Men in Black 3 (2012)

Director: Barry Sonnenfeld

Cast: Will Smith, Tommy Lee Jones, Josh Brolin, Jermaine Clement

Have I Seen it Before: I have a strong, unwavering belief that this was the last movie I ever saw in a hotel room pay-per-view. And I mean that as it was the most recent time that happened, and also the final time. Honestly, kids. Ask your parents.

Did I Like It: What is the smallest possible rationale for a movie to be made? Star Trek V: The Final Frontier (1989) is what it is because Shatner had a favored-nations clause with Nimoy and thus, the crew of the Enterprise meets God. The Cat in the Hat (2003) was the minimum punishment Mike Myers was able to stomach after refusing to make a movie version of Sprockets. The less said about most adaptations of The Fantastic Four, the better.

Among all of those, the pitch “Josh Brolin can do a pretty good impression of Tommy Lee Jones” has got to be pretty thin. But Sonnenfeld and company make the best of it, for the most part. Trying to get Jones by telling him he maybe had to work for a week probably helped matters more than little.

I’m not entirely sure (pre 2022 Oscars, naturally) why Smith felt the need to come back, and could still around the same time turn his nose up at Independence Day: Resurgence (2016). A summer sci-fi extravaganza is just the same as any other. Maybe if Josh Brolin could do a young Robert Loggia impression…

Ultimately a third venture with Earth’s last line of defenses is about as good as the original and a fair sight better than the almost paint-by-numbers second film. I’m normally in favor of any series wanting to suddenly adopt time travel, but content to reach for the simplest of audiences, we’re not so much allowed to go along on the adventure with Agent J as having him occasionally mention aloud what is happening. It’s not my favorite thing to happen. But it’s all of a piece.

Men in Black II (2002)

Director: Barry Sonnenfeld

Cast: Tommy Lee Jones, Will Smith*, Lara Flynn Boyle, Rosario Dawson

Have I Seen it Before: Only once, so far as I can remember, on its opening weekend all those years ago. Maybe I was in a singularly bad mood in those days, but the film failed to make much of an impression then.

Did I Like It: And I’m not sure it has improved much. It is not altogether funny. With an alarming frequency, it falls into the trap so many blockbuster sequels fall into, where it seems like we’re supposed to be content with this new entry echoing lines and scenarios from the original, while also positively straining its narrative muscles to cancel any conclusions from the first film. I’m ultimately willing to overlook that deficit when I realize that the original film wasn’t nearly as funny as we collectively like to try and remember. The series is more possessed of light science fiction/space opera injected with a certain degree of Peter Gunn energy.

And on that front, the film delivers what it promises. I’m even willing to acknowledge that it aptly takes itself less seriously than the earlier film and embraces the sci-fi cheese that is at the core of its being.

So, does the film work better now than it did back then? I’m in agreement with my previous self to say that as appointment-viewing blockbuster viewing, it feels too slight for its own good. But as a light entertainment to play on a lazy Saturday afternoon while trying to catch up on some writing? A movie that Rob Gordon in High Fidelity (2000) might describe longingly as “something I can ignore”? It works perfectly. That may sound like damning with faint praise, but the world certainly needs movies to play in the background.

They just need to get past opening weekend.

*Man, Jones’ agents must have made one hell of a deal on Men in Black (1997) to still be getting top billing in the new millennium.

Men in Black (1997)

Director: Barry Sonnenfeld

Cast: Tommy Lee Jones, Will Smith, Linda Fiorentino, Vincent D’Onofrio

Have I Seen it Before: Oh, sure. While producing The Fourth Wall I had avoided watching it as the Venn diagram might interfere with the process. In fact, I think the DVD currently on my shelf was one of the first DVDs I ever owned.

Did I Like It: It was a strange experience watching this in the summer of 2022. This was the first time since the infamous Academy Awards slap that I’ve taken in a movie starring Smith, and when J first appears on screen, I had some kind of reaction to seeing him again. It wasn’t the return of a conquering hero, or the dread of seeing an aggressor at his prime. It was a degree of annoyance. It certainly seems like Chris Rock suffered no permanent injury, so I could really go the rest of my life without hearing about it. If I’m not alone in that assessment, one does wonder what shape Smith’s career as a movie star will take from here.

There’s nothing wrong with the film itself, but I think even in the 90s I had the sense that this was an exercise in half measures. It’s funny enough, but there are comedies—even high-concept ones—with a far higher laugh-to-miss ratio. The action is engaging enough, but I don’t even have to think all that hard to trip over more suspenseful action movies, even in the summer of 1997*. Ultimately, as a science fiction piece it could stand to be a fair sight weirder than it ends up being. Ultimately, the film is a near-perfect case study in making a big entertainment designed to not offend anyone, but never quite thrill anyone either. Whenever I see a bland monstrosity (including especially the sequels and spin-offs which were to follow in this franchise), I can’t help but wonder what movies might look like now if we hadn’t so thoroughly over-validated this one. back in the day.

