Men in Black 3

Men in Black 3 (2012) comes out fifteen years after the original, and ten years after the sequel. I imagine there's a good number of audiences for whom Men in Black 3 will be a totally new experience. Fortunately, the movie turns out to be a good place to start even if you haven't seen the first two.

Men in Black is a secret agency, lead by Agent O (Emma Thompson), assigned to monitor and suppress alien activity on Earth while keeping the populace ignorant of its happenings. After breaking out of a moon-based security prison, Boris the Animal (Jemaine Clement) decides to go back in time and eliminate the person who arrested him - Agent K (Tommy Lee Jones). When he does so, Agent J (Will Smith) is the only one who has realized that the timeline has been changed and he too travels back to July 15, 1969, the day before Agent K is killed. After overcoming some disbelief, J manages to convince the younger Agent K (Josh Brolin) and others of just who he is and why he's there. With the help of a 5th dimensional being named Griffin (Michael Stuhlbarg) who can see all time lines, they track Boris down.  In the process J learns a well-hidden secret, something K had never told him.

Men in Black 3 features some wacky antics that made the first two movies so fun; combating undercover aliens in ironic situations with lots of funny cultural references. Will Smith acts like his wacky Will Smith self and Tommy Lee Jones acts like the grumpy, experienced older guy with some nearly imperceptibly subtle humor. There are moments of humorously illogical sci-fi reasoning such as Agent O deduces that there has been a fracture in the space-time continuum based on J's sudden insatiable craving for chocolate milk to ease his headaches. But the movie goes a bit further; the story is more complex than the previous movies and we've also got time travel escapades which are usually fun.

Most of the movie takes place in the 1960's, and the way they depicted the 60's was amazing. Yes, there are lots of extras in very convincing costumes that were contemporary of the time period, but the science fiction elements were made to look 60's-ish as well. In the present, the MiB's weapons and gadgetry looked sleek, sophisticated, and high-tech. In the 60's their weapons and gadgets looked more like the ray guns and gadgets from the original Star Trek, Lost in Space, and Flash Gordon TV shows. Even the aliens they meet resembled the oversized rubber-suit monsters from sci-fi horror movies of the 1960's. Not only was this funny, but it also gave and interesting method of setting development that was interesting to watch.

The acting in this movie was outstanding, especially on the part of Josh Brolin. He looks, sounds, and acts so much like an actual, younger version Tommy Lee Jones it is uncanny! I think it was a more impressive performance than Joseph Gordon-Levitt playing a younger Bruce Willis in Looper. He captures Jones' voice and mannerisms so perfectly you can't help but assume that Josh Brolin will inevitably turn into Tommy Lee Jones sometime in the future. He also brought some new quirks to the character of Agent K; young K actually smiles once in awhile as if he is not yet jaded or world-weary as is his older counterpart.

Jemaine Clement plays the villain in this role. I totally didn't recognize him with the makeup job at all. Clement is a New Zealand musician and stars in a comedy TV show called Flight of the Concords. I've never actually seen it, but I did not see Clement in Boris the Animal at all. He plays a nasty villain with some weirdly funny, subtle, deadpan humor himself. He played a great villain and I'd love to see Clement in more acting gigs.

My favorite character was easily Griffin. He's this 5th dimensional being and the last of his species. With time travel stories there is often a sense of determinism and fate which lends to some pessimistic moods a lot of the time. Griffin is a combination of string theory and a zen master. He can see all possible outcomes, and is often frightened when things start going wrong, "Negative possibilities are multiplying as we speak!" But even though determinism is present in this time travel story, Griffin's character helps remind us that while we can't control everything, we always have the ability to make out own choices. That brought a sense of optimism to the movie.

Men in Black 3 had some plot holes in it, but it wasn't a bad movie. I enjoyed it for what it was. It was funny, exciting, wacky, and just plain fun. The movie has a great cast, excellent acting, fun characters, and a good plot. Watch out for funny little details in the background when you watch it; both Lady Gaga and Tim Burton appear on the Men in Black's monitors as suspected aliens. Men in Black 3 is an above average renter and possibly worth owning if you're a long time fan of Men in Black.

Do you like the Men in Black series? Which one is your favorite? Comment below and let me know!

Small Soldiers Movie Review

I remember when Small Soldiers (1998) hit theaters. There was a big marketing campaign that featured Burger King promos, toys, video games and a lot of TV spots targeted towards kids. Even though I was in my mid-teens I still remember thinking Small Soldiers was too violent and scary for the targeted audience the marketing campaign was focusing on.

