Mission Impossible Final Reckoning, MI, psychology, psychoanalysis, leadership, trust, dreams, ambitions

Mission Impossible Final Reckoning: Leadership Notes to Trump 1

Mission Impossible Final Reckoning is a pretty straightforward action movie.  It is one that culminates a series of such movies, but you really don’t need to have seen any of the previous ones to enjoy this one – nor even to have seen the original TV series – though a bit of background won’t hurt either.  I will try to make this post brief because the movie is straightforward, but as my kids say, “Ask him what time it is and he will tell you how to make a watch.”

The New Yorker’s review of this film highlights the ways in which it appears to be pointed at Trump’s agenda, but I think it is a bit wide of the mark.  They suggest, for instance, that filming in various countries underscores the havoc that Trump imposed tariffs on foreign filming could cause.  I find it hard to believe that the choice to film in various locations was made after the tariffs were announced just three or four months ago.

I think this engrossing film is effectively critical of Trump for two reasons: first, the Tom Cruise character demonstrates leadership – meaning that he is thoughtful and constructs a plan and then takes on the parts that suit his character while delegating aspects to people well suited to handling them; second, then, he constructs a team that works both together and autonomously to accomplish a shared goal.  Building an effective and well-functioning team with clearly defined objectives is characteristic of good leadership.  I suppose there is a third aspect – the film suggests that a charismatic leader – one who understands the gravity and import of a moment – can make a difference – can effect a positive change against all odds.  This may be something that Trump aspires to – I think, in fact, he imagines that this is what he is doing.  If this is the message to Trump though, I think it is bait.  Something to draw him in.  Not an action plan.

This movie stretches credibility at every possible moment.  The task that the Mission Impossible team is set is an eponymously impossible one, and the obstacles that they must surmount, and the things that must coalesce for the team to be successful, are beyond unreal.  The chances of each part of the plan succeeding are slender – and the feats of derring-do that must be accomplished are formidable.  Throughout the film the odds of each aspect of the plan are stated with mathematical exactitude, and each probability is miniscule.  When they are multiplied together, they make an electron look large.

The movie, then, is built like a dream.  A dream we might have every night, a dream of something that is unlikely to actually occur, but one that we are deeply invested in.  In an ordinary night dream, when the odds are against something actually happening, we work hard to create the conditions that will allow our crazy wish to come true.  As we stretch what is plausible, the dream begins to crack – and if our wish is entirely unrealistic based on what we "know" to be the case, it breaks. 

In the movie, two things work against the implausibility of what is occurring leading us to turn away in disbelief.  The first is the intensity of the action.  We move back and forth between two fight scenes seamlessly integrated with each other so that we can keep track of what is happening in both, but only if we fully commit our attention to the action – there is no room for us to entertain doubts about the plausibility of what we have just observed actually happening.  Similarly, when we are keeping track of the rolling of the submarine at the same time that we are tracking both the internal geography, what needs to be accomplished, and the threat that the falling torpedoes pose, we don’t have room to ponder how the swimmer can be this active in water this cold at this depth when his skin becomes exposed to it.

The second thing that is working to keep our reality testing at bay is that we know that Tom Cruise is performing his own stunts.  There is a real component to this.  Especially as we approach the final action sequence, we are riveted by the empathic connection with the individual who is holding on for dear life while the wind is whipping him and he is being twisted and turned by powerful g forces.  This guy has skin in the game, so we, even those of us who, like me, are of two minds about what kind of person the actor actually is, suspend our disbelief because we are there, hanging on for dear life with him.

The movie, in general, asks us to be empathic both with the fears of the other leaders – what would it be like to be the president and to consider using nuclear power, knowing personally what damage it would cause, and knowing that it would, at best, keep terrible forces at bay while wreaking unimaginable broader destruction; and with leaders of the team who find helpful aids along the way – a native who doesn’t speak English but is able to communicate and lend the resources necessary to complete the mission.  We need to trust that our leaders have integrity – and that those we meet along the way will help us because they recognize the value of what we are doing.

So this movie is constructed to help us believe in the possibility of impossible missions being accomplished.  And what is the central impossible mission?  It is to create a team that can rely on each other – to build relationships and trust including with those who might at first seem hostile to you (while also recognizing those whose ideology is inconsistent with ours - pointedly, the Russians)– because, at heart, we all want the best possible outcome.

I have written elsewhere about the problems with American exceptionalism.  It can blind us to the manifold ways that we are actually causing damage when we believe that we are being helpful, but, especially at a historical moment like this one, when everything that we thought we knew about ourselves is being questioned, we need to be reminded that the central concepts of trust, leadership with integrity, and caring for others as a central value are virtues that we aspire to – even though those are much more complicated than they are being portrayed to be on the screen.  Just as this movie is a team effort – multiple people working on multiple continents to achieve a common goal, we are a people that are united in believing that this grand experiment of governing ourselves can work.

This past weekend, I participated in one of many local “No Kings” marches.  The people on the march were neighbors, friends and strangers and the largest group I have been in for some time.  There was a sense of trust in each other, of shared purpose, but also of respect and comradery.  It was moving to see the real world reflect the values that a movie – that a dream – would have us aspire to.

 To access a narrative description of other posts on this site, link here.  For a subject based index, link here.

To subscribe to posts (which occur 2-3 times per month), just enter your email in the subscribe by email box to the right of the text.