Paramount Pictures | Release Date: May 5, 2006
7.8
USER SCORE
Generally favorable reviews based on 678 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
526
Mixed:
112
Negative:
40
Watch Now
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Buy on
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Expand
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)
6
grandpajoe6191Dec 26, 2011
J.J Abrams sorta made "Mission Impossible 3" with a ominous fuse of Brian De Palma's story and John Woo's action. The result? Manageable.
6 of 8 users found this helpful62
All this user's reviews
5
BrandonA.May 29, 2006
It was predictable, the story was simple. To sum it up the action saved the movie of getting a 1.
0 of 1 users found this helpful
5
halbNov 11, 2006
Corny and cliche'-riddled, but with exhilirating action scenes. A 2-hr episode of 'Alias' on speed. Good supporting cast, but who can watch Tom Cruise any more without thinking of him jumping on Oprah's couch or spouting Corny and cliche'-riddled, but with exhilirating action scenes. A 2-hr episode of 'Alias' on speed. Good supporting cast, but who can watch Tom Cruise any more without thinking of him jumping on Oprah's couch or spouting his criminally irrational Scientology philsophy... ? And the plot twist is as contrived as they come. There are better movies to rent, for sure. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
5
RayzorMooseNov 13, 2013
Mission Impossible III was a step in the right direction.
After a very disappointing sequel to the spy series, MI3 recaptures some of the magic with a more "down to earth" Tom Cruise and a much more realistic basis.
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
4
DerrickA.May 6, 2006
Great action and that's about it. The bad guy seemed like a pushover. Very confusing plot line. And I didn't get the answer to what was the "rabbit's foot".
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
ChazG.May 9, 2006
It was entertaining... The story was ok... The ending was predictable... Another action movie.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
MikeDec 20, 2006
Very watchable to the end. Overall alot better then I expected it to be.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
MichaelG.May 11, 2006
This was an empthy action/drama movie but definately not a mission impossibble sequel, other than using the franchise name to sell. Plot is very predictible, and the details that make mi1 which was then somewhat gone on mi2 were completely This was an empthy action/drama movie but definately not a mission impossibble sequel, other than using the franchise name to sell. Plot is very predictible, and the details that make mi1 which was then somewhat gone on mi2 were completely gone on mi3. never mind the fact that Tom Cruise's bocome a really irritating actor. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
WilsonMay 10, 2006
This movie isn't worth the price of admission. You could get the same thrills and sappy drama from any Alias episode (especially the first two seasons). Cruise is boring, the plot predictable. Worst of all is the fact that they forgot This movie isn't worth the price of admission. You could get the same thrills and sappy drama from any Alias episode (especially the first two seasons). Cruise is boring, the plot predictable. Worst of all is the fact that they forgot to include even one of the elements that made the first MI movie so great! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
DanaM.May 13, 2006
Enjoyable but not necessarily a good movie. Lots of action but really no story to support it. Predictable.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
MaseMay 8, 2006
Were people really clamoring for a 3 mission impossible?? Well the series is getting very stale despite a new director. Abrahms just recyling he better tv shows. Actually all three diffrent mission directors all had better work than the Were people really clamoring for a 3 mission impossible?? Well the series is getting very stale despite a new director. Abrahms just recyling he better tv shows. Actually all three diffrent mission directors all had better work than the mission movies. Which may be why they are all watchable an not necessarily "bad" movies just totally forgetable. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
ScarecrowJun 11, 2006
Not the best mission impossible movie for sure.The first movie was the best.It has some good moments and some lame moments.Sometimes it tries to be more serious and sometimes more action oriented.Its like a combination of the two previous Not the best mission impossible movie for sure.The first movie was the best.It has some good moments and some lame moments.Sometimes it tries to be more serious and sometimes more action oriented.Its like a combination of the two previous movies and unfortunately it doesnt mix. The script is dissapionting and the action isnt very spectacular.The ending sucks and the overall experience isnt as you expeced from a movie like Mission Impossible.The first movie was serious the second was more action focused and this one seems kinda lost in between. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
BarryR.May 10, 2006
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
NatMay 15, 2006
This movie was ok. Not the worst movie I've seen but definately not one of the best. If you've got nothing better to do, this movie will entertain you.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
JasonP.May 16, 2006
Not terrible (despite some AWFUL moments - wait for the "cat prayer" bit and you'll know what I mean). Cruise's woman had almost no personality but the action wasn't bad and the "Felicity" girl was cute. Having said that, Not terrible (despite some AWFUL moments - wait for the "cat prayer" bit and you'll know what I mean). Cruise's woman had almost no personality but the action wasn't bad and the "Felicity" girl was cute. Having said that, you're probably better off watching "Alias" 'cuz swap out Cruise with Garner and this could've been a typical (i.e. not great) "Alias" episode, albeit a two-hour one. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