15-year-old Alan Abernathy (Gregory Smith), the son of a toy store owner, tries out the new action figures: The Commando Elite vs. The Gorgonites. Three months earlier, a toy company believed it is onto something when it employs the latest government military technology in a series of action figures, enabling them to talk. The company underestimated the power of the special microchips they've employed, however, as the two opposing sides of the toy line start thinking for themselves, they engaging in real combat. The Commando Elite, lead by Major Chip Hazard (Tommy Lee Jones), vow to wipe out the Gorgonites in a suburban neighborhood. Alan and his neighbor Christy (Kirsten Dunst), on whom he has a massive crush, must protect his home and family from the militaristic action figure Commandos with the help of the kind Gorgonites

I have to admit, Small Soldiers was a fun idea, but not an easy thing to pull off. It's a violent movie. People's clothes are set on fire, they are cut with steak knives, and houses are trashed. It almost sounds like something out of a Chucky movie. But at the same time it tries to be goofy and fun to appeal to kids. Most of the real violence happens to the toys, but at the same time they are presented as individuals who can think for themselves; there are believable heroes and villains among the toy characters. It's rated PG-13, but if the same sorts of violent actions were taken against actual people, this would have had a solid R rating. I still think this could be a terrifying experience for kids to watch Small Soldiers.

The special effects are actually very well done. The action figures are animated with a blend of CGI animation and animatronics puppetry; sometimes it's hard to tell which is which. These effects were incorporated seamlessly into the live action scenes and made the toy characters seem all the more realistic. Furthermore, there was a lot practical effects. There were real pyrotechnics which brought us some pretty nice explosions and fireballs. The Commando characters were building weapons and vehicles out of common household items. Some looked as though they might work, while others seemed a bit too exaggerated to be realistic. It was very creative, and since it was physically made (not CGI stuff) it looked more believable.

This movie had a lot of potential to say something about violent imagery in children's products, especially that in toys meant for boys. The toy shop Alan's father owns is a classical toy shop; no war toys. It has trouble competing with toy stores that sell toy guns and such. So, the set up is there. Then the Commandos start wreaking havoc in a way that most boys have probably played out in their minds, but there are real consequences to playing war in Small Soldiers. The movie sets up a means of making a statement, but then doesn't do it.

Small Soldier is a satire of several war movies. You've got this kind of Toy Story concept along with the "playing war" concept in the Toys movie and a little bit of Gremlins, what with the tiny killers that seem to multiply like crazy. There's also a lot of funny war movie references. Early on Major Chip Hazard is rallying his fellow toy troops for battle while standing in front of a jigsaw puzzle of the American flag, a reference to the opening scene in Patton. Wagner's Flight of the Valkyries was played during a scene when the Commandos were attacking with makeshift helicopters, a nod to Apocalypse Now. It's the kind of movie that is a little bit funnier because of movies you've already seen.

Small Soldiers isn't an awful movie, but I can't recommend rushing out to see it. It's a bit hard to take seriously, has logical errors in the story, and is an overly violent movie for its target audience. The pacing is very slow; the story and action doesn't really get going until after the movie is half over. I remember my Dad rented Small Soldiers soon after it hit VHS, and we were all giving him dirty looks for getting such a dumb movie. Fortunately for him it started getting good and he redeemed himself. Small Soldiers is currently on Instant Play on NetFlix, and frankly that's the only thing that makes it worth seeing; it's kind of fun but not worth the cost to rent.

Do you have a favorite war movie? Or even a satirical war movie? Comment below and tell me all about it!

Lincoln Movie Review

A good biopic must be hard to make. You would have to summarize an entire life into a couple of hours, show the most dramatic highlights of someone life, and make sure the movie does it justice.  If you don’t do an absolutely amazing job, people who love and respect the individual the biopic is about will have a conniption fit. That’s probably why there hasn’t been many movies about Abraham Lincoln before Steven Spielberg’s Lincoln (2012).

In 1865, as the American Civil War winds unavoidably towards its conclusion, U.S. president Abraham Lincoln (Daniel Day-Lewis) seeks to pass a landmark constitutional amendment which will forever ban slavery from the United States. This task is a race against time, for peace may come at any moment and if it comes before the amendment is passed, the returning southern states will stop it before it can become law. Lincoln must, by any means possible, obtain enough votes from the unruly Congress before peace arrives and it becomes too late. Yet the president is torn, as an early peace would save thousands of lives. While the nation confronts its conscience over the freedom of an entire population, Lincoln faces his own crisis of conscience; end slavery or end the war.

If you’re familiar with Daniel Day-Lewis and his movie roles such as The Last of the Mohicans, Gangs of New York, and There Will Be Blood you’ll likely assume, just as I did, that he doesn’t look like the 16^th President of the United States. However, the makeup job which was done for Day-Lewis was astonishing to say the least. Compounded by his stellar acting, you almost believe that the man on screen actually is President Lincoln. He’s a plain-spoken, practical, down-to-earth man from the farmlands of the Midwestern US who exhibits a lack of social grace but has a great intelligence and knowledge of human nature. Lincoln is constantly telling seemingly unrelated stories, but when he gets started he’s almost like this affable grandpa, and you just want to go sit on his lap while he tells you a story. Day-Lewis is calm, self-confident, and powerful in this role and really brings this revered president to life.

