REVIEW: “Men in Black International”


I can say with absolute certainty that there was no part of me yearning for another “Men in Black” sequel. I was never a big fan of the original 1997 film with Will Smith and Tommy Lee Jones. Even less enthused about the next two sequels. So could a spin-off movie eight years later with fresh new faces invigorate the franchise for a new audience? If comparing box office numbers, the answer is a resounding ‘No’.

Here’s the surprising thing – “Men in Black: International” isn’t terrible. In fact it can be surprisingly fun at times. Predictable, unimaginative, and unnecessary? For sure. But the charisma and chemistry between its two stars Chris Hemsworth and Tessa Thompson at least makes the globetrotting goofiness bearable.

The story (penned by Art Marcum and Matt Holloway) begins with two flashbacks. One back to 2016 where Agent H (Hemsworth) and High T (Liam Neeson) fight off an alien invasion on top of the Eiffel Tower. The second is 20 years earlier in Brooklyn where a young girl named Molly helps a friendly alien escape as Men in Black agents wipe the memories of her parents.


Photo Courtesy Sony Pictures

Twenty-three years later the bookish Molly (Thompson) sneaks her way into the MiB New York City headquarters aspiring to join their ranks. She makes a strong impression which prompts the head of the US division (Emma Thompson) to give her probationary status as Agent M. She is assigned to the London branch of the MiB which is ran by High T. and is partnered with the disaffected Agent H to stop two twins empowered with alien energy and so on.

Along the way we meet Kumail Nanjiani voicing a tiny alien chess piece creature named (of course) Pawny and Rebecca Ferguson as one of H’s old flames. Both are good performers and they have their moments but neither add much to the story. It all comes back to how much of the load Hemsworth and Thompson can carry. The pair definitely do their part but the movie needs more than just two likable leads.

“Men in Black: International” disappointed at the box office and numbers show it didn’t quite break even. You have to think this will mark the end of a franchise that (if we’re honest) probably shouldn’t have been resurrected to begin with. But it was, it came, it went, and (for many) I’m sure it has already been forgotten. I can understand why. It’s pretty middling entertainment with nothing particularly memorable or exciting to offer.



REVIEW: “Marriage Story”


The title of Noah Baumbach’s emotionally-charged, fractured-family drama “Marriage Story” is dripping with irony. It could more accurately be called a divorce story, but one full of personal reflections on a marriage that was. It’s also one of the rawest and most authentic looks at divorce ever put on screen. Obviously that doesn’t make it an easy watch, but it is an incredibly affecting one.

But there is a better way to read the title. It could just as easily be a reference to the stories told by the two leads to friends, therapists, and eventually lawyers. Their stories are rooted in their perspectives of what went wrong with their marriage and with what drove them to such a contentious split. And in one of the sadder turns, they eventually lose control of their stories to the lawyers who ensure things only get uglier and more painful.


© Netflix All Rights Reserved

While not all of Baumbach’s movies emotionally register with me, they’re never boring and they display an unabashed humanity that never comes across as disingenuous. His “Marriage Story” script is one of the most real and brutally honest works of his career. He puts aside the acid-tongued wit for more verisimilitude and veracity. But that doesn’t mean the humor isn’t there. The moments of levity Baumbach injects are welcomed and also quite funny.

I love the way the film opens. A New York couple (which becomes a significant point of debate later on) take turns telling us what they love about each other. It’s sweet, heartfelt, and organic. But it’s also Baumbach throwing us a curveball. It turns out that the words are part of an exercise they’re doing for a separation therapist. The session doesn’t go well and we quickly sense the couple’s relationship has reached the point of no return.

While Baumbach’s script is among the year’s best, his character-driven story hinges on its two Oscar-caliber lead performances. Adam Driver plays Charlie, an avant-garde stage prodigy whose small theater company is on the verge of hitting it big. His lead actress is his wife Nicole (Scarlett Johansson), a former teen movie up-and-comer who left her film career behind to help Charlie produce plays in New York. The two get married and have a son Henry (Azhy Robertson).


© Netflix All Rights Reserved

But we learn that over a fairly short period of time their marriage has crumbled. They agree to handle their separation amicably and without involving lawyers. Nicole is offered the lead role in a new television pilot so she leaves the theater and flies to Los Angeles with Henry. Charlie, naively thinking Nicole’s move is temporary, stays in New York preparing his play for its big Broadway debut.

In LA Nicole breaks the news to her mother (the delightfully spacey Julie Hagerty) and her high-strung big sister (Merritt Wever), both of who are divorced themselves. While on the set of her new show Nicole is convinced by one of her producers (who also happens to be divorced) to hire high-profile celebrity attorney Nora Fanshaw (yep, divorced). She’s shrewd, cut-throat and played with unbridled confidence by a fantastic Laura Dern.

