Men in Black General Thread

Saw the trailer when I saw Endgame. Looks good.

It's the sounds of silence.

Still kind of a cool look at how much editing, music, and sound effects change our perception of things, right?

I actually liked the first trailer because it had a snazzy pace, you could enjoy it as a music video rather than just advertisement. This one is alright, but a bit more plot heavy. The first trailer had me interested in a genuine MIB mole, but making "The Hive" (which is already a villain organization name in several different franchises) into shapeshifters is actually less interesting. The large group of men dressed in suits also brings to mind The Matrix.

In both trailers I did notice an odd trailer-order issue, M is already dressed in the suit trying to convince O that she is worthy, then cuts to her putting on the suit triumphantly. Why would she be dressed in uniform and THEN has to argue for a place in the organization?

Occasionally, they do just shoot things for trailers. Or they're pulling editing tricks to really show something else.

Amazing actually.

Edited by DevilMayhem666 on Apr 28th 2019 at 6:25:42 AM

That was correct. I'm still glad they kept the MIB theme in the trailers, though. And they brought back Danny Elfman to compose.

I've heard from multiple people that International is worse than Men in Black II. Ouch.

Its opening RT score is 32% by the way, so not looking good.

Right, bit of a bother and whatnot.

Maybe people were more bummed about the lack of Tommy Lee Jones and Will Smith than we thought?

I heard nothing about this movie for weeks, so I was thinking it'd be one of those movies that are simply average. I guess not.

I am kind of surprised, the trailers made it seem to be a breezy, visually inventive sci-fi comedy, but I guess it didn't really pan out. My concern was a distinct lack of a Straight Man or The Comically Serious that we could tell, something vital for the formula of the previous films. Both Hemsworth and Thompson seem charming and likable, which did not inspire confidence in them being interesting characters.

Is it me or is it looking like a lot of these Sony comebacks are missing the point of the source material?

Because barring Spider-Man and Jumanji, these revivals like Ghostbusters (the all-female one) and now MIB: International are sort of falling on their faces...

(In fact, only reason Spider-Man is fine is because Marvel Studios is the one steering the ship. An MCU-less Spider movie would probably fare as well as Venom...)

I mean, Venom fared REALLY well. Not critically, but audiences loved it, it made a lot of profit too. It was an unqualified success.

MIB apparently did worse than Dark Phoenix did.

Are we looking at a Franchise Killer?

Not quite a franchise killer,certainly a bummber its under performed though

It wasn't reviewed well at all, either, which didn't help.

I saw it last night and I don't understand why it's being reviewed so badly. I mean, it wasn't amazing, but it was a good summer blockbuster. The characters were good, the special effects were good, the action was good, the twist was...well, you could guess the twist from the trailer, but that isn't unusual for summer blockbusters.

Also, we need more Tessa Thompson. She was pretty damn awesome in this film. And I love Pawny.

I don't think it's bad, it's just not good enough. There just aren't enough people who really want to see a Men In Black film without the original MIB duo. Reviews are maybe a bit harsh but where the likes of Godzilla had people interested enough to go anyway (and consequently good word of mouth) the reaction to MIB is just apathy.

I think the third Men in Black movie wrapped up things for the original duo fairly well, so I was glad the franchise moved on. Shame it doesn't seem to have picked up more steam. I like Men in Black's concept.

I would have thought that Men in Black, of all franchises, would have staying power to go beyond their original actors. Especially since they already did that with the Men in Black cartoon, which went on for four seasons. And the second and third Men in Black weren't good either — in fact, I'd say that Men in Black: International was better than both of those — but perhaps that's also why this film didn't do as well.

Disagree on the third. It has some grit in the gears but otherwise I quite like it. Almost on pair with the first.

Yeah, make fun of 2 all you want but 3 was quite fun, and a good place to end things.

Probably why no one was jazzed for a Will Smith-less MIB.

3 worked as a step up from 2, which was mostly rehashing the same plot and plot beats as the first while upping the action hoping you won't notice. That said, 2 still benefited from good performances from Smith and Jones. 3 still wasn't as fresh as the first, but the visual innovation showing a 1960's MIB (I still laugh at the corded neuralizer) along with Brolin's perfect Jones impersonation gave it a nice sendoff.

I would put MIBI pretty close to 2, it's not as frustrating because it is trying something new, but it feels equally superficial at the same time. I was amused with the car parts as weapon pieces gag as seen in the trailer, but it was a surprisingly dull shoot out in the end. It's another movie where just about all the best moments are shown in the trailer, leaving the story especially bad about going places to make it seem like the plot is developing even though it makes little sense. Hemsworth and Thompson are not bad but the whole movie suffers from an Iron Man 2 "babble" problem, actors trying to be funny with improvisation rather than actual character development. Thompson's Agent M is also another "girl likes science as substitute for actual character" issue, including the cliche'd "romantic feelings is just chemicals in your brain" line.