Skip to main content

What is this, the sequel to The Notebook?

Men in Black: International
(2019)

(SPOILERS) The failure, both critically and commercially, of Sony’s limpid attempt to reignite (soft reboot) the Men in Black franchise has confirmed how desperate they are, scrabbling about for anything that might turn their fortunes around but without a scintilla of the inspiration or acumen to achieve it. They’re now on their second attempt with Ghostbusters, resuscitating Bad Boys – perhaps surprisingly, a big hit – and not making as much hay with their one smartly reinvented property (Jumanji) as they should have. And yes, they have their Spider-verse, but having all their eggs in one basket led to the downfall of the Amy Pascal regime. Despite the sad fate that befell Men in Black: International, though – the once mooted 21 Jump Street mashup would surely have been more in line with the tone of the original – it’s actually a fairly agreeable, if determinedly unremarkable movie.

Quite aside from the struggles getting a new MIB off the ground, and that the MIB heyday thing was very much historic and time capsuled, that of the halcyon, X-Files decade of the 90s when aliens and Will Smith went hand in hand, I had my doubts about this picture as soon as the director and cast were announced. I was never a huge fan of MIB, but even with the need-a-hit second instalment, they carried a definite sense of what they were about: Barry Sonnenfeld’s broad, bouncy, cartoonish visual sensibility married to Smith’s larger-than-life persona and Tommy Lee Jones’ deadpan. So where did F Gary Gray fit into that, a journeyman director not exactly prized for his comedy chops? Indeed, his The Fate of the Furious is singled out by lacking – the odd Stath interlude aside – the balletic visual oomph of its better prior outings.

And what was Sony doing casting Chris Hemsworth, funny Thor and Ghostbusters support aside, being in no way a “comedy” guy. And Tessa Thompson? Okay, they’d appeared together in the larky Thor: Ragnarok, but the combination suggested Sony were actively disinterested in attracting audiences with the promise of similar hijinks to those the series had displayed historically (besides which, Hemsworth’s non MCU vehicles have been consistently resistant to suggestions that he may be a star outside of them). Indeed, if one didn’t know better, one might have thought the studio was angling for something closer to The X-Files itself than the goofy tone the series was known for.

Which, it turns out, little wacky aliens designs aside, it pretty much was. Possibly even more so prior to the version that made it to cinemas. Such was my disinterest in Men in Black: International, it entirely passed me by that the production had been so stormy (I mean, when you have the kind of reshoots Dark Phoenix suffered to divert your attention, everything else palls by comparison). It seems Men in Black: International was your classically rushed production, with a first draft screenplay that required significant rewriting, often at the behest of series producer Walter F Parkes and to the objection of Gray, who suffered the ill effects of Parkes’ interference when Sony VP David Beaubaire left the studio.

The “edgier and more timely” screenplay dealing with immigration was softened, it seems (but in fairness, producer Parkes was historically no slouch in the writing department, with WarGames and Sneakers to his name; certainly, I’d more readily listen to his ideas than credited writers Matt Holloway and Art Marcum. Perhaps the handling of topical material was, like so much Hollywood produces, heavy-handed and glib). Of course, Parkes and co-producer Laurie MacDonald naturally had a less incendiary take on the Hollywood Reporter’s story. Whatever the details, there were sufficient ructions that Sony ended up with two cuts of the movie, a Gray one and a Parkes one, with the latter’s picked for release.

Men in Black: International is quite serviceable, particular during the first hour, but with Gray helming, it sands no chance of taking off visually or exhibiting any degree of real verve (and the big action set piece on a hover bike is as unnecessary and lethargic as one might expect). Hemsworth is fully trading on his Thor persona, channelling the faux-Shakespearean tones of the Norse god into a reasonably funny faux-posh English caricature. That said, his character, cocky and over-confident and careless, is crippled by an all-important thread whereby he isn’t the guy he used to be (“He’s changed. I can feel it”) and so can’t be trusted. Except that it’s never clear, aside from having had his memory of a crucial incident wiped, just why this should be the case. It means we never get a sense of who H is supposed to be (the question remains, though, why not convert H as well as Liam Neeson’s High T, given there was evidently the opportunity).

Thompson’s Molly/M is likeable but blandly unmemorable. The most noteworthy aspect of her involvement is questioning the operation’s gender-biased name, and that was in the trailer. Much of the plot revolves around the prospect of a mole in MIB, working for aliens the Hive, and this element sustains itself quite effectively, even given there are only two options, Rafe Spall’s Agent C, who is so obnoxious it can’t be him, and respectable veteran High T. So there you go. Emma Thompson is back as Agent O, Rebecca Ferguson plays a three-armed alien like she’s auditioning for AbFab, and Kumail Najiani, recently on the steroids, voices tiny alien sidekick Pawny.

Maybe I had very low expectations, but Men in Black: International’s no worse than many of the middling studio movies that came out last year. It confirms what we knew anyway – Men in Black 3 bucked the feeling that the franchise was one-and-done redundant, but only due to the time travel element – but perhaps it’s just as well to have it underlined that all those now nostalgia-ripe 90s SF properties (The X-Files, Independence Day, Men in Black) have little latter-day lustre. And certainly not when their original architects are still attached.


Agree? Disagree? Mildly or vehemently? Let me know in the comments below.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Maybe the dingo ate your baby.

Seinfeld 2.9: The Stranded The Premise George and Elaine are stranded at a party in Long Island, with a disgruntled hostess.

Nanobots aren’t just for Christmas.