When Charlie flies to LA to see Henry he’s blindsided with divorce papers from Nicole and told to lawyer-up tossing their previous agreement out the window. The first attorney Charlie meets (Ray Liotta) plays dirty like Nora but is too expense (and looks to be divorced). So he settles for a semi-retired family lawyer named Bert Spitz (Alan Alda in another great bit of casting). He’s far more easy-going and appeasing. Oh, and he has been divorced three times! Do you sense a trend?


© Netflix All Rights Reserved

As the lawyers become more involved things get nastier and Baumbach wisely lets it play out at a very natural pace. We are fed bits of information through conversations and confessions that give us a clearer vision of both Charlie and Nicole. They’re both flawed and with the exception of one sin Charlie commits (which I could have done without) its easy for us to be empathetic. The movie maintains a delicate balance, making no judgments and keeping our sympathies shifting back-and-forth. But overall we can’t help but root for both.

So we end up with a heart-wrenching account of a crumbled relationship, the ugliness of the divorce process, and its sad, complex aftermath. Baumbach drives his story with rich narrative detail, often building to scenes of painful, visceral release. Take what may be the film’s signature sequence where an argument between Nicole and Charlie savagely escalates to a devastating crescendo. The script’s candor along with the ferocity of both Driver and Johansson makes for a bruising exchange. It’s tough to watch but it is mesmerizing cinema.

“Marriage Story” has a lot to say about modern marriage and with such painfully high divorce numbers it’s sure to resonate with a great many people. And as we sit back and observe this cross-country separation Baumbach gives us lots to consider: relationships are tough, splitting up is tougher, and for some lawyers divorce is a lucrative business. More importantly he reminds us that those effected are real people and no one is left unscathed.



REVIEW: “Midway” (2019)


I hate to say this but one thing that always keeps my expectations in check is seeing Roland Emmerich’s name attached to a project. For me he is the epitome of a hit-or-miss filmmaker. When he misses the results can be pretty dreadful (see 1998’s “Godzilla”, “White House Down”, and “Independence Day: Resurgence”). But he’s also the guy who gave us the rip-roaring original “Independence Day” and I still have plenty of love for “The Patriot”.

But what of his latest, the historical war picture “Midway”? Within minutes of watching I couldn’t help but pick up on the old-school movie vibes that informs us on the kind of film Emmerich is going for. It’s a movie that celebrates the valor, grit and patriotism of those who fought and sacrificed for their country. It may be a by-the-books tribute, but I still have room for entertaining old-fashioned war pictures even if others (unfortunately) dismiss them as out-of-date.


The film attempts to cover a lot of ground starting with the attack on Pearl Harbor then onto the eventual Battle of Midway. Along the way we meet fighter pilots, admirals, specialists, and codebreakers who with others planned and carried out what is still considered one of the most pivotal naval battles in United States military history. There are plenty of action sequences, almost all of it being air and sea combat. But there are just as many (if not more) scenes of tense military strategizing.

“Midway” follows numerous characters but the main is a hotshot pilot and squadron commander Dick Best (Ed Skrein). He loses a close friend at Pearl Harbor which makes him eager to take the fight to Japan despite having a concerned wife (Mandy Moore) and toddler daughter at home. Woody Harrelson plays Admiral Chester Nimitz, the unlucky soul put in charge of the Pacific fleet and tasked with putting together the US response. And the always reliable Patrick Wilson plays Edwin Layton, the chief intelligence officer who tried to warn Washington about the Pearl Harbor attack.

Several other familiar faces pop in and out of the story including Luke Evans, Dennis Quaid, Aaron Eckhart and Nick Jonas. With such a list of reliable talent naturally the performances are solid throughout. Yet there is so much bouncing back-and-forth between war rooms and aerial engagements we rarely get the character depth that would have made this film really stand out. As a strict military procedural it works well, but it’s the human element that sometimes falls through the cracks.


Again, Emmerich gives as much attention to the buildup as he does the warfare. It makes sense considering the actual Battle of Midway was just as much about the tactics and maneuvering as the fighting. “Midway” strikes a good balance and keeps a steady pacing right through to the inevitable combat-heavy finale. Speaking of the combat, the action scenes are surprisingly thrilling despite a heavy dependence on CGI. A little repetitive but still exciting.

Yes, “Midway” gives us the occasional line of dialogue that seems pulled from the John Wayne era, but it’s still a fitting and fun way to remember those who fought and sacrificed in a signature battle in American military history. And sure, the film’s unabashed patriotism is out of fashion today and certain to face cries of jingoism. But I’m glad movies like this occasionally come down the pipeline and “Midway” is a nice surprise from “Emmerich”.