GodComplexMay 5, 2006
Borring. Mundane.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
SyzgyMay 7, 2006
Story moves fast so the crowd does not have much time to dwell on the crazy plot. so many contrivances, wonderfully kinetic editing, and slick dialogue keeps this puppy motoring along with nary a hitch. this 'human dimension' peopleStory moves fast so the crowd does not have much time to dwell on the crazy plot. so many contrivances, wonderfully kinetic editing, and slick dialogue keeps this puppy motoring along with nary a hitch. this 'human dimension' people have been remarking upon is wafer thin, notable only because the usual gadgetry and globe trotting would have been old and lonely third time around. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
THMay 7, 2006
Great action sequences; fun movie as long as you don't think too hard about the plot lines.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
MarkG.May 8, 2006
Ok for a pop-corn munch. But ho-hum factor grows exponentially scene by Ka-boom scene, as the movie delivers way more than is necessary by way of non-stop stunts and explosions. And you have the nagging suspicion they there is a big hole in Ok for a pop-corn munch. But ho-hum factor grows exponentially scene by Ka-boom scene, as the movie delivers way more than is necessary by way of non-stop stunts and explosions. And you have the nagging suspicion they there is a big hole in the plot, which seems non-sensical and circular in an almost Back to the Future way. [***SPOILERS***] To wit. At first, they are chasing the villian because he is going to sell an unspecified super weapon to the bad guys. Only problem is, he, the villian, never had the super weapon to begin with. Nor do we have an idea how he would have acquired it except for the fact that Cruise captures him, the villian, and he gets pissed off. So the villian kidnaps Cruise's wife and forces Cruise to steal the superweason and deliver it to the villain to prevent the murder of the wife. The villian kidnapped her as revenge for Cruise's capture and near jettison of the villian from a jet at 10,000 feet. Cruise captured and was interrogating the villian about the superweapon which the villian was going to sell but actually didn't have to begin with. Nor do we have any idea how he intended to steal it except he got pissed off at Cruise. So he forces Cruise to steal the superweapon to prevent the wife from being killed so the villian can. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
ErkMay 19, 2006
Often when Hollywood makes a sequel, they feel it's necessary to have *MORE ACTION*, the only problem is that it usually results in *LESS PLOT*. Mission Impossible -- the franchise -- is about circumstances conspiring to create a Often when Hollywood makes a sequel, they feel it's necessary to have *MORE ACTION*, the only problem is that it usually results in *LESS PLOT*. Mission Impossible -- the franchise -- is about circumstances conspiring to create a situation that can only be resoved by brilliant planning, guts, and perfect execution. The setup is "there is no way that can be done ... it Impossible!" And then when they do it in a daring and clever way, you are amazed. They didn't spend enough (any?) time on the setup, and so the payoff isn't really there. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
KenG.Jun 15, 2006
There is plenty of well-done action, and spectular stunt-work. But I would have happily exchanged some of that spectular stuntwork for a less cliche-driven script. (as well as a script that wasn't as lazy). I'm guessing about half There is plenty of well-done action, and spectular stunt-work. But I would have happily exchanged some of that spectular stuntwork for a less cliche-driven script. (as well as a script that wasn't as lazy). I'm guessing about half of Hoffman's scenes ended up on the cutting room floor. It's a shame. He could have been a good villain if movie had given him a chance. There also seems to be a number of other missing scenes. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
JacobJun 4, 2015
Mission Impossible III gives a lot of stuff I want to see in a Mission Impossible movie and some stuff that I could have done without. The stand out scene is a heist that occurs halfway through the film, which is true to the spirit of theMission Impossible III gives a lot of stuff I want to see in a Mission Impossible movie and some stuff that I could have done without. The stand out scene is a heist that occurs halfway through the film, which is true to the spirit of the series and what I like. All of this is done with a crew who is mostly well developed moreso than the last one. The story is also suspenseful having a lot of surprises that mostly come from knowing how the film will end. The problem with the film comes with everything else. This film is long and exhausting due to it being full of big dumb action scenes, which aren’t that interesting and are poorly made feeling like something out of a Michael Bay film at times. Had the film toned down the action and/or had those moments be constructed as smartly as the heist scenes we could’ve had something. As it is the film is eh. Its an improvement over the second film as we have something resembling a Mission Impossible Movie but nothing special. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
ColginatorSep 14, 2015
For the third outing of the Mission Impossible franchise, JJ Abrams was bought in to bring cruise back for a new mission. Considering that he had already been creating television shows done with a cinematic budget to a cinematic quality likeFor the third outing of the Mission Impossible franchise, JJ Abrams was bought in to bring cruise back for a new mission. Considering that he had already been creating television shows done with a cinematic budget to a cinematic quality like Lost and Alias, it made sense that he take on the reigns of the multi million dollar franchise. But whilst he is able to keep the franchise action packed, his style is unable to flourish the same way that Palma or Woo were able to in the previous films.

