Man…. I wish I loved this movie more than I did. Don't get me wrong, it's a solid action movie with jaw-dropping stunts (some of the best in the series), but as a Mission: Impossible movie, it felt like a small step backward for the franchise. Fallout had mind-blowing action sequences and stunt work, along with developing Ethan's relationship with Ilsa, providing closure with Julia, showing the lengths Ethan would go to protect those closest to him, and battling an imposing villain. Dead Reckoning: Part One stretches the movie across two films only to seemingly showcase action spectacle after action spectacle while sacrificing character development. Characters I have grown to love over a decade of films felt sidelined, ignored, or wasted. Hayley Atwell's new character chewed up most of the screen time, and while she was fantastic, I wanted to see more of the original team. The new villain had an inconsistent ability that confused more than intimidated. There were some important emotional moments that I just didn't feel the weight of when I definitely should have. Part Two might tie everything together and make me enjoy Part One more in retrospect, but unfortunately, I left wanting more from this one.

In the interest of full disclosure, I’m often somewhat skeptical about films that include the word “part” in their titles; I frequently feel that such offerings have difficulty standing on their own, unable to complete their stories in a single vehicle. So, admittedly, that consideration was on my mind as I screened the first half of the final installment in this long-running action-adventure franchise. To its credit, director Christopher McQuarrie’s latest has a lot going for it – an intriguing plot with a strong cautionary tale message for us about the potential dangers of AI, an array of superbly staged action sequences, the welcome addition of some much-needed comic relief (something this series has often lacked) and a fine cast of supporting performers (especially the expanded role of Vanessa Kirby, who was woefully underused in the franchise’s previous release). However, with that said, there are some elements that could use improvement. For starters, the picture is simply too long; with a runtime of 2:43:00 (and this is just the first half of the story!), the film is definitely bloated and could stand some judicious editing, especially in the action sequences, several of which begin to try one’s patience after a while. Then there are certain aspects of the narrative that are predictable, formulaic, and, at times, implausible (particularly in the picture’s overlong final act train adventure sequence), qualities that are not as apparent (or at least better hidden) in previous outings. Finally, there are the underwhelming performances of the IMF crew (Tom Cruise, Simon Pegg, Ving Rhames). The leader of the pack (Cruise) comes across more like someone whose presence is designed largely to carry the plot rather than serve as a genuine, actively engaged protagonist, and his two colleagues are underused, seemingly playing sidekick roles rather than participating as key characters (unlike previous installments in the series). All told, this is by no means a bad picture, but it could have been better, especially with it being the series finale. It makes me wonder if the full story of “Dead Reckoning” might have been better executed in a single, slightly longer offering than as two separate feature-length releases. That might have solved the issues noted above, and it may have eliminated that nagging “part” problem I wrote about, allowing the picture to stand on its own two feet as a single vehicle. We’ll have to wait another year to see how it all plays out, but I can’t exactly say I’m holding my breath about it.