Lincoln has a very large cast that includes Sally Field as Mrs. Lincoln, David Strathairn as Secretary of State William H. Seward, Tommy Lee Jones as Radical Republican Congressional leader Thaddeus Stevens, Joseph Gordon-Levitt as Robert Todd Lincoln, and Jackie Earle Haley as Confederate States Vice President Alexander H. Stephens. There was not a single actor who didn’t do an amazing job with their role. Alongside Day-Lewis, it really helped portray a remarkably vivid story about passing the 13^th Amendment.

The script they were given was also extraordinary. The dialogue wasn’t just good and well written, it was powerful! Lincoln is mostly calm and genteel, but there are times he speaks so powerfully and with such conviction that he’s almost intimidating; you can’t help but want to follow such a strong leader whose words are so profound and insightful. No wonder Lincoln was so well loved by the people. Famous historical words are beautifully woven into the script without making it sound like a stuffy, obligatory history lesson. The words of The Gettysburg Address are spoken with the greatest possible impact, but not by Lincoln himself. Since this movie is about an historical event, we all know how it will end before the first scene even starts. And yet the script is so powerfully written and draws you into the political suspense such that you can’t help but be on the edge of your seat while congress votes on the amendment.

It’s been nearly 150 years since the 13^th Amendment was passed, but the political situation is still applicable today. We still see the results of this Amendment. The accurate portrayal of politics is remarkable. Seeing the two political parties nearly at each other’s throats over a proposed law isn’t unlike contemporary politics. The elected officials jeer and insult one another in a remarkably articulate way while still getting their point across to Congress. This is especially true of Thaddeus Stevens, who provided some comic relief to the movie; there are a lot of jeers from the Republican Party to the Democratic Party whom opposes the 13^th Amendment. Still, the elected delegates that met to “discuss” politics yell, scream, and insult one another, which is also not unlike contemporary politics.

Lincoln wasn’t just a good movie, it was powerful. It’s a long movie at two and a half hours, but it’s so captivating and impressive that the time flies by. It’s a political drama, so viewers who don’t enjoy politics or drama films in general may not appreciate it as much. Personally, I don’t enjoy politics at all, and I enjoyed Lincoln a great deal. I strongly urge you to see this film; it’s powerful, dramatic, compelling, and still pertinent to today. It’s worth owning a copy of as both a beautiful piece of cinematic art and as a gripping tale about a significant land mark in the history of The United States of America.

Do you have a favorite political drama movie? What is it and why do you enjoy it so much? Comment below and tell me why!

Movie Review: Captain America: The First Avenger

Marvel Studios has been busy as a bee since 2008, introducing a variety of Super Hero characters. Each character has their own movie, and some even have multiple movies. We have two Iron Man movies, a Hulk movie, a Thor movie, and Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) has appeared in all of these movies to varying degrees. There’s even a third Iron Man and a second Thor movie in the works. Any comic book geek with knowledge of the Marvel universe could see what was coming after the post-credits scene in Iron Man (2008).  Nick Fury showed up telling Tony Stark (Iron Man) that he’s not the world’s only super hero and wanted to discuss the "Avenger Initiative". The last of The Avengers team that hadn’t shown up yet was Captain America. I didn’t think Captain America’s story would be hard to do, but it might be tricky to do well. But after seeing how well a Norse god became relatable, I felt confident and ready to see Captain America: The First Avenger (2011).

The year is 1942; World War II is in full swing and the United States has entered the fray. Thousands of young men are volunteering to join the army to serve their country. One among them is Steve Rogers (Chris Evans), a short, ninety-five pound asthmatic with a heart of gold who has just been rejected yet again for military service. Rogers’ life changes dramatically after encountering Dr. Abraham Erskine (Stanley Tucci) at a recruitment center. Dr. Erskine is impressed with Rogers and recruits him for the top secret “Project Rebirth.” After proving his extraordinary courage, intellect, and morals, Rogers undergoes a Super Soldier experiment conducted by Dr. Erskine and Howard Stark (Dominic Cooper) that transforms his weak frame into a body at the peak of human strength and potential. Dr. Erskine is immediately assassinated by an agent of Nazi Germany’s secret research department, HYDRA, which is operated by Johann Schmidt, also known as The Red Skull (Hugo Weaving). Schmidt has been using an object of remarkable power called the “tesseract,” believed to have come from the Norse God Odin’s throne room, to create space age weapons and supply Nazi Germany with an unlimited energy-source for world domination. Rogers is deemed too valuable to be put on the front lines and is misused initially as a propaganda mascot. However, when his comrades who had previously enlisted need his help, Rogers springs into action to aid them and truly becomes Captain America, the hero, not just the symbol. This is where Captain America’s war against the Red Skull truly begins.