Denzel Day #11 : “Man on Fire”


Director Tony Scott’s 2004 revenge-soaked thriller “Man on Fire” has a weird allure despite being jarringly formulaic and drowning its audience in a deluge of visual excesses. There is hardly anything about it that feels original and the story evolves into something utterly implausible. Yet there is something about it that has always kept me steadily entertained.

Denzel Washington plays John Creasy , an ex-Marine Special Forces officer turned boozing assassin-for-hire. He has bounced around Central America doing shady contracts and wrestling with sins from his past. An old friend who runs a Mexican security outfit (Christopher Walken) encourages Creasy to take a bodyguard job in the wake of a series of politically-motivated kidnappings. It should be easy work and easy money. Yeah right.


Creasy is hired by Samuel Ramos (Mark Anthony), a well-to-do entrepreneur who lives lavishly in Mexico City with his beautiful American wife Lisa (Radha Mitchell) and their precocious young daughter Pita (Dakota Fanning). Creasy is strictly business: keep an eye on Pita, drive her to school, bring her back home. At night he tries to drown his demons with more alcohol while even contemplating suicide.

But he didn’t expect for the tender and persistent Pita to soften him up. The two form a sweet bond. You know, a ‘child and her bodyguard’ kind of bond. Pita gets a more present father figure. Creasy begins to remember what it’s like to enjoy living. But sadly this isn’t that kind of movie which means that bad things have to happen. Pita is kidnapped and Creasy is severely wounded trying to save her. As he recovers, her abductors make their ransom demands – $10 million.

Ramos agrees to pay but things go terribly wrong during the drop off. Creasy recoups and sets out to enact his own brand of vengeance and justice. With the help of Pita the old Creasy had been suppressed. With her gone he resurfaces with guns, rocket launchers, and a simmering bloodlust towards anyone who participated in or benefited from Pita’s kidnapping. And you quickly understand why he would be battling with demons.


I like the idea of a man struggling with a torturous past that resurfaces, forcing him to confront it. The conflict between ‘old self’ and ‘new self’ amid such a strong thirst for revenge is intriguing stuff. Unfortunately the movie wants to have to have its cake and eat it too. Early on the movie gives several scenes to Creasy’s boiling inner tumult. But once the stylish big screen killing begins any sense of personal struggle goes out the window. I would have loved to have seen a more psychological dig into his troubled psyche.

As it is “Man on Fire” stays on a pretty conventional path. It features a ton of Denzel and a sweet child/bodyguard dynamic (both strengths). The action (often shot like a fever dream) lands somewhere in the middle. At times it’s thrilling, other times it’s overbearing. Worst of all it ends up smothering out the interesting character work we’re teased with early on. It wouldn’t be such a bad thing, but at almost two-and-a-half hours the film really needs more meat on its bones.



Denzel Day #10 : “The Mighty Quinn” (1989)

QUINN poster

In 1989 you could say Denzel Washington was on the cusp of super stardom. His film “The Mighty Quinn” came right on the heels of “Cry Freedom” and his first Academy Award nomination and right before “Glory” and his first Oscar win. Everything was clicking for Washington and his career was set to take off.

“The Mighty Quinn” is one of Washington’s movies that kinda gets lost in the shuffle. Perhaps that’s due to it being book-ended by two attention-getting Oscar-nominated pictures. Or maybe it’s because the film really doesn’t stand out at all. That may sound like a sharp criticism, but it really isn’t. “The Mighty Quinn” is simply a light and laid-back crime caper that doesn’t reinvent the wheel but that has fun doing what it’s doing.


The film is based on Arthur H. Z. Carr’s 1971 crime novel “Finding Maubee” and its title is inspired by a Bob Dylan penned folk-song. It’s directed by a relatively unknown Carl Schenkel but written by Hampton Fancher who is best known for co-writing Ridley Scott’s “Blade Runner” and its eventual sequel “Blade Runner 2049”. Needless to say this is a MUCH different movie.

Washington plays Xavier Quinn, the chief of police on a Caribbean island with a strong Jamaican resemblance. The people respect Chief Quinn and he’s in good standing with the local governor (Norman Beaton). The only bump in the road is at home with his frustrated wife Lola (Sheryl Lee Randolph) who is tired of his job and the lack of time he spends with her and their son.

Things take a turn when a wealthy American businessman is brutally murdered at a fancy island resort. The stuffy and smug owner Thomas Elgin (James Fox) works to sweep the the crime under the rug and the local government is quick to oblige. They immediately pin the murder on a local free-spirited con-artist and Quinn’s childhood friend Maubee (Robert Townsend). Quinn doesn’t buy it and sets out to uncover the truth amid loads of corruption of cover-ups.


The film has much of what you want out of a crime thriller but there is also a subtle playfulness to it. You see it in the vibrant locations, in the interesting array of locals, in the steady wave of island music, and most of all in Washington’s performance. He brings a fun and interesting flavor to his character, balancing serious intensity with well-tempered humor. Sure his accent sometimes wanders off, but he’s still a great fit.