Some time after the second film, Hunt has decided to retire from active duty and is now training IMF agents. He also has new fiancée, forgetting Thandie Newton from Mission Impossible II, who is gone without explanation, and is now with a nurse named Julia (Michelle Monaghan). It's a situation similar to True Lies, with Cruise living a double life and his wife being entirely unaware of his life as a secret agent that Hunt has decided to leave in his past to be with her. But just like any other film about a retired agent, it's not long before Hunt has received a new self destructing message with a new mission which he chooses to accept, leading him to assemble a new team to save one of the agents he trained in the past.

And just like every Mission Impossible film, his mission inevitably goes wrong. Thus Hunt is plunged back into the life of a spy, having to take down brutal arms dealer Owen Davian (Philip Seymour Hoffman), save his wife to be, and track down the mysterious rabbit's foot. What exactly this rabbit foot is, we're never really told. It's a Macguffin in a similar vein to the likes of the suitcase in Pulp Fiction. It could some kind of toxin. Or it could be a doomsday device. But whatever it is, we know it's bad, and that if the villain gets his hand on it there will be trouble. It leaves it up to the viewer to decide just how high the stakes will be this time around.

As usual, Cruise is great as Hunt. He still has the American action hero charm mixed with some great stunt and physical work, with one stand out scene where he's sprinting through Shanghai at breakneck speeds. But as great as he is, Hoffman really steals the film as the psychotic arms dealer Owen Davian, who is throughout the film one of the most intimidating villains in a PG-13 movie. At the midpoint when he says to Cruise ""Do you have a wife? A girlfriend? Because if you do, I'm gonna find her. I'm gonna hurt her." We believe him, since he really seems willing to do anything to get what he wants. The only downside to his character is that he does not get enough screen time. The film even pushes him out of the way for a while, instead focusing on the overused traitor from within the organisation cliché we've already seen in both of the previous films in the franchise. You'd really think by now IMF would keep a closer check on their agents.