My biggest concern with this movie was that the character Captain America would be portrayed as a gung-ho, pro-America, nationalist, which seems to be the extent of modern day patriotism. Thankfully, this was not so. Captain America: The First Avenger (directed by Joe Johnston) has something to say about patriotism and where the true strength of America lies. This aspect of the character and plot was not played up quite as much as I was expecting, but it was not belittled or avoided as I had feared. Steve Rogers did not join the military out of a sense of vengeance or bravado as many of his comrades had. He joined out of a sense of justice and a desire to protect the oppressed. This was depicted in an exchange between pre-Super Soldier Rogers and Dr. Erskine. Erskine asks, “Do you want to kill Nazis?” to which Rogers replies without hesitation, “I don't want to kill anybody. I don't like bullies; I don't care where they're from.”

We’re shown the other side of war where patriotism can be used as propaganda. Initially Steve Rogers is given a rather eccentric costume after the Super Soldier experiment so that he can help promote the war and sell it to the American public. He is given an embarrassingly simple script to recite about buying war bonds while a line of dancing women are singing pro-America jingles. This ends badly with Captain America throwing a fake punch at a stage actor portraying Adolf Hitler. Rogers is clearly uncomfortable with this and desires to take a more active and useful role in stopping the Nazi bullies. This really is the type of simplified gung-ho nationalist-like patriotism that the character Captain America is not about and I appreciated that they made this distinction in the movie.

In most movies, especially superhero movies, they spare no time in having the newly empowered hero confront the villain and dive headlong into the action scenes. Not so in this movie.Captain America: The First Avenger really spends time developing the Captain America character. This really is an origin story that develops the character at his heart; the movie is more character driven than action driven. There is an action “montage” rather than lots of fighting scenes. This was used to depict Captain America’s multiple successes and shield-smacking victories before getting into the bigger, more plot-specific battles. But don’t worry; when the action arrives it’s really good; I was on the edge of my seat for many of the scenes. There were even a couple of moments during the action scenes that were unexpected and a bit shocking, such as a henchmen meeting a grotesque demise by a propeller.

All the characters were fun and well developed. Steve Rogers’ flame, Peggy Carter (Hayley Atwell), was interesting, pretty, confident, and independent. Colonel Chester Phillips (Tommy Lee Jones) was gruff, practical, logical, and helped push Rogers’ to his best potential. Howard Stark (who is the father of the not yet born Tony Stark; Iron Man) is a lady killer, arrogant, creative, and resourceful. All these characters play off of each other really well. No one character is given a bulk of the humorous lines which was a somewhat mediocre device done in Thor (2011).

My only real complaint was the Red Skull. Every good hero needs a good villain; the nastier and more devious the villain, the more interesting the conflict. The Red Skull seemed to be lacking in purpose. He seemed to simply want to take over and destroy the world for the sake of taking over and destroying the world. It was almost as though all the lackluster qualities of a generic throw-away villain were stuffed into what is ordinarily an iconic super villain from the Marvel Comics universe. I have heard Red Skull is supposed to possess a superior intellect and inventive genius, as well as being a highly gifted subversive strategist and political operative. We did see some creative genius as he made ray guns and all manner of sci-fi gadgets with 1940’s technology. But you don’t get a feel for his intellect, political machinations, or strategic plotting. The Red Skull as a character is just about the only major character that seemed flat, generic, and undeveloped. He fills the role of “nasty, ugly villain” quite well, but his depiction in this film just seemed cliché. I can overlook this shortcoming a bit since Captain America is the main focus and there needed to be a struggle over which he could prevail. Such a struggle allows us to see what Captain America is made of and ultimately understand his part in the upcoming Avengers movie.

As opposed to the excruciating Captain America movie that came out in 1990 (trailer here) which, with good reason, no one seems to remember, Captain America: The First Avenger really was a fun movie with a good, fairly solid story. The movie demonstrates the message that patriotism is not about strength. It is about compassion and justice. Patriotism is not about how loud you cheer for your country or how many bad guys you kill. It is about how much you are willing to sacrifice to protect the helpless. Those are real patriotic American values. I enjoyed this movie enough that I intend to get a copy of it on Blu-Ray for my personal collection when it becomes available. This movie will be pretty intense for younger audiences, but it might be worth the effort to show them once they can handle some intense action scenes. Captain America is a hero of good morals and character that would be good to help them model in their own lives.