*I’m looking in your direction, Con Air and Air Force One.

Independence Day (1996)

Director: Roland Emmerich

Cast: Jeff Goldblum, Will Smith, Bill Pullman, Randy Quaid

Have I Seen it Before: Oh, sure. The summer of ‘96, this thing was bigger than Star Wars. At least, it felt like it was bigger than Star Wars, especially in an era before the special editions and the prequels. The family saw it during Independence Day weekend in Washington DC, which was probably the way to take in this movie intially. There were toys, there were tie-in novels, and there was the subsequent wearing out of a VHS copy.

Did I Like It: But then something happened. It was about a year after the film’s release, and I was at a Sci-Fi convention. They had a room devoted to endless screenings of various movies*. This movie was playing, I caught the tail end of it.

And I was bored beyond comprehension. I was thirteen. The film barely had a shelf-life of a year.

The jokes had burned out after the first viewing, the storyline collapses under even the slightest scrutiny of a thirteen-year-old, and the special effects would become passé very quickly after that. There simply isn’t that much movie there. Outside of a THX certified theater, the thrill disappears like vapor.

Seriously, this is a movie where scores of characters roll their eyes whenever Randy Quaid starts ranting about flying saucers, like visitors from another planet is the most patently ridiculous idea ever considered... While at the same time there are flying saucers everywhere. Did they hold any script meetings about this film? Or do people just have to react that way to Randy Quaid, regardless of the actual circumstances?

And still, I want to remember what enjoying the film was like. I suppose it’s a nice idea that the various nations of the world would get over their provincial differences and unite against a common enemy. Will Smith arrives fully-formed as a movie star for the masses here, having hinted at his charisma with Bad Boys (1995).

Also, the action figures came with computer games on floppy disks, which was pretty cool.

I’m trying, folks. I know the film is beloved by many, but it just ain’t me.

*Conventions don’t really do that any more, aside from anime. They should.

Aladdin (2019)

Director: Guy Ritchie

Cast: Will Smith, Mena Massourd, Naomi Scott, Marwan Kenzari

Have I Seen it Before: I mean, the typical joke about the lack of originality in Hollywood would be sort of low-hanging fruit in this particular case.

Did I Like It: I mean, sure?

From a pure study of screenwriting, it is interesting to see how the screenplay for the original Aladdin (1992) was disassembled and then put back together into… this. Large portions of the beginning of the original film are truncated to start the main meat of the story much faster, and presumably to allow space for the injected subplot. It actually works for the most part, and allows the film to reach (and perhaps intermittently succeed) to be a product of its time far more than the original did.

But then, if the goal of a Disney movie is to be truly timeless, why try to make a film a reflection of its time? Empowering Jasmine (Scott) is welcome and overdue but dwelling on the politically precarious times in Agrabah feels less magical, to put it mildly. I’ve got no problem with those moments, really, but in twenty years is it going to age very well? Let’s assume we’ll all be here in twenty years, naturally… On that front, the awkwardly injected elements of the film are sort of hopeful, because it allows me to imagine a world in which they wouldn’t work as well.

New music written for this version of the film is fine, but it does seem akin to the point in the concert where you let the rock star play through stuff on the new album. The new music isn’t bad, and you might even grow to like it as time goes on, but it isn’t what you came for.

And then there’s Will Smith. I’m tempted to give the studio and filmmakers a pass on his casting. There really isn’t a current equivalent to the frenetic energy Robin Williams brought to the role. If they absolutely insisted on remaking the movie—and it appears that they did—they were stuck on the central piece of casting for the movie. Picking Smith offers the viewer a fundamentally different energy. Williams was a pinball, jumping back and forth improbably so much that they were able to create a new character out of some of his improvisations. Will Smith is occasionally funny, but his strength lies much more in the pure charisma. Had they not fed Smith a lot of the same off-the-wall lines that Williams had in the original, it might have worked a lot better. Also, despite coming from music originally, I never escaped the sense that Smith didn’t have the vocal range to overpower the orchestrations. On second thought, I’m not giving them a pass on Smith. I don’t think I can give the entire film a pass.

Bad Boys for Life (2020)

Director: Adil El Arbi and Bilall Fallah

Cast: Will Smith, Martin Lawrence*, Vanessa Hudgens, Alexander Ludwig

Have I Seen it Before: I mean, it’s only been out for a minute and a half, so naturally this would be the first time I’ve watched it. As I’ve written during many of these reviews, it isn’t exactly like the film is exploring brand new territory in any way, shape or form.

Did I Like It: And that’s not necessarily a bad thing. I wrote in my review for the original Bad Boys (1995) that the only thing necessary for a buddy cop movie to work is a visual sense that pointedly discourages any deeper thought, and a chemistry between the leads. Time may have passed, but Smith and Lawrence are still able to milk the laughs out of their interactions together, and that would be enough to recommend the film.