No Time to Die (2021) (SPOILERS) You know a Bond movie is in trouble when it resorts to wholesale appropriation of lines and even the theme song from another in order to “boost” its emotional heft. That No Time to Die – which previewed its own title song a year and a half before its release to resoundingly underwhelmed response, Grammys aside – goes there is a damning indictment of its ability to eke out such audience investment in Daniel Craig’s final outing as James (less so as 007). As with Spectre , the first half of No Time to Die is, on the whole, more than decent Bond fare, before it once again gets bogged down in the quest for substance and depth from a character who, regardless of how dapper his gear is, resolutely resists such outfitting.

Twenty dwarves took turns doing handstands on the carpet.

Bugsy (1991) (SPOILERS) Bugsy is very much a Warren Beatty vanity project (aren’t they all, even the ones that don’t seem that way on the surface?), to the extent of his playing a title character a decade and a half younger than him. As such, it makes sense that producer Warren’s choice of director wouldn’t be inclined to overshadow star Warren, but the effect is to end up with a movie that, for all its considerable merits (including a script from James Toback chock full of incident), never really feels quite focussed, that it’s destined to lead anywhere, even if we know where it’s going.

Big things have small beginnings.

Prometheus (2012) Post- Gladiator , Ridley Scott opted for an “All work and no pondering” approach to film making. The result has been the completion of as many movies since the turn of the Millennium as he directed in the previous twenty years. Now well into his seventies, he has experienced the most sustained period of success of his career.  For me, it’s also been easily the least-interesting period. All of them entirely competently made, but all displaying the machine-tooled approach that was previously more associated with his brother.

Beer is for breakfast around here. Drink or begone.

Cocktail (1988) (SPOILERS) When Tarantino claims the 1980s (and 1950s) as the worst movie decade, I’m inclined to invite him to shut his butt down. But should he then flourish Cocktail as Exhibit A, I’d be forced to admit he has a point. Cocktail is a horrifying, malignant piece of dreck, a testament to the efficacy of persuasive star power on a blithely rapt and undiscerning audience. Not only is it morally vacuous, it’s dramatically inert. And it relies on Tom’s toothy charms to a degree that would have any sensitive soul rushed to the A&E suffering from toxic shock (Tom’s most recently displayed toothy charms will likely have even his staunchest devotees less than sure of themselves, however, as he metamorphoses into your favourite grandma). And it was a huge box office hit.

Isn’t sugar better than vinegar?

Femme Fatale (2002) (SPOILERS) Some have attempted to rescue Femme Fatale from the dumpster of critical rejection and audience indifference with the claim that it’s De Palma’s last great movie. It isn’t that by a long shot, but it might rank as the last truly unfettered display of his obsessions and sensibilities, complete with a ludicrous twist – so ludicrous, it’s either a stroke of genius or mile-long pile up.

It's something trying to get out.

The Owl Service (1969-70) I may have caught a glimpse of Channel 4’s repeat of  The Owl Service  in 1987, but not enough to stick in the mind. My formative experience was Alan Garner’s novel, which was read several years earlier during English lessons. Garner’s tapestry of magical-mythical storytelling had an impact, with its possession theme and blending of legend with the here and now. Garner depicts a Britain where past and present are mutable, and where there is no safety net of objective reality; life becomes a strange waking dream. His fantasy landscapes are both attractive and disturbing; the uncanny reaching out from the corners of the attic.  But I have to admit that the themes of class and discrimination went virtually unnoticed in the wake of such high weirdness. The other Garner books I read saw young protagonists transported to fantasy realms. The resonance of  The Owl Service  came from the fragmenting of the rural normal. When the author notes that he neve

Who’s got the Figgy Port?

Loki (2021) (SPOILERS) Can something be of redeemable value and shot through with woke (the answer is: Mad Max: Fury Road )? The two attributes certainly sound essentially irreconcilable, and Loki ’s tendencies – obviously, with new improved super-progressive Kevin Feige touting Disney’s uber-agenda – undeniably get in the way of what might have been a top-tier MCU entry from realising its full potential. But there are nevertheless solid bursts of highly engaging storytelling in the mix here, for all its less cherishable motivations. It also boasts an effortlessly commanding lead performance from Tom Hiddleston; that alone puts Loki head and shoulders above the other limited series thus far.

These are not soda cans you asked me to get for you.

The Devil’s Own (1997) (SPOILERS) Naturally, a Hollywood movie taking the Troubles as a backdrop is sure to encounter difficulties. It’s the push-pull of wanting to make a big meaningful statement about something weighty, sobering and significant in the real world and bottling it when it comes to the messy intricacies of the same. So inevitably, the results invariably tend to the facile and trite. I’m entirely sure The Devil’s Own would have floundered even if Harrison Ford hadn’t come on board and demanded rewrites, but as it is, the finished movie packs a lot of talent to largely redundant end.

Did you not just hand over a chicken to someone?

The Father (2020) (SPOILERS) I was in no great rush to see The Father , expecting it to be it to be something of an ordeal in the manner of that lavishly overpraised euthanasia-fest Amour. As with the previous Oscars, though, the Best Picture nominee I saw last turned out to be the best of the bunch. In that case, Parasite , its very title beckoning the psychic global warfare sprouting shoots around it, would win the top prize. The Father , in a year of disappointing nominees, had to settle for Best Actor. Ant’s good, naturally, but I was most impressed with the unpandering manner in which Florian Zeller and Christopher Hampton approached material that might easily render one highly unstuck.