Once again, when looking at Denzel Washington’s filmography it’s understandable how “The Mighty Quinn” may have fallen between the cracks. It’s not the kind of movie that would draw a lot of attention especially when placed next to other films from the actor’s impressive body of work. It’s also unfortunate because this is a fun movie that sets the table for some of the roles Washington would later become famous for.



Denzel Day #7 : “Malcolm X” (1992)


Over a span of two months each Wednesday will be Denzel Day at Keith & the Movies. This silly little bit of ceremony offers me a chance to celebrate the movies of a truly great modern day actor – Denzel Washington.

It may not seem like it today, but getting “Malcolm X” made was no easy task for filmmaker Spike Lee. Bringing this highly controversial figure’s life to the big screen brought heat from all sides. Lee was criticized by defenders of Malcolm X who feared how he would be portrayed. Many in the white community disapproved siting Malcolm X’s comments and positions deemed by many to be racist and anti-Semitic.

Interestingly Lee even ran into trouble with Warner Bros. who failed to give him the full funding needed to finish the film he wanted to make. With outside help and a lot of determination, Lee finally was able to get his movie across the finish line complete with a 3 hour 20 minute running time.


Lee (who also served as co-writer and co-producer) based much of his film on Alex Haley’s 1965 book “The Autobiography of Malcolm X”. He already had the right man in place to play the titular lead character even before he signed on to direct – Denzel Washington. Petty concerns over Washington’s height and darker complexion were quickly tossed aside once people saw his performance. This was the second of four collaborations between Spike Lee and Denzel Washington and their sharp chemistry together was immediately evident.

Out of the gate “Malcolm X” comes across as very much a standard biopic. But to Lee’s credit he’s not just feeding us information by simply making stops across the timeline. He wants to put us in Malcolm’s shoes. He wants to represent to us the circumstances and influences that shaped the man who eventually turned from a small-time thief and hustler into a powerful civil rights firebrand.

He was born Malcolm Little but during “the war years” he was known as Red. After running afoul of a low-level Harlem gangster, Red flees to Boston where he and his hipster pal Shorty (played by Lee) prowl the nightlife in bright zoot suits and with white women on their arms. Soon they begin running numbers and committing petty burglaries which lead to his arrest and a 10-year prison sentence.


These scenes are broken up by powerful although sometimes klunky flashbacks which present key moments from Malcolm’s upbringing. They include the murder of his father (framed as a suicide but widely believed to be by the KKK), his separation from his siblings by the state, and his mother’s resulting mental illness. He grew up in foster homes where he was a bright kid and a good student even being voted class president. Yet in one scene a white teacher tells him his aspirations of being a lawyer were unrealistic. Instead he should do something more “fitting for a negro“, something like carpentry. These life experiences give form to the man Malcolm would soon become.

Prison proves to be a turning point for Malcolm (and the film). He falls under the spell of a persuasive fellow inmate who introduces him to the doctrines of the Nation of Islam. On one hand it leads him to reevaluate his life, putting aside his past vices. On the other hand he is seduced by the teachings of NOI leader Elijah Mohammad (Al Freeman, Jr) who advocated the complete separation between whites and blacks. He put a needed spotlight on injustices both past and present. But he also taught that all whites are “devils” and that unity among races was not the answer.

The remainder of the movie focuses on Malcolm’s rise through the NOI ranks and into the national spotlight as his powerful speech and ability to control a crowd draws attention from all sides. Lee takes us through the incendiary comments and public controversies; Malcolm’s eventual riff with the jealous NOI leadership; the transformation of his sweeping indictments and personal prejudices to a more thoughtful and inclusive point of view. And of course his assassination on the night of February 21, 1965.


This would all make for an interesting historical essay but what makes it work as a piece of cinema is the humanity Lee and Washington brings to the character. We see it most through the deep-digging personal scenes between Malcolm and his wife Betty. She’s played by a superb Angela Bassett who brings an emotional resonance to every scene she’s in. Washington is as convincing in the intimate moments as he is when brandishing Malcolm X’s unbridled, fiery tongue on a street corner or behind a pulpit. It’s a brilliantly multi-layered performance that opened a lot of eyes.

Spike Lee’s epic-sized biopic covers a lot of ground. The first half is a bit long even though none of its scenes feel wasted. It’s the second half where things really pick up and the complexities of Malcom X take shape. Lee paints a fascinating portrait of a man hardened by racial injustice, drawn to a divisive ideology, and then opened to a new way of seeing things. In Lee’s portrayal the Malcolm who once said “The only thing I like integrated is my coffee” is not the same man we see later.  And while he was still clear-eyed regarding the vile and often violent nature of racism, he sought more unified ways of confronting it. In the end that’s what makes the film all the more tragic.