Monday, 7 January 2013

Men in Black 3


Or if you prefer, MIB3 or Men in Black III, it's still the third in the series with no other title.

 Not a bad movie, quite fun, worth your money as a DVD, but the whole point of talking about it is to pick holes, so I shall. I can't help feeling they didn't go to quite so much trouble with this one. It wasn't as cleverly written, and there were no scenes that I want to watch over and over, as there were with the other two. So either make the 4th movie better, or quit guys. No, I know. They won't. This one made the most money of the 3.........

 The story goes that Agent J has to travel back in time to save Agent K, and help kill an alien named Boris. The casting and acting is mostly first-rate, as usual, Boris is fantastic, and Josh Brolin does a very accurate impersonation of Tommy Lee Jones, as a young Agent K, although I did squirm when he said he was 29 (he's actually 44). 

 My first problem was as J arrived in 1969. I yelled out "WHAT? I remember 1969, it didn't look like THAT!". Tom pointed out that it was New York in 1969, which would explain some of the cars, obviously, but even so, was fashion REALLY that different across the Atlantic? I can't help feeling this was a fantasy Hollywood 1969, but I will await comments by my American friends. 

 In a sci-fi comedy movie that is intended purely to entertain you can't expect anything even resembling realism, so I overlooked an awful lot,  but I ran out of patience towards the end. I won't spoil it for you except to say that military bases/staff simply aren't that trusting/lax/insecure. There is no way in hell that one colonel and 3 strangers could have got access. But, whatever.

 My main objection was how rushed certain aspects of the final action scene were. Perhaps the editor is at fault here. A couple of time I had the urge to shout "CUT!" and ask the actors to deliver their lines more slowly, although in a couple of cases the problem was the line itself. Yes, that scene I really could pick apart. My guess is that they assume the audience is so caught up in the plot that this sort of thing goes unnoticed. Well, no, it doesn't. 

 Fabulous character played by Michael Stuhlbarg, and I think we'll be seeing more of him in future. Bit of a Mork thing going on there, I really enjoyed him.

 I was left at the very end with questions. But that's not unusual. Time-travel stories always do that to me. 
Posted by at

6 comments:

  1. Unknown7 January 2013 at 05:02

    I liked this movie the most out of all three. Josh Brolin did an amazing job imitating Tommy Lee Jones and Michael Stulbarg was indeed fabulous. He made the entire movie.

    Personally I was able to suspend my imagination and not think about the implications of time travel, not one bit.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Melanie Boxall7 January 2013 at 05:08

      I have some sort of disability when it comes to "suspense of disbelief". Obviously I can do it up a point, or I'd never be able to enjoy any movie, or any story or joke. But I seem to have some sort of limit, or an opposing influence. One obvious plothole and the bubble bursts. But bad acting is even worse.

      Delete
    2. Melanie Boxall7 January 2013 at 05:13

      Incidentally, it was said by some that Johh Hartnett would have been a better choice, as he looks almost identcal to a young Tommy Lee Jones, but I don't think he has the gravitas for the role. Maybe that's why they chose an older actor, as J is always ribbing K about being born old.

      Delete
  2. Kathy Custren7 January 2013 at 05:13

    I agree - I have seen it too.

    Fashion wise, I would direct your attention to the recent TV series, "Mad Men" and another movie done not that long ago, "Down With Love." There seems to be a stylized look to the 1960s era that Hollywood likes to use. Most of my friends in the 1960s (granted we were kids) wore blue jeans or corduroy pants, with either t-shirts or striped polo shirts and Converse sneakers. They were the practical uniform of the time for many school-age-through-teen youngsters, until you reached college-age where you might run into the "hippie-style" flowing shirts and ponchos. In fact, my Babcie (grandmother) made me a poncho to wear, which was considered a rather abnormal accessory for a young person at the time. That, and a crochet hat with recycled beer can panels in it, as I remember....

    Anyway, getting back to the movie, I agree with you, that we might see this new character in there. Tony Shaloub's character was noticeably absent from this new movie, so I figure they put this fellow in, which kind of works--especially if they're going to continue using such things as time travel. His character, Griffin, reminded me (strangely enough) of what I've heard people on the autism spectrum describe some of their experience, which I found rather interesting as well.

    I'm looking forward to the next one. ;) ~ Blessings! :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Melanie Boxall7 January 2013 at 05:26

      Griffin is quite wonderful, isn't he? Utterly "good", almost angelic, but warm and funny with it.

      I remember hippies just fine, in fact it was the more formally dressed people that make me do a double-take. Perhaps London was more "trendy" in 1969, admittedly I did most of my shopping in Carnaby Street anyway, but I don't recall men wearing hats, not many anyway, that had gone, and women were completely finished with beehives. This is how I recall young people in 1969:

      http://services.eadt.co.uk/suffolk/content/unseenarchive/images/1969%20Rag%20fashion%20week.jpg

      Delete
  3. Unknown8 January 2013 at 17:16

    I haven't seen it yet, but I'm looking forward to it.

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)