Abrams is able to shoot a confident action sequence, however he doesn't make the same mark on the franchise that his predecessors did. Few blockbuster films have come anywhere near the nail biting suspense that De Palma was capable of in the first Mission: Impossible and nobody's ever done it in quite the same way. And love it or loath it, no director can make an action sequence quite as over the top as Woo with his explosive 20 minute finale. But with Abrams his style is less distinct. It looks just like every other action movie, which isn't necessarily bad, but doesn't leave the same mark that the first two films had.

Beyond this there's a certain repetitiveness to the sequences. There's only so many time you can watch the same high speed chases and good guys shooting bad guys before it can become boring. And whilst the locations change, throughout the film all the action sequences end up feeling largely similar. Whilst other spy franchises at the time like Bond and Bourne were starting to experiment with darker and more realistic film-making, Mission Impossible remained stuck in the same generic action that's been see many times before. It still lives up to basic expectations, but it never tries to exceed those expectations either and is instead just a very ordinary action movie.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
HalfwelshmanJan 22, 2012
Mission: Impossible III is always competent, and is considerably better than M:I-2 but lacks the excitement and consistency of the first film. The action is generally well handled, but ranges from jaw-dropping set-pieces (the scene where theMission: Impossible III is always competent, and is considerably better than M:I-2 but lacks the excitement and consistency of the first film. The action is generally well handled, but ranges from jaw-dropping set-pieces (the scene where the IMF team frantically try to bring down a lethal military drone on a rapidly disintegrating bridge), to the ridiculous (Ethan Hunt BASE jumping from halfway down a Shanghai skyscraper) to the uncreative and dull (the opening hostage rescue in a guarded warehouse). Concerning the actors, Tom Cruise still does what he needs to do, Ving Rhames is as entertaining as ever, and Philip Seymour Hoffman's makes a terrifically scary villain, but the vast majority of the rest of the cast tend to drift listlessly through the film. Michelle Monaghan, despite being a key addition to the cast in theory (she does play Ethan Hunt's fiancee after all) feels more like a spare wheel, an unwelcome bit of emotional baggage that slows the pace of the story, Billy Crudup and Laurence Fishburne's characters are woefully underdeveloped, Maggie Q plays the same character she plays in every film, and Keri Russell and Eddie Marsan don't get enough screen time to make any impact whatsoever. The film always looks good, and J. J. Abrams gets ample opportunity to flex his directorial muscles on the big screen for the first time, but the main disappointment of M:I--3 is the story. It's flimsy, unable to adequately support the plethora of action sequences let alone allow for any sort of character development. Thankfully, the silly hyper-real facemasks don't play as key a role to the plot this time round, and it's kind of cool that we get to see how they're made, plus the filmmakers finally acknowledge the need for contact lenses and voice--changing software for an IMF agent to convincingly imitate their target (though it still doesn't explain how Cruise can believably pose as any other man considering his diminutive stature). Mission: Impossible III looks good and has a few stand-out sequences and a great performance from Philip Seymour Hoffman to offer us, but the lazy story and the addition of an ill-defined romantic subplot detracts from the viewing experience as a whole, and some of the actors simply don't look like they're really trying. J.J. Abram's film directorial debut is solidly O.K., but nothing more. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
javis10Jan 11, 2012
This is the less Mission Impossible thta I like, I don´t know why but it makes me sleep like in the middle of it and the action is not as good as the second film. And the bad guy, didn´t look like a bad guy to me. IThis is the less Mission Impossible thta I like, I don´t know why but it makes me sleep like in the middle of it and the action is not as good as the second film. And the bad guy, didn´t look like a bad guy to me. I was dissapointed with this. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
imthenoobFeb 8, 2021
MI3 introduces the kind of tone and style the films after this would take on and improve. It's certainly better than the previous two entries but the lack of Hoffman, despite being billed as the main villain, is disappointing and I just don'tMI3 introduces the kind of tone and style the films after this would take on and improve. It's certainly better than the previous two entries but the lack of Hoffman, despite being billed as the main villain, is disappointing and I just don't think the cast is that strong this time around either. Don't get me wrong, It's a solid movie and a quick watch but it doesn't ever really peak. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
diogomendesAug 21, 2015
Good follow-up to the awful Mission: Impossible sequel, this movie managed to make the action and cinematography look better than the previous one, and Tom Cruise continues to shine. The soundtrack is terrific, and the pacing is really solid.Good follow-up to the awful Mission: Impossible sequel, this movie managed to make the action and cinematography look better than the previous one, and Tom Cruise continues to shine. The soundtrack is terrific, and the pacing is really solid. By far, I'd say this one had the best villain in the whole franchise. Overall, pretty decent movie with some twists and cool action.

