Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol came out in 2011 and I watched 3/4 of it last night. I turned it off with the final 20 minutes remaining. Stay with me on this.
"I only watched the first 15 or 20 minutes, but this story did nothing for me. I mean, the bad guy in the first scene, wearing a black mask and hood? Then we get introduced to the protagonist who is some whiny teenager on a boring double-sun planet. I hate these annoying, one-dimensional characters. Could have been so much more…"
Are the 94% of critics wrong? Do the 85% of the folks on Rotten Tomatoes smoke crack while writing reviews? Probably, but that’s beside the point. A reviewer for The Akron Beacon Journal wrote, “…a strong cast fighting a silly plot.” A plot? You’re watching a Mission: Impossible movie for the plot?
Action movies are made to entertain. They are not meant to educate. They are not high-brow cinematic creations and are certainly NOT realistic. Why would you slam a Mission: Impossible movie for its realism or plot? Its kind of like watching the first 10 minutes of a gay porn flick and then leaving a negative review because you didn’t see any boobies (there it is, my promise made last week is fulfilled).
And where are the ghosts? They probably appeared in the last 20 minutes of the film.