It's often a bad sign when someone involved in making a film appears before it, suggesting it won’t live up to expectations—and that’s unfortunately true here. In all my years of seeing movies in theaters, this has almost always been the case, and this final chapter in the “Mission: Impossible” series is no exception. Simply put, "Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning" has significant issues, primarily due to the decision to divide the story into two parts. The narrative would have worked perfectly well as a single film. If the studio wanted to create two movies to conclude the franchise, they could have made them separate stories instead of trying to connect this one to “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning, Part One” (2023), because the link between them is weak at best. This results in an unnecessarily long 5½-hour story that could easily have been shorter with some editing. It seems likely that maximizing box office revenue was a major factor in how this project developed. Even if that wasn't the case, the filmmakers should have delivered a more compelling narrative: While the first part managed to keep viewers engaged, that’s not true here, thanks to numerous lengthy action sequences (similar to the recent “Indiana Jones” film (2023)); a plot that elevates minor characters for unclear reasons; underutilization of talented actors like Nick Offerman and Janet McTeer, while others are completely absent (where is Vanessa Kirby's White Widow, who played an important role in the previous installment?); and a requirement for audiences to be intimately familiar with both the franchise’s backstory and the complexities of artificial intelligence. More importantly, many plot points go beyond being “impossible” and become "wholly implausible" or even unbelievable, with scenes full of holes, relying on convenient coincidences, or appearing completely illogical. The film also borrows elements from other movies like “Fail Safe” (1964) and “Terminator 2: Judgment Day” (1991), which undermines its claim to originality. There’s a noticeable sense of self-importance as well, evident in the inclusion of numerous flashback clips from previous films, presented with somewhat forced connections—a nostalgic trip that doesn't add much, aside from the clever reintroduction and effective use of CIA operative William Donloe (Rolf Saxon) from the first film (1996). Ultimately, this release falls short in many ways, including a weak ending that feels drawn out and unsatisfying. It’s my opinion that the franchise should have concluded with "Mission: Impossible – Fallout" (2018), which was easily the best of the eight films. Continuing a mythology for too long can damage its reputation, and “Mission: Impossible” is an example of this. The series deserved a strong finale, not a disappointing one—and that’s truly unfortunate.

Source on TMDB