MI3: Not That Bad

Saw it Friday, but put off writing this until Monday nite. The verdict is that the movie isn't that bad, in a vacuum. It has a lot of well choreographed action, decent acting, and not a bad plot (overall, but see below). In short, I enjoyed it and would recommend the action-driven crowd see it.

That said, given enough time after the movie I have a couple of problems, and a handful of silly musings...(I'll be careful not to let too many spoilers slip through):

• The series is completely missing the point of the original Mission Impossible. It's not about guns and explosions, it's about subterfuge and espionage. Something the first movie had some of, but not enough. The revival series in 1988 was really good as well.
   
  
• If the IMF has so much corruption (and willingness by its members to believe that the corruption exists and that anyone is susceptible to it), why does it continue to operate? Putting Jim Phelps in the traitor seat (first film) was a mistake in itself.
   
  
• If both sides (bad and good) use the mask disguises, why haven't countermeasures been developed against them? (a small laser shoots across the room, alighting on Mr. Bad Guy's face) "His skin elasticity is all wrong...that's not Dr. Webber, he's wearing a mask!"
   
  
• Why does Ethan have to do complex computations when planning to perform a simple pendulum swing, when he can toss a magnetic grenade, have it bounce off a pillar and stick solidly to a metal natural gas pipe, tens of meters away?

Still, MI3 delivers a solid action performance. For those who like that kind of thing, it's a good ride.