Score: 6.5/10.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
iMakeMyOwnLuckMay 31, 2015
i hate the ending to this movie, its like a joke that noones laughing at....what happened to the bad guy (phillip seymour hoffman)?? why do they keep changing who the bad guy in imf is and ethan hunt is about as smart as a reasonably sizedi hate the ending to this movie, its like a joke that noones laughing at....what happened to the bad guy (phillip seymour hoffman)?? why do they keep changing who the bad guy in imf is and ethan hunt is about as smart as a reasonably sized rock in the movie Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
MonkiReviewsMay 29, 2017
Better than the last, but still not great. The story was boring and filled with plot holes. The characters have improved a little also. This did have a lot of action though, which was good.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
LoletinAlexisApr 7, 2019
Mission Impossible III is a positive step forward after the horrible second installment of the saga.

- Good performances in general, especially Philip Seymour Hoffman. - J.J. Abrams created the style of the following Mission Impossible
Mission Impossible III is a positive step forward after the horrible second installment of the saga.

- Good performances in general, especially Philip Seymour Hoffman.
- J.J. Abrams created the style of the following Mission Impossible deliveries.
- Good management of the times, creating a balanced movie.

- Action well choreographed, but impoverished by camera movements very annoying.
- Twist of plot taken from the sleeve and without sense.
- The use of McGuffin.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
LivingTribunalFeb 1, 2019
I love the villain so much, but this movie isn't really my type. Ethan feels little bit dumb and sometimes things go weirdly. Also, the plot wasn't the best. Still, it's pack of many great action sequences and great acting.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
ThatOneNerdyGuyOct 4, 2018
J.J. Abrams knows how to make intense scenes and they work out perfectly in this movie. But there is a mcguffin that is never explained throughout the whole movie. and there is a overuse of the classic "blaring lights and shaking camera" youJ.J. Abrams knows how to make intense scenes and they work out perfectly in this movie. But there is a mcguffin that is never explained throughout the whole movie. and there is a overuse of the classic "blaring lights and shaking camera" you would expect from a movie made by him. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
SoapNuggetJan 11, 2021
It's definitely better than 2, but this is a JJ Abrams film, and that means a lot of close ups, lens flares and a predictable plot, PSH truly gives a performance and Cruise shines as always, but the rest is fine
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
Toasty87Jul 11, 2020
Where the decline started not terrible but just acceptable quite wooden at times.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
liamexeJul 6, 2022
This is another another mainstream action movie. Stay clear from this movie if you're looking for one with an original plot. Before the film had even reached its halfway point, I knew how it would conclude. That's how foreseeably obvious itThis is another another mainstream action movie. Stay clear from this movie if you're looking for one with an original plot. Before the film had even reached its halfway point, I knew how it would conclude. That's how foreseeably obvious it was. There is only one "good man" slain during the entire film. It is quite improbable that someone could leap onto buildings from great heights and endure numerous gunfights without suffering even a single gunshot wound or serious injuries. The movie appeared to be set in our time period, yet there were a number of high-tech items that were clearly fake. such as the tool that created a lifelike mask of a person's face in a matter of minutes. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews