Bond or Hunt?
The decision as to which side you’re on involves complicated analysis. It isn’t as simple as, say, deciding between the cheesy but undeniably magnetic, ugly American, maverick that is Donald Trump versus the soothing but confident dulcet tones of a potential John Kasich presidency. Nor is it as clear as the decision between the teflon encased, master manipulator, political operative Hilary Clinton opposed to the commanding serene, dare I say presidential, erudite prowess of Jim Webb. We could debate petty details like crazy hair machinations and whether pantsuits, well, suit, but ultimately instead of the issues and matters of political ideology and nationalistic pride, it all comes down to personality.
Would you rather have a room temperature brew with “Mission Impossible’s” Ethan Hunt, or a martini, shaken not stirred, with James Bond?
After five films since 1996, the “Mission Impossible” franchise moves along in an undisciplined and ridiculous manner. And although the signs of strain are present, it’s still escapist fun. In “Rogue Nation,” the IMF or the Impossible Mission Force is disbanded by the US government. This leaves Hunt on the run and pursued by the CIA while he continues to investigate a shadowy organization named the Syndicate. Once again, the brooding Hunt makes his mission personal as he and his team skip around the world with an unlimited array of high-tech gadgets.
Of course, Hunt becomes smitten and obsessed with a mysterious, beautiful woman named Ilsa Faust (Rebecca Ferguson), who seems to hold the key to finding a dangerous Brit named Lane (Sean Harris), the head of the Syndicate. Lane is one scary dude, but seriously lacking in personality. And his dearth of charisma is part of the problem with the film. Although Harris has the look down, the script gives him little to do but look frightening. He does seem to have an unlimited number of vicious, but dim-witted henchman. And his quiet, refined cool is in stark contrast to the smash-mouth but still technologically sophisticated Hunt. Call it Bond vs. Hunt.
As is normally required in a “MI” film, there is a heist that must be intricately mounted and executed. And something always goes wrong, but never too wrong. It is hard for disbelief to be completely suspended as the laws of nature are bent. But for some reason, I found the indulgences palatable even when things are completely off-the-rails. There is wit and verve here.
We get endless car chases, gun fights, hand-to-hand combat, a thin but athletic woman takes down men who are even trained and hardened mercenaries. It is often difficult to accept as the action spills over into the streets of London with killers and the heroes shooting recklessly in a manner that would obviously endanger all innocents within range. But unlike the last “Fast & Furious” episode in which the Rock sprays fifty caliber machine gun bullets all over the streets of a major American city, the carnage in “Rogue Nation” is more limited in scale.
Still, one wonders whether the level of heedless risk-taking is justified, especially as the stakes are never fully explained. Apparently, the Syndicate threatens to become a massive terrorist organization and is already responsible for the deaths of possibly hundreds. Therefore, if a few innocent bystanders are injured or even killed in the process of capturing that organization’s leader, such collateral damage should be justified, right? Don’t try to make sense of it, the world of Ethan Hunt, just like the cartoonish society that the characters in the “Fast & Furious” franchise inhabit, is clearly not our own.
But the question remains: Hunt or Bond? This weekend, the edge clearly goes to Hunt, who is running hard for the office of box office leader. And as long as you accept the surface flash of him, without diving too deeply into the substance of the man, you’ll feel okay casting your vote for the American.