Interesting that Michael Bay did not return for this film, as he’s spent the last decade and a half mashing action figures together. One would assume that the budget wouldn’t allow for him and Smith to occupy the same set at the same time, but just as Bumblbee (2018) proved that a franchise can not only survive, but thrive without him, Belgian filmmakers El Arbi and Fallah prove equal to the type of action movie Bay appears to have stopped making**.

So, everything is fine, right?

Well, it’s such a weird thing to get bothered by, but it’s a complaint about the nuts and bolts of filmmaking. The big bad of the film, Isabel Aretas (Kate del Castillo) spends the entirety of the film pulling them from Mexico City, where she opens the film by escaping from prison. Every single time the film cuts back to her witchy doings, we get a title, we’re reminded that the scene is taking place in Mexico City. When Marcus (Lawrence) and Mike (Smith) gear up to take the bad guys down, it tells us once more that they have arrived in Mexico City. Unless the Bruja is leapfrogging from Mexico City to Addis Ababa all the way to Toad Suck, Arkansas, I don’t need to be reminded three or four times that part of the movie takes place in Mexico City. I’m not wild that the audience of the film can’t be trusted to remember such basic information, especially when it isn’t so integral to the plot.

Okay, so maybe the action didn’t manage to discourage deeper thoughts from me. It’s still reasonably fun. If you’ve seen the others, you know what you’re getting into.

*Anyone want to take any bets as to whether or not the delay between Bad Boys II (2003) and this film was largely a negotiation to get Smith billing above Lawrence?

**Maybe 6 Underground (2019) is a return to form for him. I don’t know, I haven’t brought myself to watch it.

Bad Boys II (2003)

Director: Michael Bay

Cast: Martin Lawrence (absolutely mystified that he kept top billing going into the sequel; will this keep up with Bad Boys For Life? [2020]?), Will Smith, Gabrielle Union, Jordi Mollà

Have I Seen It Before?: I have a vague memory of watching the first fifteen minutes of it on DVD at some point, but being bored by it. Is that even possible?

Did I like it?: A little less than the original Bad Boys (1995), and I’m left a little uncertain as to how to quantify that difference. Michael Bay is in fine form, eschewing the complete void of human interest that has become his later career. He really should just make clones of Lethal Weapon (1987) and leave the robots to… Well, no one, now that I think about it. 

Smith and Lawrence continue to effortlessly offer the one non-negotiable element for buddy cop movies: chemistry. Each are plenty charming on their own (although one may have more of a continuous record at the box office) but together their so imminently watchable that it isn’t a completely ridiculous notion that the two will come back together for a third film next year.

The movie is shamelessly what it is, for better or worse. So why doesn’t this one work as well as the previous film? Am I just wrong? A possibility. The film reached several worst-of lists in the year of its release. However, it does have a cultural reach that eclipses the original, although that may be more related to its being lionized in Hot Fuzz (2007).

It’s more difficult to quantify something so subjective at first blush, but if I had to pick one element that sinks or swims plenty of movies. The score here is produced by a different composer, and I really prefer the score in the first movie. It might be reductive to be down on a movie for one single element, but just try to watch films like Star Wars, Episode I: The Phantom Menace (1999), or better yet, Halloween (1978) without the music. Both films become equally unwatchable, which is simply unfathomable given how both of those movies turned out. Music counts, folks.

Bad Boys (1995)

Director: Michael Bay

Cast: Martin Lawrence, Will Smith (last time he gets second billing, me thinks), Téa Leoni, Joe Pantoliano

Have I Seen it Before: I was a child of the 1990s and had cable, so I saw some version of this movie, to be sure.

Did I Like It: What’s not to like? How hard is it to make a buddy cop movie work?

That question may be unfair. The entire genre is dependent on chemistry between the two leads. If it works, you’ve got the next Lethal Weapon (1987). If you get it wrong, suddenly you’re saddled with another Stop! Or My Mom Will Shoot (1992)*. In what must be unnerving for those who make movie in the genre, that chemistry is largely ephemeral, and can be waylaid by any number of factors and good casting alone may not be enough to save matters.

Luckily, the chemistry between Lawrence and Smith is nearly perfect in its calibration. When the two are sharing a frame and just talking, the film’s charms are undeniable. One can’t be certain if they’re improvising during these sequences, but it feels breezy in a way that seldom can be achieved outside of improvisation. They’re easily funny, which is starkly obvious when it appears that either of the stars deliver one-liners supplied by one of the four credited screenwriters.

This movie even comes from a time before Michael Bay went into autopilot mode while mashing action figures together, and while his style may be a bit too arch for some, it does feel at home in the Miami sun amid endless explosions.

*I’ll be willing to admit that one had some other problems, not the least of which appear to be that the entire rationale for its existence appears to be as a prank Arnold Schwarzenegger played on Stallone. Look it up!