This franchise has been going for 26 years! And is any single one of them anyone's favourite film? It's hard to pinpoint what's missing, but something certainly is. Although there's some lovely location shooting it never feels like we're in any real place (they go to the Himalayas and we don't see a single local person! - mind you I suspect that, as with Carry On Up The Khyber, it's actually Snowdonia). Tom Cruise has star quality, sure, but hasn't entirely managed to shed his frat boy persona and become a grown-up James Bond type. The action relies a lot on CGI, and there's relatively little fighting (the MO of most action movies these days). Despite the outwardly frenetic pace, a lot of the time it feels like the story is not getting anywhere. And they're far too long, as if to make up in running time the relatively long gaps between films.

This one isn't easy to differentiate from the others. It could have made more use of action siren Vanessa Kirby - who looks like she'd eat Tom Cruise for breakfast - and less of wooden plank Henry Cavill, who surely demonstrates conclusively why he shouldn't be the next Bond. Reprising her role as a British agent, Rebecca Ferguson's not-quite English accent adds to the general air of nothing being real. They chase around, on foot, on motorbikes, in cars, in helicopters; but, even when it looks like two (not one, two!) nuclear bombs are about to explode you somehow don't feel a moment's real tension.

At least they're not po-faced like the Bournes.